I have a glass carboy which I placed in a insulated chamber. This chamber has thermoelectric elements and a electric motor in the bottom. In my rubber bung I have three holes.
1st hole contains a stainless steel pipe which is submerged into my wort, and inside the pipe I have a temperature sensor to whom I connected the thermoelectric elements. The mesurements is by that, taken in the middle of the wort and not on the wall outside the fermentor. The elements will adjust temp within 0.1 degrees.
2nd hole has a hose with a valve to it, by connect a syringe I can add nutrients (or other spices or solutions) and take samples without opeining the vessel.
3rd hole is where I connect my vacuum ejector (compressed air driven vacuum generator). By using vacuum I will be able to degass and by use other enviromental pressure I think that I just might manipulate the way the yeast works. Not bio-chemically but my fluid dynamics changes since there are no/very little pressure. I have no evidence that this will improve my final result, but with high OG beverages it seems like degassing will help out to get faster attenuation without stalled fermentation.
The motor in the bottom of my chamber has neodymium magnets attached to it and inside the fermentor I placed a magnetic stir bar. This motor is controlled by intervall relay and a dimmer to control the speed. I stirr for about 5 min and then it stops for 5 min and then it starts for 5 min, and so it keeps on going 24/7
Why all the effort? By doing this equipment I get constant degassing (if that is a good thing?) through vacuum and stirring. I also get a very homogenous temp due the stirring. Yeast is always in suspension, the healthy yeast won’t get trapped in the bottom by other adjuncts or inactive yeast. I can also add nutrients and take samples, all these steps can be made without opening the vessel and no need to use airlock. Some pictures:
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201801 ... fe859e.jpg
https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/201801 ... b63ce3.jpg
Statistics: Posted by Cobrac — Thu May 24, 2018 5:54 pm
]]>
Anyhow. It's leaking slowly. My main intent for this unit was to use it in a kolonnenspunden-setup with active fermenting beer, so I guess it will work for that.
Statistics: Posted by Smellyglove — Wed Apr 04, 2018 11:44 am
]]>
http://www.barby-kuehner.de/de/
Statistics: Posted by Weizenberg — Sun Apr 01, 2018 3:18 am
]]>
Statistics: Posted by Smellyglove — Tue Mar 27, 2018 5:49 pm
]]>
I cleaned it as good as I can, but I still have a leak.
I've submerged all the things in the pipeline which is before the unit, without finding any leaks. When I spray the joints and connectors on the Kellerfee I still can't see any bubbles. I've submerged the parts of it which can be submerged too.
I'm starting to think the leak is at the diaphragm. I don't want to submerge this part since the manometer is it's closest neighbor.
I've googled around a little bit, but couldn't find any spare parts with the pricing for the kellerfee. Does anyone know if this might be an easy fix? I'd maybe need some new gaskets too, since I swapped the old rotten ones with o-rings I had laying around (but still no bubbles around these parts).
I've noticed I really need to tight down the glass housing to make it leak "less", but now I can't tighten that part anymore.
Statistics: Posted by Smellyglove — Wed Mar 07, 2018 12:10 pm
]]>
EDIT: old post, saw it just now.
Statistics: Posted by bjanat — Fri Feb 16, 2018 5:35 am
]]>
I'd imagine such amount should last the home brewer for quite many a decade.
Going by with what allegedly x or y brewery is doing will yield mixed results. In order to achieve similar one needs to have access to the same plant. Augustiner could tell you the exact recipe, yet your likelihood to reproduce it will be slim.
There was a time when Sam Smith in Yorkshire brewed the Ayinger Urweisse under license. They had access to the exact water chemistry, yeast, fermentation schedule and ingredients. Yet, the end-result was a beer different enough for many to notice. Eventually, this joint venture stopped.
My approach has always been to focus on what's available to me and understand its uses and limitations. One can achieve remarkable results this way. With WLP838 I am able to make Helles that myself (and many of my friends) prefer to a lot of commercial examples out there, and this is what counts: whether I am happy with it.
One needs to invest a bit of time getting it right with WLP838, especially when using Sulphates. For my part, I even prefer it to the original W34/70 directly from Weihenstephan. The Wissenschaftliche Station strains are found in many of my favourite Bavarian breweries
Statistics: Posted by Weizenberg — Sun Feb 04, 2018 3:16 am
]]>
As it refers to your question, I do not even know what yeasts are Frohberg and what yeasts are Saaz, with the exception of 34/70 (Frohberg).
My observation was in three yeasts: Augustiner (Omega), Andechs (WLP) and Ayinger (WLP). Observations were not comparing the same beer style.
So, again, it is just a hypothesis that needs to be tested (as I indicated above). Nothing more, nothing less.
In probably the most recent/ comprehensive review on flocculation (Vidberg), not much is mentioned about temperature and what is mentioned is not relevant to this question. Even if it were investigated, we will need to know where our preferred yeasts fit, and it is unlikely we will know this in the near future.
Statistics: Posted by lupulus — Sat Feb 03, 2018 11:55 pm
]]>
]]>
Yeasts strains have an optimal flocculation temperature. This flocculation temperature is not the coldest possible temperature. In general, a lager yeast will flocculate faster when lagering at 5C than when lagering at 0C. This seems to apply to Kolsch yeast as well.
It is possible that the faster flocculation is related to the yeast running out of fuel, but given that I keg condition Kolsch with sugar for 7 days at 22C, the fact that Kolsch yeast drops faster at 5C vs 0C does not seem to be related to fuel.
NOTE that there is NO implication that 5C is better than 0C, it is quite possible that keeping yeast in suspension as much as possible prolongs the life of the beer, and also quite possibly, it is better to keep the beer at 0C once yeast has flocculated.
So, if you have a stubborn non-flocculating yeast and you want beer to clear faster, give warm lagering a shot
Statistics: Posted by lupulus — Thu Feb 01, 2018 8:42 pm
]]>
]]>
The Relative Importance of Temperature and Time in the Cold Conditioning of Beer. Michaela Miedl and Charles W. Bamforth. J. Am. Soc. Brew. Chem. 62(2):75-78, 2004.
The impact on the development of turbidity from chilling lager-style beer at constant low temperatures and alternating to low temperatures has been investigated. Irrespective of whether a beer is held isothermally or has received a change in temperature of storage, the magnitude of the haze that develops is determined by the extent of chilling that the beer encounters. Equally, the length of storing a beer at a prior, higher temperature does not influence the extent of haze development when the beer is subsequently brought to a lower temperature. These observations support the contention that in the formation of insoluble material during cold conditioning of beer, a short period at a very low temperature (e.g., –2.5°C) is more efficacious than a prolonged period at a warmer temperature (e.g., 0°C).
Statistics: Posted by lupulus — Sat Jan 20, 2018 11:29 am
]]>
I can say with certainty, do not crash to 0c, bubble pure 02 for 15 minutes, then fine with lime flavoured gelatin. Tastes like hot buttered Lime stuffed Corona. Or so I would imagine.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Statistics: Posted by mchrispen — Sat Jan 13, 2018 9:42 pm
]]>
See my earlier pictures.
Statistics: Posted by Weizenberg — Fri Jan 12, 2018 12:22 am
]]>
]]>