BrewingTechniques
Q-&-A with the Troubleshooter
Dave Miller takes on...
  • Pumping Hot Wort
  • Strike Water Calculations -- Compensating for False Bottoms
  • Over-the-Top Hop Utilization
  • The Secret to Guinness Stout

    Republished from BrewingTechniques' March/April 1997.

    Pumping Hot Wort

    Q: I currently have a three-tier brewing system in my basement. My ceiling is not high enough to take full advantage of a complete gravity setup. I would like to purchase a pump to transfer hot wort to the wort chiller. I brew in 5- to 6-gallon batches. The wort would have to travel about 3-4 ft vertically and about 3-6 ft horizontally. Can you help with any specific recommendations and guidelines? Suggestions about where to get products would also be nice.

    A: In a previous column (1), I mentioned some small, magnetically coupled centrifugal pumps that I feel are suitable for use in general home brewing. The trouble with these pumps is that they have a temperature limit of 200° F (93° C). They are fine for pumping cleaning solutions, cold wort, and hot wort from the lauter tun, but not for boiling-hot wort. And that, as I understand it, is precisely what you need -- you want to pump hot wort from the kettle to the wort cooler. What you need is a pump with a metal body (the centrifugal pumps mentioned earlier have plastic bodies, hence the heat limitation).

    Fortunately, a home brewer who stopped into my brewpub recently happened to tell me about a small stainless steel centrifugal pump he uses called the Grundfos, model number UP15-18SU (catalog no. 2P311). It is sold by W.W. Grainger (Chicago, Illinois). This pump is rated to 230° F (110° C) and should be capable of doing the job for you. Be warned that it is not a sanitary pump and therefore should not be used to pump cooled wort or beer. It should do fine for pumping hot wort from the grant to the kettle, or from the kettle to the heat exchanger, as well as for moving hot or cold water and cleaning solutions.

    The biggest limitation of centrifugal pumps is that they must be placed below the supply tank. Usually this is no problem because the kettle stands on a burner anyway. Another limitation is that as the "head" -- the resistance on the pump imposed by piping, valves, and lift, expressed in feet -- increases, the maximum flow rate decreases. When the head reaches a certain point, the pump simply cannot move liquid. Small centrifugal pumps have very low head limitations. The maximum head this Grundfos pump can take is about 7 feet. With 7 feet of head, the flow rate will be a bit over 1 gallon/minute. If this limitation poses a problem, you might consider redeploying your equipment in some way. For example, you might put your kettle on the middle level of your three-tier stand, with the hot liquor on top and the mash/ lauter tun on the lowest level. Then you could pump your wort from the grant up to the kettle, and pump from the kettle to the heat exchanger as well.

    You also need to consider the limitations of the motor. One of the attractive features of one of the plastic pumps is that they come with a TEFC (totally enclosed fan-cooled) motor, which is highly water resistant. The stainless steel Grundfos pump is only available with a conventional open frame motor, so you would have to be careful with it. I would not recommend putting it on the floor -- sooner or later you will spill something on it and fry the motor windings.

    If you decide to buy the Grundfos pump, you will also need the coupling kit W.W. Grainger sells; it consists of two unions that enable you to hook the pump up to regular pipe fittings.

    Strike Water Calculations -- Compensating for False Bottoms

    Q: We recently converted a used Sankey keg into a mash/lauter tun by the typical method of cutting out the top and dropping in a purchased false bottom and a drain tube. Our first 5-gallon recipe called for 8 lb of grain. We used the conventional calculations for determining the water requirements for the mash (1 1/4 qt/lb of grain) and sparge (1/2 gal/lb of grain) and began to mash by underletting the false bottom with part of the calculated mash water. Our problem was this: When we doughed in the grain, we ran out of mash water and missed our strike temperature. We compensated by using about 1 gallon of the sparge water (this is about how much water is under the false bottom). Should we have calculated extra water in the mash to compensate for the volume under the false bottom? If we do this, do we still use the conventional figure of 1/2 gallon of sparge water per pound of grain?

    A: In a word, the answer to your first question is "yes." When you work with a mash/lauter tun, you must include the foundation water (the water required to cover the false bottom) in the volume calculated for the mash. For example, my mash/lauter tun at Blackstone Restaurant and Brewery requires 1 bbl of water (31 gallons) to cover the plates. So when I calculate the volume of mash water for a new recipe, I first compute the strike water volume (1 bbl for every 100 lb of grain, which is 1.24 qts/lb), then add 1 bbl for foundation water. Calculating the mash water volume in this way should ensure a consistent mash thickness, regardless of the amount of grain being used. Of course, the grist composition also influences water requirements. Barley flakes, for example, tend to swell up in hot water, and you may have to use extra water to compensate for this factor. But the basic calculation at least gives you a starting point from which to make adjustments.

    The answer to your second question is also "yes." There is no question that a large space below the false bottom means more first wort will be run off. But on the other hand, you will have to begin the sparge operation with more mash water in the mash/lauter tun, and when it ends the same will be true. So your total water use will be higher. The unfortunate part of all this is that you will not be able to rinse the grains as thoroughly, even though you are using the same volume of sparge water. This means lower extract. If that bothers you, I suggest substituting a slotted copper tube collector for your false bottom. This will give you a much smaller dead space at the bottom of the vessel. Alternatively, you could double your batch size; a 15.5-gallon beer keg mash tun is plenty big enough for making 10 gallons of beer at a time. This would cut your dead space down to a more reasonable proportion of your total mash volume and raise your efficiency considerably.

    Over-the-Top Hop Utilization

    Q: In my home decoction setup, I boil the bittering hops (Liberty pellets, 1995 crop, 4.5% alpha-acid, stored at 0° F [-18° C]) for 90 minutes at 200° F (93° C), which is the boiling point at my altitude (5,800-6,000 ft). I usually boil 7 gallons of sparge down to 5.5 gallons of wort in that time. By doing comparative taste tests, I've settled on a hop conversion efficiency of 40% using Rager's formula (2), and this is for batches in which I add no finishing hops that would contribute more IBUs. I use distilled water to dilute my tap water's 300 ppm of hardness (40 ppm of which is sulfate) to less than 50 ppm in the finished wort, and I use lactic acid to lower the mash pH and sparge water pH to about 5.2 and less than 6, respectively. Is this 40% conversion for real? I've read that 40% is achievable only in commercial setups. Does wort pH have anything to do with it? How accurate are the published alpha-acid numbers for hops, anyway?

    A: It seems unlikely that your 40% hop utilization figure is valid; in my experiences, most home brewers get 20-25%. You stated that you determined your bitterness levels by taste comparisons. What commercial beers did you use as references? Most imports and many microbrews have serious oxidation problems, which means a significant loss of bitterness in the bottle. The best beers to use for taste comparisons are the lagers made by the major American breweries. Those beers are almost always fresh. Of course, you would have to brew a light-bodied beer with only about 12-15 IBUs for the comparison to work.

    Hop utilization in the kettle decreases as the wort pH decreases. Considering your procedures (pH adjustment and water adjustment as well as decoction mashing), I see nothing that would account for abnormally high bitterness.

    Question: Is the bitterness smooth, or do the beers have a rough, biting finish? If the bitterness is rough, you may have a calibration problem with your pH meter -- in other words, your wort might not be as low in pH as you think.

    I think you can be confident in the alpha-acid numbers of your hops, assuming that your homebrew supplier is knowledgeable and buys hops from a reputable wholesaler. In any case, the 4.5% you quote sounds reasonable; I have never seen Liberty hops with an alpha-acid rating over 5%. And, as you probably know, mistreatment of hops during shipping and storage will lower their bittering value; it never raises it. If you suspect that you have gotten some mislabeled hops, try a different supplier. But I doubt this is your problem, unless your 40% utilization is a recent phenomenon that coincides with your purchase of a fresh lot of hops.

    The Secret to Guinness Stout

    Q: I have tried a lot of stout recipes and have yet to emulate authentic Guinness Stout to the satisfaction of either myself or my lady. Both of us have been to Ireland to sample the original (she much more recently than I, but then, my consumption exceeded hers). Do you know the secrets, all of them, and can you be enticed to reveal them?

    Keep up the good work and thank you for all of the good advice you've given me and others.

    A: I wish I could tell you how to duplicate Guinness. I don't know the secrets, although I'm sure there are some. Maybe I can at least give you a few hints to help you get your home- brewed effort closer to the role model.

    To start, I would suggest getting hold of Dr. Michael Lewis's new book, Stout (Brewers Publications, 1995). Dr. Lewis has worked with Guinness, and I expect he knows as much about their beer as anyone outside the company.

    I am convinced that part of the smoothness of Guinness is due to its unique draft dispense system. If you can afford to buy a Guinness tap (they are available from Johnson Enterprises, Rockford, Illinois, part number GF100, and from other suppliers -- your homebrew supply shop can order one for you) and dedicate a keg and gas tank to serving your stout, you will be gratified by the results.

    Guinness is dispensed under high pressure (45 psi) using a 75% nitrogen/25% CO2 mix. The Guinness tap has a built-in restrictor plate with five very small holes drilled in it. The high pressure is necessary to force the beer through these pinholes. This set-up forces the dissolved carbon dioxide to break out of solution, leaving the beer in the glass with a very creamy head of foam but almost no carbonation, which makes the drink much smoother. Guinness is common enough that many beverage gas suppliers sell the proper gas mixture, and you may be able to get one to fill your small gas cylinder.

    In setting up your dispense system, the gas mix is just as important as the tap. If you can obtain both items, you are in business. Artificially carbonate the beer to about 2-2.2 volumes. Keep the keg at around 45° F (7° C) when you are dispensing from it.

    In a previous column (3), I discussed some of the techniques home brewers can use to get the slight, consistent lactic acidity that does so much to complicate and enhance the smooth, dry character of Guinness.

    Other than that, I would offer some general advice on recipe formulation. First, remember that Guinness, though full-bodied, is not a very strong or heavy beer. Go for a starting gravity in the mid-40s or even lower (Dave Line, author of the book Brewing Beers Like Those You Buy, says the draft Guinness sold in the UK is actually in the high 30s [4]). Avoid crystal malts. Use about 10% flaked barley to enhance the smoothness and body. And finally, keep your roasted barley in the 5-10% range. More is not better.

    Finally, I have to say that, although I do not filter my stouts, Guinness does, and I am sure that this partly accounts for the light color of the foam and also undoubtedly enhances the smoothness. If you want to filter your stout, use a depth filter, such as the Marcon (Woodbridge, Ontario, Canada) plate-and-frame sheet filter (available for homebrew operations), with a very coarse grade of filter material (try 8 microns or so). Pleated cartridge filters will strip too much color and body from the beer.

    References

    (1) Dave Miller, "Ask the Troubleshooter: Water, Malts, Mashing, Lautering, Brewing Belgian Styles, and Recipe Scale-Up," BrewingTechniques 3 (3), p. 29 (May/June 1995).

    (2) Jackie Rager, "Calculating Hop Bitterness in Beer," zymurgy 13 (4), pp. 53-54 (1990).

    (3) Dave Miller, "Q&A with the Troubleshooter," BrewingTechniques 3 (5), p. 43 (September/October 1995).

    (4) Dave Line, Brewing Beers Like Those You Buy (Amateur Winemakers Publications; reprinted by G.W. Kent, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1985), p. 39.

  • Issue 5.2 Table Of Contents
    [Home]  [BrewingTechniques Library]  [Contact Us]  [Order]