Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - hopfenundmalz

Pages: 1 ... 185 186 [187] 188 189 ... 428
General Homebrew Discussion / Re: cleaning and passifying question
« on: August 29, 2013, 10:00:45 AM »
A blue or green scrubbie is recommended by most.

I was just reading the directions that came with my conical. It said to use blue scrubbies but avoid the green ones.
Blue are the softer of the 2, and will be easier on the Chromium Oxide layer.

Commercial Beer Reviews / Re: Samuel Adams Ruby Mild
« on: August 29, 2013, 09:55:55 AM »
I have had Hardy and Hanson's Cursed Galleon Mild at 5.5% in Nottingham. Might not be brewed anymore.

Then there is Sarah Hughes Dark Ruby Mild at 6.0% ABV.

Those are extreme for today, but there were much stronger molds in Victorian times.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: cleaning and passifying question
« on: August 28, 2013, 12:13:02 PM »
A blue or green scrubbie is recommended by most.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: cleaning and passifying question
« on: August 28, 2013, 11:03:37 AM »
Along with being a really nice guy, John is a Metallurgical Engineer, so he might now something about it.

General Homebrew Discussion / Re: cleaning and passifying question
« on: August 28, 2013, 08:48:25 AM »
According to Palmer, Barkeepers Friend does a deep cleaning. O2 from air passifies almost instantly.

I am not a pedantic brewer.  I repeat my sucesses and avoid my repeating my mistakes.  Minutiae are for the small-minded.

I always thought that minutiae were for the engineers.

Add scientists to that, but as an engineer I must agree.

All Grain Brewing / Re: stuck mash on Blichmann Top Tier system
« on: August 25, 2013, 04:56:08 PM »
I don't have a Top Tier stand, but I use all-Blichmann kettles, with Blichmann false bottoms, for my mash tun (15 or 20-gallon depending on the beer) and boil kettle.  Also use a March pump for RIMS.  I recirculate on a Blichmann burner, directly heating the mash tun.

For the first five or six batches, I had symptoms of a "stuck mash", where the output of the pump back to the top of the mash would start to sputter and seize, then eventually crap out altogether, as if it was trying to draw more wort through than was getting through the false bottom.

More playing around has lead me to a different theory, i.e. that the flow rate was too slow (valve on the output of the pump was closed too much) and the burner was too high, which was allowing the wort underneath the false bottom to overheat and actually start boiling, which in turn allowed bubbles from the boil to get drawn into the pump causing it to seize and lose prime.  Even when the burner flame is very low.

Opening the valve on the output of the pump (probably somewhere in the vicinity of 1/2 open), and keeping it there, has solved this problem completely.  A higher rate of flow means that more wort is moving across the bottom of the kettle and does not get hot enough to start boiling, but not enough to clog up the false bottom.  I let the pump run continuously at a constant and fairly healthy rate.  The Blichmann false bottom can take a healthy flow of wort.

I wish I could see underneath the grain bed to see if this theory is accurate, but for me it explains what was happening, and the solution.
My note above was for the sparge, no flame. When doing fired steps and recirculating, yes, you want a fairly good flow, and I'm stirring often so that it does not set up.

Once at mash out I let the bed set, and Borlaug at a lower rate until clear.

There is the Perry categories, made from pears, so not just apples.

No idea where a pineapple wine would go. Will defer to someone more expert.

All Grain Brewing / Re: stuck mash on Blichmann Top Tier system
« on: August 25, 2013, 12:04:18 PM »
I have a half barrel with a false bottom. If you really throttle the pump out let,  less suction will be on the inlet. I useually have noproblem, except with rye beers. I have the kettle and a selfless ball valve to make a grant, but need to make the hole. I think the pocess could be speeded up with another burner adding heat for mashout and the Skaggs.

Zymurgy / Re: chiller performance: sep/oct 2013
« on: August 23, 2013, 02:02:18 PM »
I was a chemical engineer, now a patent attorney.  I have a copy of Perry's where the data they use comes from.  The article is purely a paper study.  Their calculations are reasonably accurate for doing comparisons among common cooling options.  I would not assume that they are accurate for other purposes.    I do not consider what they are doing "BS," but I'm not surprised that one person's real world data does not coincide with an estimate from a paper study.

Theoretically, counterflow cooling should always be faster than batch immersion cooling for same coolant flow rate and same heat transfer area assuming proper design because in counter flow the coolant exiting the cooler is cooling wort at the initial temperature.  In immersion cooling, very little of the coolant is cooling wort at the initial temp.
Old MechE here. In Table 2, he has the counter flow with slightly higher Area for the study, the U is roughly a wash. My quandary is how does the immersion suddenly perform better than the counterflow with just a 5F change in cooling water? I think it has to do with the definition of the Delta T avg for an immersion. I might have to pull my dusty Heat Transfer book off of the shelf.

Zymurgy / Re: chiller performance: sep/oct 2013
« on: August 23, 2013, 12:48:22 PM »
Too many theoretical variables. You okay at that

I'm okay with the time it takes to chill. But the study in Zymurgy says they're getting it done in 10 minutes vs. my 14 minutes.
The variables:
They chilled 5 gallons, I did 5.5.

They used a 46'x3/8" coil. I use 2 separately-fed  25'x3/8" coils. Theoretically, this should give mine an advantage, at least enough to make up for the slight difference in volume.

We both used 65f water to chill.

I circulate the wort continuously, in the opposite direction of chiller flow.

My chiller flow rate is 3 gpm. So is theirs.

So how do they chill so much faster? Or do they? Perhaps the article is based strictly on calculations, with no scientific data, and is really just theoretical bs?
It does look like calculations were used for the graph. The data point for the immersion being below the counterflow is counterintuitive. You could e-mail Zymurgy and ask the question there, and I suspect the author would respond. Worked for me a while back when I had a question.

i have not read the full article, but i don't find it counterintuitive.  if they recirculated the wort with a paddle briskly around the immersion coils the heat transfer gradient could be significantly higher, including th e tranfer at the air interface and the wort kettle interface.  in fact, an argument could be made that this is significantly better than that from pumping a laminar layer through a counter flow or even a cross flow heat exchanger.

It was calculations in fig 4. Assumed 3 gallons per min. For both sides of the counterflow, which will be turbulent flow for the sizes used. Maybe a e-mail is in order.

Tinseth is most accurate on my system for the boil additions. None of the calculators have predictions for a hop stand/whirlpool addition.

You could use your favorite calculation algorithm for the following. Keep the hop additions in the same ratio. Have your 0 minute as a 15 or 20 minute, it is a swag on your system. Increase all of the additions by affixed percentage and see where you end up. Try 50%, Looking at the last post, maybe try 75%. Then fine tune it to hit the target IBU, by going up or down a smaller fixed percentage for each. That should balance the bitterness and flavor/aroma from the additions.

Paul is correct that large brewing systems get better hop utilization. We will all have different utilization on our specific systems with our specific techniques.

Saw erockrph's post, which is very good input. Hey - Brewer's Friend does a whirlpool calculation, who knew. What time do they assume, or do you enter that in there.

Zymurgy / Re: chiller performance: sep/oct 2013
« on: August 23, 2013, 10:21:46 AM »
The only unknown variable I can think of that might make a sizeable difference is spacing between coils. My coils kind of lay on top of each other which could reduce surface area and impede the flow of the circulating wort. My chiller's based loosely off JaDeD brewing's Hydra.

Time to get out the soldering torch!
Spacing the coils will expose ll the area.

The linked chiller - talk about surface area!

Brewers Gold is the best sub for Bullion.

Pages: 1 ... 185 186 [187] 188 189 ... 428