After a 1year, i'm taking the plunge.

[woozy]

Yeah, but we're both using the same ice... and we're both going "through" the same disparate temperatures. Okay, there's volume but... Well, this really seems like expecting a six inch extension to tip to reach further than adding it to its base. I'm willing to be wrong but what exactly is the model.

I mean, thought experiment. 8 oz. of 200 degree tea. + 4 oz ice, no stirring measure time to reach room temperature. 8 oz. of 200-degree tea. wait to 120 degree + 4 oz ice, meaure time to room temperature. Different? Really? Maybe, but why? Would it be different if we measure to a different temp, say 100? Maybe I'll try that. I only have one thermometer though.

I'm dubious. I could be wrong. But I'm dubious.
===
inconclusive results. Need another thermometer... The mug without ice seemed to stay consistantly at 12 degrees higher than the mug with ice. Adding ice when the mug was 120 *seemed* like it'd do a lot more than the same ice did to the first cup at 170 but they both dropped to 97 at about the same time. Switching thermometer between mugs was ineffective because minutes would go by while I waited for thermometer to stabilize.

 

[bxtzd3]

well i have my fermenter in the pantry, ac is on so its better then the garage. how long should i expect bubbles? very cool learning day.

 

[woozy]

You're *likely* to get bubbles tomorrow. But if you don't it doesn't really mean anything.

The bubbles are cool but what *I* really love are seeing (if you have a carboy flashlight penetrable container) the yeast particles swirling around in a turbulent storm.

 

[bxtzd3]

no bubbles yet, but i will be patient. its funny how munks made ale in the 1700's or so where being sterilization meant a guy getting his, you know, but we stress over it. i wonder ho different the beer was. i need to get a better bucket thermometer, the one on min dont seem to work. also i tried a hydrometer reading and could not understand how to read it. next lesson i guess.

 

[unionrdr]

It's easy to read. 1.000 is water at like 66F. some others say 60F,Fermtap says 68F. So read where you're particular one is calibrated. The longer lines on the scale read 10,20,30,40,etc. The smaller lines in between those read 2,4,6,8. So one small line below the "10" would be 1.012. Simple.
And those stick on thermometers are fine,as long as you don't submerge them in water. Then they go bad. I stick mine on where the middle of the liquid column would be in a 5 gallon batch. If it looks like it's not working,you either soaked it in water,or the temp is out of range of that particular thermometer. In other words,it's reading too cold or too hot,worse case scenario.

 

[freisste]

Yeah, but we're both using the same ice... and we're both going "through" the same disparate temperatures. Okay, there's volume but... Well, this really seems like expecting a six inch extension to tip to reach further than adding it to its base. I'm willing to be wrong but what exactly is the model.

I mean, thought experiment. 8 oz. of 200 degree tea. + 4 oz ice, no stirring measure time to reach room temperature. 8 oz. of 200-degree tea. wait to 120 degree + 4 oz ice, meaure time to room temperature. Different? Really? Maybe, but why? Would it be different if we measure to a different temp, say 100? Maybe I'll try that. I only have one thermometer though.

I'm dubious. I could be wrong. But I'm dubious.
===
inconclusive results. Need another thermometer... The mug without ice seemed to stay consistantly at 12 degrees higher than the mug with ice. Adding ice when the mug was 120 *seemed* like it'd do a lot more than the same ice did to the first cup at 170 but they both dropped to 97 at about the same time. Switching thermometer between mugs was ineffective because minutes would go by while I waited for thermometer to stabilize.

Alright...last post on this from me because it is off-topic.

Heat flow is based on temperature disparity. So 3gallons at 212 is going to lose heat to the environment at a certain rate (say x), based on the temp of the environment. The same 3gallons loses heat at a lower rate (x') when it is cooler because the difference in temperature is smaller. I'll assume we agree on this.

Also, larger volumes of water require longer times to change temperature. So 5 gallons at 125 will cool at a lower rate than 2.5 gallons (call it x'').

For the next part, I am going to assume you add 32f WATER (no ice so we can ignore latent heat of melting. It would cause a larger effect, but not a different effect.)

Mixing in the water changes the temp very rapidly, let's say instantaneously. In theory, 2.5 gallons of 50f water plus 2.5 gallons of 100f water equals 5 gallons of 75f water.

Now, do you want to replace your fast heat transfer (x') with your instantaneous temperature change (water addition) and be left with a slow heat transfer (x'') or do you want to keep the fast heat transfer (x') and replace the slow heat transfer (x'') with the instantaneous temperature change?

The best way to cool the wort is to rely on the temperature disparity early and the water addition later.

 

[bxtzd3]

ok, still no physical signs of fermentation. so in the event it doesn't show anything soon, what steps should i take and yeast to use to get it going.

 

[woozy]

Now, do you want to replace your fast heat transfer (x') with your instantaneous temperature change (water addition) and be left with a slow heat transfer (x'') or do you want to keep the fast heat transfer (x') and replace the slow heat transfer (x'') with the instantaneous temperature change?

you're right. It is off topic.

But the answer to that actually depends on what the values actually are.

Suppose you were driving a car and were a 100 miles from your destination. Suppose I told you I could instantly transport you so that you were only 25 miles from your destination but your speed would slow way down. Should you do it?

Well, you obviously don't have enough information to answer that. And I don't have enough information to answer yours.

 

[woozy]

ok, still no physical signs of fermentation. so in the event it doesn't show anything soon, what steps should i take and yeast to use to get it going.

Wait. It's only been a day. It might take 36 to 72 hours as the title of the sticky says.

And you could also miss it while you aren't looking.

Just wait.

 

[Yooper]

you're right. It is off topic.

But the answer to that actually depends on what the values actually are.

Suppose you were driving a car and were a 100 miles from your destination. Suppose I told you I could instantly transport you so that you were only 25 miles from your destination but your speed would slow way down. Should you do it?

Well, you obviously don't have enough information to answer that. And I don't have enough information to answer yours.

We have lots and lots of engineers on this forum who would be happy to show you the actual calculations of thermal transfer. It really is just science and math. Please start a new thread in the "Brew Science" forum if you really don't understand why thermal transfer and cooling is a scientific fact and need it explained. It doesn't have a thing to do with cars or speed or anything.

Let's get back to the original topic for the OP. Thanks.

 

[mcbaumannerb]

ok, still no physical signs of fermentation. so in the event it doesn't show anything soon, what steps should i take and yeast to use to get it going.

The only step you want to take is to crack open a brew and forget about the fermenter for a day or two. It won't always bubble (leaky kids are not uncommon) and it might take some time for the yeast to get fully engaged.

Just remember - the yeast are trained professionals. Just let them do their kilobit!

 

[markley]

Quick question about top up water..If using tap water should this be boiled first? Then cooled before adding to hot wort?

I really like the idea of having 2 gallons in the freezer..I am assuming you are not "freezing" the gallons, but rather cooling down close to freezing?

 

[markley]

+1 to every thing said here!


start the boil with 3 gallons and about 40% of the extract giving in the recipe. I added the second half of the extract at the end of the boil and let it sit for 10 minutes before cooling.

So does the extract (remaining half) not have to boil?

 

[woozy]

So does the extract (remaining half) not have to boil?

No. It doesn't. (If you are worried about sanitation, putting the extract into the hot wort is enough to sanitize it. It doesn't need to boil. And for "cooking", it doesn't need any cooking whatsoever. The boil is purely for the purpose of the hops.)

(Likewise putting a wort chiller into hot wort will sanitize it. No need to waste sanitizer on a wort chiller.)

Boiling tap water? I don't but if you have reason to suspect microbes in you water (i.e. your tap water is well water) you should. I don't but others do. But I don't.

Also there's chemicals (chlorine mostly) but that's another story altogether.

And freezing the water to close to freezing... No, it's okay to freeze them if you want. Or you could just keep it close to freezing. Up to you.

 

[bxtzd3]

ok lads, i looked at the bucket last night, 24 hours after pitching yeast, no bubbles but i also seen that i filled the airlock past the line. i removed the lock and dumped out the overage. while it was out i looked through the hole and there was foam in the bucket. so im guessing its all ok. now i did read the temp strip on the bucket, not broke after all just needed to shine a light on it, and the temp is 66-68 . so a slow start. should i move it to a warmer climate?

 

[bxtzd3]

holy smokes! just realized i am missing a piece to my three piece airlock. the part that goes over the center tube, piston, so im guessing this may be the culprit and the air is happily leaving the chamber hence no bubbles. dam!

 

[freisste]

the temp is 66-68 . so a slow start. should i move it to a warmer climate?

I would probably move it to a cooler climate. I keep beers fermenting that the very bottom of the ideal range for the first few days, then pretty much let it go where it wants (within reason, up to 65-66 for example) to finish fermentation.

 

[woozy]

holy smokes! just realized i am missing a piece to my three piece airlock. the part that goes over the center tube, piston, so im guessing this may be the culprit and the air is happily leaving the chamber hence no bubbles. dam!

There ya go! Don't move it. 66-68 is really good temperature and for a first batch it's enough to make any homebrewer jealous. (Didn't measure mine but I figure it was in the low to mid 70s. My beer was fine but yours will be better. *if* you don't move it.)

 

[pollock]

welllll....... okay.

But I'm not convinced. I mean it seems like we're both trying to achieve the same thing (turn two gallons of hot wort into five gallons of cool wort) with the same tools (an ice bath and 3 gallons of ice) and it seems that as long as neither of us do anything *indirect* to our goal it's gotta be that whatever order we do everything it's a zero-sum gain. I mean if one's less efficient than the other then one is losing energy and where is the lost energy going?

At any rate. I've never been able to cool as quickly as you have so you might be right... but I'm sure not wrapping my head around it.

{*mumble... smaller volume... surface area... hrmmmm... volume is proportional to depth as the kettle is cylanderical but surface area is proportional to sides which is proportional to depth *PLUS* the base surface area which is the same for both so ... smaller volume => lesser depth => *more* surface area per volume than the larger volumes ... so smaller volume *does* cool faster because it has more square inches per gallon... and... hmm, maybe...}

Yooper is very correct in his statement.
It's not as much about surface area as it is difference of temps and quantity of volumes. Try the ice bath to 100 and mix with 2.5g freezer water method and you'll be amazed. Sometimes I would fall to mid fifties in mid winter in Florida using this method on accident.
Now getting all 5g of my AG batches down in temp is proving to be a pain in FL with 85 degree ground water...

 

[woozy]

Yooper is very correct in his statement.
It's not as much about surface area as it is difference of temps and quantity of volumes. Try the ice bath to 100 and mix with 2.5g freezer water method and you'll be amazed. Sometimes I would fall to mid fifties in mid winter in Florida using this method on accident.
Now getting all 5g of my AG batches down in temp is proving to be a pain in FL with 85 degree ground water...

We're off topic so I figured I'd stop talking about it.

I was willing to be wrong but I wanted an explanation because it was counter intuitive. I sat down and did the math and finally figured it out.

I'm not sure it's so much volume difference as that hotter items lose more total heat in the same time as a cooler item as friesste pointed out. My problem was determining if that extra heat loss as it cools is actually great than larger heat loss of adding the ice first. I did the math. It was.

Case 1: ice first. 2-gallons 212 goes to 5-gallons 104 [That's a big difference! It was hard for me to accept that this might not be desirable]. Which is 40 above room tempature. Cool it for 20 minutes and drops 80% to 8 above room temp. = 72 degrees.
Case 2: ice last 212 is 148 above room temperature. Cool it for 20 minutes and drops 80% to 30 above room temp = 94. mix ice 2 gallons 94 goes to 5 gallons of 57 degrees.

So, yes, Yooper and Friesste were right.

I think what I didn't take into account was the ice-drop of 108 degrees by adding the ice first isn't actually "abandoned" in the second. Cooling by 40 degrees with ice is a lot less than cooling by 108 degrees by ice, true. But the missing 60 degrees (and more) was account for in the air cooling.

But still. Very counter intuitive.

====
And it's lack of faith. I know that if I get it to 90 ice will drop it to the 60s. But when I'm in the kitchen it seems all but impossible that I'll *ever* get to to 90. It's 212 and hot so I drop the ice in and *imediately* it gets down to 110. Wahoo! Now I just got to beat it down to 80 and surely beating 110 to 80 seems much easier than beating 212 to 90.

But apparently it's not. It's not at all.

 

[bxtzd3]

my babys at work. it smells and tastes like flat sam adams summer wheat. very happy. i do now understand green tasting beer. the hydrometer kept sticking to the sides no matter how many times i spun it. im guessing it will boost up in abv after another week its been in for 4 days.

 

[seph]

Yup give it time to work and the SG will start getting to where you want it. And as for the hydrometer sticking to the cylinder, I pretty much gave up on the cylinder and I just make sure that my hydrometer is super sanitized and drop it in the bucket. Now if I'm using a carboy, I have to use the cylinder, but dropping it in the bucket works way better.

 

[mcbaumannerb]

Congrats on the first batch! You will now dive into the brewers biggest challenge - patience

 

[unionrdr]

For me,wearing trifocals,reading at sharp angles (as in hydrometer in bucket) won't work. Especially if any krausen is present. Here's a neat lil cheapy NB has to fit the tube the hydrometer comes in to stabilize it; http://www.northernbrewer.com/shop/brewing/brewing-equipment/testing-measuring/foam-hydrometer-stand-ring-blue.html
I think that may help solve our tube leveling issues...

 

[bxtzd3]

Ok update. After a week and three days, my gravity reading is 1.010, final should be 1.016. And it appears my abv is I'm guessing 2%. It should be 4.5%. Now I took a reading with plain water and it was between .99- 1.000. So does all this sound right? Thanks in advance.

 

[unionrdr]

.099 to 1.000 is about where it should be in water at like 66F. Here's the Cooper's ABV formula I use- (OG-FG)/7.46 + .5 = ABV%

 

[bxtzd3]

 

[bxtzd3]

Bottled and resting.