Bottle Carbing Idea (Final Data Review)

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

RukusDM

Well-Known Member
Joined
Oct 12, 2010
Messages
441
Reaction score
9
Location
Rochester
Well I started the Pasteurization today and I have data and plots showing the Carbonation process, as well as the Pasteurization process.

I started slightly early in the pressure rise. I was actually looking for 2.5 volumes of CO2, for a pressure of 25.3 Psi, but my basement temperature has been moving around a couple degrees as the weather is changing back and forth here in New York. This ends up changing the carbonation pressure required for a given number of volumes. I ended up doing this with 22 Psi for 2.3 volumes of CO2 as I have company coming to dinner Sunday.

Carbonation -
The carbonation process and conditioning of the bottles with a priming sugar added for 2.5 Volumes worked quite well with the plastic test bottle, with no indications of failure of either the tapped threads for the gauge or the bottle itself.

The process seems to be fairly linear over time, with a slight wander in the pressurization rate most likely due to variation in my basement temperature. Temperature will have a big impact on carbonation time.

The following data and plots show this pressurization rate.

edit: more info regarding cider prior to bottle conditioning.
Cider fermented to 1.012 using Safale S-04
Cider bottled with priming sugar added for 2.5 Volumes of CO2 on top of the finished 1.012 SG.
Cider bottle conditioned for ~ 11 days at around 62 - 66 deg
Pressure Monitored during the 11 Days, waiting for 25.3 Psi to produce 2.5 Volumes CO2.
No Cold Crash Done.
Pasteurization started at actual 22 Psi for 2.3 Volumes CO2.

Pasteurization detailed below.

CarbonationData.jpg


CarbonationPlot.jpg



Overall, the process followed what appears to be typical when following the normal priming wait time before Pasteurization which is described quite well by Pappers sticky post.

There may be some variation in this however which could be attributed to strain of yeast and sugar content (SG) prior to adding priming sugar. This was with Safale S-04, and a final SG reading of around 1.012.

From my experience with Champagne yeast, and how vigorous that strain is, the rates could be quite different. This would support using some kind of gauging method to reach the desired pressurization value prior to Pasteurization and add a safety factor. I don't have any data using Champagne yeast yet to determine if a more aggressive yeast would change rates, however I hope to continue testing on using more than one strain to see if the rate is typical for all strains or not.



Pasteurization -
I began by putting the test bottle in a water bath of 160 degrees, with the flame off. I covered the pot with 2 towels too keep heat in as well as the water in the event the bottle burst. I recorded the pressure rise with samples at 1 minute intervals. As it turns out, the pressure inside the bottle is much higher than one might think. As you can see from the data, my 30 Psi gauge was not adequate for the Pasteurization task.

The pressure inside the bottle went way above 30 Psi. In fact the pressure did not drop and come off the 33 Psi hard stop on the gauge for almost 3 hours. As of this writing, the pressure is still above 30 Psi. The following data shows the Pasteurization process.

PasteurizationData.jpg


PasteurizationPlot.jpg


Summary -
I think that the general process of using the typical methods does work in most cases. I believe the unknowns and the method of applying Pasteurization heat with a water bath does work well, however how high a temperature of the bath will have a large impact on how high the pressure goes during that process.

Pimento has found some data regarding the temperatures that yeasts die off at, and I hope he posts that data here. However, I did use a temperature for the bath that would fall in line with his data, and would get the liquid temperature up in the 140's. If I recall correctly, his data suggests that this temperature would be fatal for the yeasts. It would also help keep the bottle pressures lower durring that process.

I used a bath temperature of 160 degrees, with a submersion time of about 12 minuets. As you can see from the data collected during the Pasteurization, the pressure climbs fairly linearly with time and with the temperature of the liquid in the container.

I wasn't able to determine the actual pressure in the bottle due to the limit of the gauge. It might make sense to use a 50 or a 100 Psi gauge for this whole process (depending on your CO2 Volumes and Pasturization Temperatures). I was able to estimate the pressure in the bottle using linear regression of the data. This of course is only a estimate, however in all likelihood a good estimate as I believe pressure of a gas increases linearly with temperature in a fixed volume.

There are a few things that may have a large impact on whether you have bottles burst during this process or not. If the bottles are submerged to a level that is either approaching or above the liquid level, the gas temperature would rise much faster than my data shows, which would cause the pressure to climb at a very rapid rate, and likely exceed what I saw or estimated. I had the water about 2/3 the way up the bottle liquid level. I think there is a fairly good chance you could blow a bottle if the water level gets a lot higher.

With all of this said, typical methods do provide a pretty good safety margin, however refining the method to provide safety and repeatability of carbonation might suggest that this method may have merit.

I think in the end, we are really force carbing the Cider like the keggers do. We raise the pressure way up, and the cider dissolves the CO2 and the pressure drops. I'll post a vid showing the Carb level I have.


Any comments or suggestions are welcome. YMMV.

Regards
Doug.
 
That is awesome info... and reassures my suspicion and nervousness about bottle pasteurizing.

Prost
 
With all of this data, I think it suggests that if you don't use a gauge to pasteurize, make sure you calculate your sugar right, wait the (week with tests durring the week to check for overcarb) and then use a lower temperature to pasteurize. Perhaps 160 to 165 for 12 or so minutes. Do your normal "test a bottle every few days" , or squeeze the bottle if thats what works for you, but in either event use a lower temperature for pasteurization.

Also, don't fill the pasteurization pot above 2/3 the bottle liquid level. I would also place a towel over the top even if you use a lid to help contain the splash of hot liquid in case of a bottle failure.

Even more importantly, do not overfill the bottle. Leave the typical 1.5" to 2" of a longneck airspace. The shorter headspace will likely bring the pressure even higher and cause a failure at typical pasteurization temperatures.

I'll attempt to get data with other temperatures and strains of yeast.

edit: I'll leave the gauge on the test bottle to see what the pressure drops back down to, and monitor to see if the yeast takes off again. I don't think it will with the info I have, but can't be to safe.

another edit: It just occured to me some people use larger volume bottles. This was with a 12 oz. Long neck. I'll see if I can dig up a pounder and do the same thing. Perhaps a quart as well. The pasteurization time may have to be extended longer than 12 min.
Wait time is one week, but with tests during wait.
 
To be clear, are you adding priming sugar to a dry, cold crashed, racked cider?

Because I recently cold crashed a fermenting cider at 1.020 ... bottled... and tested 12 hours later and had adequate carbonation. If noobs read this, and think it will take two weeks for their sweet cider to carbonate in the bottle before pasteurizing, someone is going to die. Can you give more info, preferably edited into your OP, about the cider going into your experiment?
 
To be clear, are you adding priming sugar to a dry, cold crashed, racked cider?

Because I recently cold crashed a fermenting cider at 1.020 ... bottled... and tested 12 hours later and had adequate carbonation. If noobs read this, and think it will take two weeks for their sweet cider to carbonate in the bottle before pasteurizing, someone is going to die. Can you give more info, preferably edited into your OP, about the cider going into your experiment?

No, I waited until I got the SG I was looking for first. I waited till I had a SG of 1.012, as I found that was close to what I wanted for sweetness. I then calculated the Priming sugar and added on top of that value. So its really a offset. It would also work with fully dry.

My attempt was to eliminate back sweetening and still get the proper carbing for the sweetness I wanted.

I'll check one of the bottles for SG to see if all of the priming sugar was used and I'm back to the original SG I wanted.
 
I probably won't get that data until tomorrow morning as I would have to open a bottle and drink it. I just finished my 3rd Guiness, and I have to test my newly kegged Ale. I think I'll be full by then ;)
 
To be clear, are you adding priming sugar to a dry, cold crashed, racked cider?

Because I recently cold crashed a fermenting cider at 1.020 ... bottled... and tested 12 hours later and had adequate carbonation. If noobs read this, and think it will take two weeks for their sweet cider to carbonate in the bottle before pasteurizing, someone is going to die. Can you give more info, preferably edited into your OP, about the cider going into your experiment?

Fletch, I share your concern regarding someone getting hurt. That was a large part of why I did this to begin with.

We have to consider the data I've provided as a data point of One. This has only been done once. However, following the current and well tested methods would produce the same result if a "Noob" (myself included) followed the current method with a more aggressive fermentation after bottling, and have one go off in the pot.

That is the reason why I think that using a gauge is a better method than basically winging it. I'm trying to be careful in my examination of current methods so that I do not offend Pappers as he has put allot of effort in his explanation of Pasteurization, and in general is a proven method as many use his method with excellent results, but many people don't understand the dangers not knowing the forces we are dealing with. I personally don't want to see someone get hurt.

The whole problem is currently there is no measure of "where you are" when you drop them in the pot other than a subjective test.

All this said, I still think that any way folks decide to pasteurize, lower temperatures can be used which should provide a bit more leeway in the safety factor.

This testing is provided as is, and is in no way totally complete. There are too many factors that can cause a failure without adequate measuring capability.

Edit. Cold crashing is not going to keep the yeast from taking off anyway as you'd never get carbonation in the first place if it did.
 
To be clear, are you adding priming sugar to a dry, cold crashed, racked cider?

Because I recently cold crashed a fermenting cider at 1.020 ... bottled... and tested 12 hours later and had adequate carbonation. If noobs read this, and think it will take two weeks for their sweet cider to carbonate in the bottle before pasteurizing, someone is going to die. Can you give more info, preferably edited into your OP, about the cider going into your experiment?

Fletch, I re-read your post. You mention that you had antiquate carbonation in 12 hours. How many volumes of CO2 did you prime for? The question is what did you consider antiquate?

Priming calculations and Priming calculators are available on the web. You just enter the type of carbonation you want by style or just enter the number of volumes you want.

I'm just trying to understand what you considered sufficient for your need.
 
1: I don't know anything about atmospheres of carbonation, I just know bubbles and head. I didn't prime. I cold crashed a 1.020 cider to drop sediment and yeast, then bottled, and 12 hours later the bottle tests showed adequate carbonation, as I subjectively define it. I then refrigerated them all and drank them within a week. It was a 1 gallon batch and I am an alcoholic with a sweet tooth.

2: According to your data set, your meter maxed out on pressure at 120 degrees. 120 is just fine for pasteurization, but that temp has to be held for about 5 hours.
 
1: I don't know anything about atmospheres of carbonation, I just know bubbles and head. I didn't prime. I cold crashed a 1.020 cider to drop sediment and yeast, then bottled, and 12 hours later the bottle tests showed adequate carbonation, as I subjectively define it. I then refrigerated them all and drank them within a week. It was a 1 gallon batch and I am an alcoholic with a sweet tooth.

2: According to your data set, your meter maxed out on pressure at 120 degrees. 120 is just fine for pasteurization, but that temp has to be held for about 5 hours.

Yes, it did max out, however the temperature did not stop climbing until I got into the 140's. The pressure went much higher as you can see from the data regression in the chart.

Time and temperature can be adjusted to achieve the same results. Pasteurization at lower volumes of CO2 is of course going to be safer. At lower volumes, you may never see a bottle break even using higher temperatures.

I think the cold crashing may help in the overall scheme as there will be less yeast cells in suspension, causing a slower pressure rise during conditioning.
 
Additional info added at request to Original Post detailing cider prior to Pasteurization.
 
Had a video fail. Tried to document pour and carbonation via video and post. Bottle was way to cold. I put in the freezer for a while, then switched to the fridge.

I popped the top and poured with a low resultant head on the cider. Being a bit confused as to the low head and carb, I took the temperature. It was about 35. I guess when its that low you don't get much of anything but pretty good tasting very cold, still cider with some amount of bubbles ;)
 
What do you think would have happened if you didn't add any priming sugar, but let it continue with it's own sugar at 1.012?
 
What do you think would have happened if you didn't add any priming sugar, but let it continue with it's own sugar at 1.012?

Well I assume it would eat up some level of that 1.012. I don't know what the value would be. When I primed mine, I used a primer calculator and just added the specific volume of sugar it suggested.

I should have, but I didn't note what the SG was after the addition of the primer sugar. I probably could estimate what it would have gone to to produce the PSI I was looking for now that I have this data.
 
12 Hours after Pasteurization the pressure has dropped back to ~22 Psi I
started with.

I have edited some of the data on the first few posts. I had miss typed the wait time of 2 weeks, when it was 1 week with tests during the week for overcarb. The way I wrote it made it sound like wait 2 weeks first then test. - Thanks Fletch78

In my tests, the cider took 11 to 12 days. As I mentioned in the original post, this may be effected by yeast strain and total sugar content.

Let me know if you see something you question or think the post should be adjusted. I defiantly don't want to have someone get hurt.
 
I have no problem with your scientific method, I think it's awesome. It's just really inconsistent with my own experience, very non-scientific. I just can't imagine a 1.012 cider plus more sugar in a capped bottle for 12 days, then placed in a near-boiling water bath, not exploding. If it had been cold crashed and racked, I could see it taking 12 days because there would be very few yeast cells in suspension for the journey. But you said you didn't cold crash it... that makes me nervous. What yeast did you use? Did you already post that? Edit Yes you did.... S-04.
 
I have no problem with your scientific method, I think it's awesome. It's just really inconsistent with my own experience, very non-scientific. I just can't imagine a 1.012 cider plus more sugar in a capped bottle for 12 days, then placed in a near-boiling water bath, not exploding. If it had been cold crashed and racked, I could see it taking 12 days because there would be very few yeast cells in suspension for the journey. But you said you didn't cold crash it... that makes me nervous. What yeast did you use? Did you already post that? Edit Yes you did.... S-04.

What temperature did you condition at? Temperature with allot of sugar will defiantly increase the rate of Carbonation. I also edited to clarify that as I did mention that I conditioned at 62 to 66 degrees, but higher temperatures would change that rate.

I didn't think I needed to cold crash as the S-04 produced a perfectly clear cider. I think that means there already was a lower count of yeast cells, and the trub was thick on the bottom prior to racking to bottling bucket.
 
I have no problem with your scientific method, I think it's awesome. It's just really inconsistent with my own experience, very non-scientific. I just can't imagine a 1.012 cider plus more sugar in a capped bottle for 12 days, then placed in a near-boiling water bath, not exploding. If it had been cold crashed and racked, I could see it taking 12 days because there would be very few yeast cells in suspension for the journey. But you said you didn't cold crash it... that makes me nervous. What yeast did you use? Did you already post that? Edit Yes you did.... S-04.

Also I had something going for me, I had a method to measure the pressure. I think its cheap insurance and easy to make.
 
Passedpawn has the stick.


My latest cider I referenced was conditioned at room temp. Let's call it 72 F.
 
Define "Cheap" and "Easy"....

Well, the pop bottle cost me a couple bucks. I had a gauge. I did find some gauges online that were not too expensive. I'll post back in a few min. I have to find the site again.
 
Define "Cheap" and "Easy"....

Just a quick cursory look on the web I found this at Amazon -
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001CM3PAM/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_1?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B000LEI7MS&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=0531HFXBCD0NK3N154GE

It has a higher range than mine which is good. The pipe thread stem is 1/4" Pipe thread, mine is 1/8", but it should work without a problem. You would need to drill and tap the pop cap for that thread size.

Fairly Cheap.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Passedpawn has the stick.


My latest cider I referenced was conditioned at room temp. Let's call it 72 F.

I was at 62-66 deg. Most time in the 62 - 63 range. This is also toward the lower end of the Yeast temperature performance.

If I had used 72 deg, I would have been toward the upper end for S-04.

I'm not sure what yeast you used, and its temperature performance.
 
I asked him about it. He said he has 99 problems but a stick ain't one. I'm not sure where to go from here.
 
I've been following and replicating RukusDMs experiment since last week and he asked me to post my data here as well.

I bottled a batch of graff on 11/4/10, half I backsweetened and half I bottled with the standard amount of priming sugar for 2.5 volumes.

There were a few differences, mine was a graff instead of plain cider, I used Nottingham yeast and it was bottled only with priming sugar.

For the pressure gauged bottle, I didn't backsweeten, just priming sugar.

11/4/10 - bottled dry 68F
11/5/10 - 5.5 psi
11/6/10 - 8 psi
11/7/10 - 9 psi
11/8/10 - 10.5 psi
11/9/10 - 11.5 psi
11/10/10 - 13.5 psi
11/11/10 - 15 psi
11/12/10 - 17.5 psi
11/13/10 - 20 psi
11/14/10 - 22 psi

As you can see, my priming curve mirrors RukusDMs and matches well with standard keg priming charts for pressure vs vol.
It matches the standard timings for bottle carbing in beers as well.

I also opened a bottle to check carbonation ever 2-3 days and found very little carbing at up to 15 psi, with what i would consider normal carbing only showing within the last day at 20-21 psi.

In the past I have found the plastic squeeze bottle test to be a very unreliable way to judge carbonation. On my first try at pasteurization I blew 2 bottles and popped 2 other caps, on the 2nd batch I pasteurized to early and had almost no carbonation. Even though my squeeze bottles seemed just as firm.

I'll be pasteurizing the backsweetened graff later today, so we'll see if a standard bottle carb will cause bottle bombs. I'll post results after I finish.

Even if this test fails, I'm hoping that by using a pressure gauge we can home in on a reliable pressure that doesn't cause bottle bombs.
 
I ran a few more tests this morning. My original Pasteurization test only used 2 bottle. It occurred to me there would be more of a bath temperature drop with a full sixpack in there.

I did 2 tests. 1 test with 165 Degree's and 1 test with 175 Degrees. This was with 12oz Longnecks with water inside instead of beer. I will have to repeat these with cider as I don't have Pressure data, just pasteurization temperature data.

Here is the data for tests with a Sixpack in the bath.

165 Degree Test Data -

BathTemperatureTest165Data.jpg


BathTemperatureTest165.jpg



175 Degree Test Data -

BathTemperatureTest175Data.jpg


BathTemperatureTest175.jpg


Summary to follow
 
I forgot to post the yeast pasteurization temperature links earlier.

Advances in Applied Microbiology on google books

The Biological Impact of Flash Pasteurization Over a Wide Temperature Interval

The Handbook of Food Preservation

They all recommend that 60-65C or 140-150F for 30-40 mins should be adequate to kill yeast to log 5.

Lower temps can be used, but the time length becomes a problem.

I've tested my 3 gallon pot by adding 8 12oz capped beer bottles filled with water. I heated the water to 170, removed it from the stove and added the bottles. After 5 mins the water bath temp had dropped to 145F and a test of one bottle showed that the internal water temp was 145F.

I left the bottles in the pot for 10 more mins then removed them and tested 1 bottle every 5 mins. The heat loss from the bottles was very slow, 1-2 degrees every 5 mins.

Including their 10 mins at temp in the waterbath, they remain over 140F for 1/2 and over 130 for 1 hr. I'm confident that is enough time and heat to reduce the yeast to negligible levels.
 
I forgot to post the yeast pasteurization temperature links earlier.

Advances in Applied Microbiology on google books

The Biological Impact of Flash Pasteurization Over a Wide Temperature Interval

The Handbook of Food Preservation

They all recommend that 60-65C or 140-150F for 30-40 mins should be adequate to kill yeast to log 5.

Lower temps can be used, but the time length becomes a problem.

I've tested my 3 gallon pot by adding 8 12oz capped beer bottles filled with water. I heated the water to 170, removed it from the stove and added the bottles. After 5 mins the water bath temp had dropped to 145F and a test of one bottle showed that the internal water temp was 145F.

I left the bottles in the pot for 10 more mins then removed them and tested 1 bottle every 5 mins. The heat loss from the bottles was very slow, 1-2 degrees every 5 mins.

Including their 10 mins at temp in the waterbath, they remain over 140F for 1/2 and over 130 for 1 hr. I'm confident that is enough time and heat to reduce the yeast to negligible levels.

Pimento, very nice summary. I didn't consider the temperature dwell time once removing from the bath. I'm really glad you thought of it.

I'm also happy to see that we have 2 tests that produced the same results. This gives more merit to the data originally posted.

I think that I need to continue tests and plot carbonation curves though. I was a bit concerned to hear that someone had a bottle carb up in 12 hours. Not knowing what that pressure was doesn't help though.

I don't have any cider left to bottle, so I'll have to start a couple of new batches. I'll try a small one with Champagne yeast, as I don't really care for that Strain, and I'll also try a Notty and another S-04 to see if that repeats as well.

I mentioned in my Temperature test post that I would do a summary, I think yours is more than sufficient.

Thanks again, and waiting to see your results :)

Regards
Doug.
 
No! These results do not reflect each other.

Pimento's cider was dry, with just enough priming sugar added to achieve carbonation. It makes sense that it would take a week to two weeks to carbonate. With less sugar in solution, the yeast have a harder time finding it and consuming it. It's the same principle that causes wine and mead to ferment 90% relatively quick, but often that last 10% takes time, usually in an actual secondary vessel. It's the same reason a beer can ferment out in as little as 3 days, but will take a week or two weeks to carbonate because the yeast has settled, there are fewer cells in the bottles, and less sugar added back in.


RukusDM's cider was sweet.... what, like 1.012... and wasn't cold crashed to drop cells, and then even more sugar added to prime. Just because you both had similar results in the time it took to carbonate does not mean you've replicated each other's experiments. I am still having a hard time wrapping my mind around those results. I urge you to repeat this experiment before you draw any conclusions. I once bottled beer with a filthy tube that I didn't sanitize, I also used my mouth to create the siphon, and didn't use mouthwash first. I got no infection. That does not mean it's acceptable practice.

I don't want to crap on your work, I enjoy and appreciate it, especially the water bath temp/time curves.

I think you need to do more research before you draw any conclusions. And as a pessimist, I believe you'll find too many variables that you can't control that will swing the results every time.
 
No! These results do not reflect each other.

Pimento's cider was dry, with just enough priming sugar added to achieve carbonation. It makes sense that it would take a week to two weeks to carbonate. With less sugar in solution, the yeast have a harder time finding it and consuming it. It's the same principle that causes wine and mead to ferment 90% relatively quick, but often that last 10% takes time, usually in an actual secondary vessel. It's the same reason a beer can ferment out in as little as 3 days, but will take a week or two weeks to carbonate because the yeast has settled, there are fewer cells in the bottles, and less sugar added back in.


RukusDM's cider was sweet.... what, like 1.012... and wasn't cold crashed to drop cells, and then even more sugar added to prime. Just because you both had similar results in the time it took to carbonate does not mean you've replicated each other's experiments. I am still having a hard time wrapping my mind around those results. I urge you to repeat this experiment before you draw any conclusions. I once bottled beer with a filthy tube that I didn't sanitize, I also used my mouth to create the siphon, and didn't use mouthwash first. I got no infection. That does not mean it's acceptable practice.

I don't want to crap on your work, I enjoy and appreciate it, especially the water bath temp/time curves.

I think you need to do more research before you draw any conclusions. And as a pessimist, I believe you'll find too many variables that you can't control that will swing the results every time.

Well its true the testing isn't complete, however I didn't make these numbers up. Perhaps you could do some testing to verify?
 
Back
Top