Whirlfloc and Whirlpooling

I have been attempting to whirlpool my wort for a while without success -- all I ever see after 30 mins is a flat layer of break material that has settled to the bottom 1/4 of my pot, and 1/4 of the wort is too much for me to toss. I normally add a whirlfloc tablet to help the cold break precipitate out --> clearer wort.

Last week I made a hefeweizen. I did not add whirlfloc since it's a hazy beer anyway, whirlpooled in my flat bottomed, unobstructed pot, and lo and behold there was a trub cone. I assume I could see it because without the whirlfloc, the cold break did not precipitate out well, was dispersed throughout the wort, and did not settle on top of the hot break.

Am I correct in assuming that my other batches successfully formed the hot break trub cone (fine slurry), but it was just buried beneath the cold break material (chunky)? In the future when I use whirlfloc, should I just siphon down to about a half inch, which will pick up the cold break and [hopefully] leave the hot break behind?

Your situation is odd. I use whirlfloc, whirlpool, and get a nice cone at the bottom. I add whirlfloc at 15min left in the boil. At flame out I get my big paddle and get a fast whirlpool. Let that sit for 10 minutes and I get a nice cone of hops and trub, every time.

I have exactly your problem.

First brew, whirlpooled, got trub cone. Second and third brews, used whirlfloc, whirlpooled, just get a loosly packed slurry about 5 inches deep at the bottom of the pot...no cone, and wastes a lot of beer. On my last batch, I just said "eff it", and pumped it through the autosiphon, (clogged the siphon too much to let gravity move it), until I got a good amount out.

Adding too much whirlfloc causes the trub to be fluffier and not want to cone as well. If you are doing 5 gallons, try to use 1/4-1/2 a tablet of whirlfloc and see if that helps you.

I have heard that one tablet is good for 20 gals, but I have always been too lazy to chop it up. Well, now I'm going to give it a shot and see.

I'm glad I've stumbled on this post. I, too, have tried whirlpooling after using 1 whirlfloc tab and never have had any luck. I'll try 1/2 tab and see if it's any better as well.

That's strange, because the whirlfloc bag says one tablet for 5 gallons...

mew said:

That's strange, because the whirlfloc bag says one tablet for 5 gallons...

Click to expand...

There is a post or 3 somewhere on here where the guy talks to the person who makes Whirlfloc. Apparently they were originally meant for bigger brewing operations, hence the size of the tablets. The Whirlfloc company sells them in big 55 lb bags or something, and they just get repackaged by someone who sells them to the LHBSs....1 tab per 5 gallons means they sell more.

My whirlfloc bag say 1/2 tab per 5 gallons.


My problem with forming a cone is that the immersion chiller gets in the way when I try to whirlpool.

weirdboy said:

My whirlfloc bag say 1/2 tab per 5 gallons.


My problem with forming a cone is that the immersion chiller gets in the way when I try to whirlpool.

Click to expand...

Chill the wort...then wirlpool, wait for 20 minutes

Yeah, I had same problem when using an immersion chiller... the hops bags and immersion chiller got in the way of the whirlpooling and I never got a cone. I recently changed to a plate cooler (love it!), and I installed a dip tube in my pot to draw the wort from the edge rather than the center of the pot. Now after flameout, I give it a vigorous stir in one direction, wait about 10-15 minutes, then drain, and I see a nice cone of trub in the center of the pot, with clear wort around the edges. I still get some trub in the bottom of the fermenter, but no problems so far with plugging the plate chiller.

I do recommend a fine mesh nylon bag for your hops... it really cuts down on the amount of gunk that makes its way into the fermenter.

BobcatBrew said:

Chill the wort...then wirlpool, wait for 20 minutes

Click to expand...

Commercial breweries whirlpool, then chill. I figure there's probably a good reason for this, but I don't know what it is.

Greenbirds,

That is a great description of my efforts at whirlpooling. I have only been using 1/2 tablet and am still getting the fluffy 2-3 inch layer. I know it is not my whirlpool, as I can get a vortex that just about reaches the bottom of the kettle. I have also let it sit for up to 30 mins, and still the same results. I think you may have hit it on the head about the lighter (cold break?) material hiding the cone. I have not been using any leaf hops, but believe that they might help bind up some of that material and pull it into a cone.
I usually auto siphon as much of the cleared wort as I can, which is VERY clear when using the whirlfloc, but once I see how much wort remains in the kettle, in frustration, I usualy dump the majority of that thru a strainer into my fermenter. FWIW, I have noticed that the darker, thick break and hop residue dosen't appear until the end of the pour, suggesting that it was centered at the base of the kettle.
I'm still looking for that perfect cone.
I also have to add that things settle out very quickly in the fermenter, and as many of the older,wiser members will tell you - 'it don't matter'
-still pisses me off that I can't do it though.
jason

weirdboy said:

Commercial breweries whirlpool, then chill. I figure there's probably a good reason for this, but I don't know what it is.

Click to expand...

I'm willing to bet it's because they use heat exchanger chillers, (like a cross between a CFC and a plate chiller). They don't want to clog their chillers, so they whirlpool first.

If you are using an IC, there's no worry about "clogging", and you do want to drop the temp as fast as possible.

I just heard on an old Jamil show that whirlfloc works much better when added within the last 5 minutes of the boil.

First all grain today ... also first use of whirlfloc. I have what appears to be huge amounts of floating goo in the primary now. What can I do differently?

I'm guessing I need to bag my hops (4oz loose made for a neat bed in the bottom, but seemed nearly impossible to whirlpool.

Primary a few minutes after aeration (shaking). That's about a six inch layer of goo that's slowly compacting.


Hydrometer sample settled out after a couple hours in the fridge.

What i do is chill my wort, then use an autosiphon to carefully rack into the fermenter trying to keep most of the sediment in the BK. I keep the intake if the racking cane just below the surface of the wort so I can monitor what's getting transferred. Then I aerate in the fermenter and pitch the yeast.

little bit of a bump here, but I'm wondering if anyone's had luck whirlpooling with only using 1/4-1/2 a whirlfloc tablet? I tried whirlpooling for the first time yesterday and it didn't really work at all. I just got some nice layers at the bottom of the pot - hope sludge on the bottom and break material just above that. I basically just siphoned up as much break material as I could and left most of the hop sludge in the pot. But no cone whatsoever.

I did use a full whirlfloc tablet, as I usually do, but it would be nice to get this whirlpooling thing to work. So, anyone have any luck using a fraction of the tablet?

I tried with a half tablet, same problem.

Then I tried a few AG batches, and lo and behold the whirlpooling worked! Trub cone and all! I then did a PM batch, and had the original problem, lots of fluffy floc that won't settle nicely. I think the problem, (at least for me), is the LME. For some reason the LME causes lots of junk to form and not floc nicely.

Oh well, another reason to go AG.

Anyone else having problems have them WITH AG? Anyone not having problems using LME?

I have the same problem with AG and a full tablet. I usually say screw it and siphon a good bit of the "fluffy" trub. I let it settle out with a nice long fermentation.

I've been having trouble too with whirlfloc, I haven't been using it very long, probably the last half dozen brews. I was amazed by how clear the top of the wort was when I used a whole tablet at 15 minutes, but even within an hour it would not settle past around 2 gallons left in the kettle. Since it all seemed to fall straight down I saw no reason to try whirlpooling it; I was trying to use a plastic coffee strainer inside a mesh bag which works great just up until all the clear wort is racked then the trub restricts the flow to the filter and it stops. I'm trying to get 5 gallons into the fermenter even if I have to make a 6 gallon batch but leaving 2-2.5g behind is too much. I'd like to leave out as much trub as I can so my yeast will be clean later when I want to harvest it. Recently I tried using half a tablet and at 5 minutes as suggested but it was much worse, I only racked about 2 gallons before my filter clogged with trub. I took the filters off the racking cane leaving only the tip cap and racked the rest in. Next time I think I'll try two tablets to see what happens!

Kind of wondering if I have the wrong expectations, I know one way or another it will probably settle out eventually but I would prefer it to happen in the kettle before I rack. I don't remember if I've used whirlfloc on any beers I have in the serving stage yet, so I can't judge on the end results but it makes it look so easy to get clear wort.
I've used irish moss in the past but improperly as I never knew you were supposed to rehydrate it, and I never paid attention to any difference that may have made in my beers.

Don't want to hijack my own thread and turn it into yet another trub vs. no trub debate, but I will offer my findings since I began investigating whirlpooling.

I have given up on trub removal entirely. I found that my batches with no or little (>90% removed) trub ferment sluggishly and sometimes have a slight off flavor. The batches with trub ferment stronger and are much quicker to attenuate fully. I have not noticed off flavors that I could attribute to trub presence, even with month-long primaries and light beers such as blonde or pils. And I still receive scores >40 in BJCP comps.

I'm not saying whirlpoolers and breweries who remove trub are wrong; there is plenty of evidence out there to support the practice. But for a homebrewer I'm not convinced it is worth much time nor effort.

Thanks that's very insightful. Do you just dump into the fermenter, or through a strainer or what?

greenbirds said:

Don't want to hijack my own thread and turn it into yet another trub vs. no trub debate, but I will offer my findings since I began investigating whirlpooling.

I have given up on trub removal entirely. I found that my batches with no or little (>90% removed) trub ferment sluggishly and sometimes have a slight off flavor. The batches with trub ferment stronger and are much quicker to attenuate fully. I have not noticed off flavors that I could attribute to trub presence, even with month-long primaries and light beers such as blonde or pils. And I still receive scores >40 in BJCP comps.

I'm not saying whirlpoolers and breweries who remove trub are wrong; there is plenty of evidence out there to support the practice. But for a homebrewer I'm not convinced it is worth much time nor effort.

Click to expand...

Well said!

So, let's say one decides that they will never get a usable whirlpool cone, and they will just suck most of the BK trub into the fermentor? Does using whirlfloc at all make sense?

Intuitively I would say that it is still useful to use whirlfloc anyway since it does cause the protien materials to flocculate together and fall out (in the fermenter instead of the boil kettle).

Would the same amount of material fall hard if the whirlfloc were not used? Could the use of whirlfloc reduce haze-producing proteins in the final beer?

My experience with whirlpooling has been that a cone forms which is mainly made up of hops and other "heavy" who knows what else. There is still quite a bit of break material that does not settle into the cone, thus it ends up in the fermenter.

I have also noticed a difference in fermentations when I have transferred the extreemely clear wort from the kettle and left all of the break behind. They seem to ferment less aggressivley and I have even had some that seem to clear more slowly, even though they started more clear.

So, now what I do is whirlpool, and then transfer all of the wort and break, but leave the hop/trub cone in the kettle. I'm still experimenting, but hopefully the bad stuff that causes chill haze is left in that cone.

passedpawn said:

So, let's say one decides that they will never get a usable whirlpool cone, and they will just suck most of the BK trub into the fermentor? Does using whirlfloc at all make sense?

Intuitively I would say that it is still useful to use whirlfloc anyway since it does cause the protien materials to flocculate together and fall out (in the fermenter instead of the boil kettle).

Would the same amount of material fall hard if the whirlfloc were not used? Could the use of whirlfloc reduce haze-producing proteins in the final beer?

Click to expand...

I think most of that is logical. I do still use Whirlfloc (except in wheat beers) because it seems to help my beer clear faster after fermentation.

MajorTom said:

So, now what I do is whirlpool, and then transfer all of the wort and break, but leave the hop/trub cone in the kettle. I'm still experimenting, but hopefully the bad stuff that causes chill haze is left in that cone.

Click to expand...

+1 I also do this and experience great ferms and racking to a secondary takes care of everything else.

greenbirds said:

Don't want to hijack my own thread and turn it into yet another trub vs. no trub debate, but I will offer my findings since I began investigating whirlpooling.

I have given up on trub removal entirely. I found that my batches with no or little (>90% removed) trub ferment sluggishly and sometimes have a slight off flavor. The batches with trub ferment stronger and are much quicker to attenuate fully. I have not noticed off flavors that I could attribute to trub presence, even with month-long primaries and light beers such as blonde or pils. And I still receive scores >40 in BJCP comps.

I'm not saying whirlpoolers and breweries who remove trub are wrong; there is plenty of evidence out there to support the practice. But for a homebrewer I'm not convinced it is worth much time nor effort.

Click to expand...

This observation coincides with research (Schisler et al) that indicates fermenting with the trub increases fermentation speed, reduces sulfur smells, reduced esters, and increased fusels. The concluded that this effect was due to the increase in available unsaturated fatty acids and possibly zinc when compared to fermentations completed in the absence of wort.

This is a very interesting thread. I made two batches last weekend and neither had much of a cone when I was done whirlpooling. One of them was a hef that did not have a whirlfloc tablet, the other was a belgian blonde that did. In my past experience, I think I would have to agree that fermentation seems to like a bit of trub. I can think of a few batches that fermented like a jacuzzi that had a bunch of trub in them.

A few months ago I made a honey blonde that whirlpooled great and I got very clear wort into the fermenter. I ended up being the most clear beer I had every made. It also had some off tastes and just plain isn't that great. I still have half a keg of it left from several months ago (can't get myself to dump it).

I started cold crashing with my new super freezer (home depot cheapo chest freezer that gets to 0*). This makes for very clear beer with a nice pile of trub/yeast cake on the bottom.

My question is - what is the difference in cold crashing versus whirlpooling if you end up with clear beer?

I have tried adding a full tablet of Whirlfloc at 15min..and 5 min...and I find the 15 min addition is way more effective..

Also after I chill my wort....I put a sanitized 5gal. paint strainer (Home Depot 2 for $5) in my fermentor bucket and pour in the chilled wort....I then pull the paint strainer up and rotate it side to side since the bottom of it clogs with trub until i get most of the wort filtered through.

It takes only a couple minutes and I believe it adds to the aeration of the wort. I get very little trub when i harvest the yeast after fermentation...

My old position at my job had me clarifying water. We used a silicone based flocculation chemical and would run a stir test on 6 different jars. I'm having the same problem and the flocculation and settling can be caused by either too much or too little of the agent. I'd suggest trying less each time. When you get diminishing results, swing the other way. I forgot my whirlfloc last brew but it was a stout so I'm not concerned. Next up is an ESB and will try a half tablet. Different water profiles have different effects on how these chemicals react and clump the trash out.

I have 10 gal brew pot with a drain valve with a 1/2 in drop. was thinking about using a copper scrubby to help filter break material any one use this?