2nd Primary Question

[davegrande]

I'm doing a recipe that calls for a "second primary" where the instructions are to transfer to secondary (once fermentation slows) but move 1/2 the yeast cake and add candi sugar.

It's my understanding that fermentation is an aerobic activity. And, that's why we aerate the wort when we first move to the the primary.

I was instructed to move to second primary the same as secondary---avoid aerating wort.

So, the question is, if fermentation is a aerobic activity but air is bad after you begin fermentation, how does a second primary fermentation work?
Is there enough oxygen left in the wort to complete the 2nd primary when the new fuel (candi sugar) is added?

Will follow instructions but I'm really curious how this works since I'm thinking the wort will be CO2 mixture at this point.
Cheers,
Davegrande

 

[tasteebrewer]

You are correct in assuming that the wort should still contain enough oxygen to continue fermentation in secondary. Providing the yeast with new simple sugars should be enough to activate the yeast. be sure you purge or secondary and all your transfer tubes!

good luck!

 

[ArcaneXor]

Fermentation is anaerobic, but the oxygen is needed for yeast propagation and -health before fermentation begins. There is virtually no oxygen in those fermentors after a few hours of activity.

I can't see what value the "second primary" would have.

 

[tasteebrewer]

I think in this case the value is fermenting out the candi sugar... I still wouldn't call it a second primary... it's a secondary fermentation.

Oxygen is only used by in the creation of cell walls during propagation. So if a the proper amount of yeast is pitched and propagation occurs at a correct pace oxygen should be depleted within12 to 24 hours... not a few... but you are mostly correct.

Since this is a secondary fermentation NO oxygen is required to reactivate the existing yeast bed.

 

[Komodo]

I wouldn't move it at all, it serves no purpose. There is no such thing as a secondary fermentation, just continuing fermentation of the same yeast. Just leave it where it is and add the sugar.

 

[tasteebrewer]

yeah, just leave it in the dead yeast... that's always a good idea...

one of the good reasons to use a secondary is that it allows fermentation to continue without having to sit on dead yeast...

 

[Revvy]

yeah, just leave it in the dead yeast... that's always a good idea...

one of the good reasons to use a secondary is that it allows fermentation to continue without having to sit on dead yeast...

You're about thirty years behind in your belief in this. In fact if you read about "Dead Yeast" in Palmer, even John Palmer has changed his belief about that. Now it's quite common and quite acceptable practice to skip secondary and opt for a long primary instead. Many of us leave our beers in primary for a month then bottle. I find my beer is clearer and cleaner tasting and has consistantly scored higher in contest as compared to when I used a secondary.

I suggest you read THIS thread, it's become the "uber discussion" on this topic thread.

To Secondary or Not? John Palmer and Jamil Zainasheff Weigh In .

You can choose to believe what you want, but at least by doing some reading about what's been covered quite extensively in brewing culture over the last 4 years, you can be up to date on information. All the citations, podcasts, links to articles and folks experiences are in that thread.

 

[kh54s10]

As far as I know the yeast use the oxygen at the start to reproduce to sufficient numbers of cells to do the conversion of the sugars. After that you do not want any oxygen introduced. Hence adding bottling sugars for carbonation which is really additional fermentation.

It sound like the recipe calls for transferring the yeast because you are adding the candi sugar.

 

[NordeastBrewer77]

yeah, just leave it in the dead yeast... that's always a good idea...

one of the good reasons to use a secondary is that it allows fermentation to continue without having to sit on dead yeast...

really? i think revvy nailed it, this cr@p's been debunked a while a go. yeast doesn't die or cannibalize itself in the size batches we home brewers use. it's just silly to even think this, the books that talk about this are at least a decade and a half old, and correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Palmer himself go back on this in the newest edition of How to Brew?

 

[Revvy]

davegrande, you don't need to want to add more oxygen at this point. In fact the reason we add the oxygen originally really has nothing to do with the fermentation part of the yeast cycle, for the most part we add it for the REPRODUCTIVE phase of the cycle. So at this point there's plenty of yeast to eat the sugar.

Also, you really don't need to rack to secondary for the adding of sugar at this phase, in fact even before the whole secondary/long primary discussion, it was common to add the additional sugar to the primary.

In fact for higher grav beers where you are doing this, it's actually still a good idea to do this in primary, since it's a big beer, you really don't want to take it off the largest amount of yeast that can handle the job of fermentation of the big beer. Because more than likely fermentation is not fully done on this anyway before you are adding the sugar, so you don't really want to interrupt this fermentation by removing all the active yeast still being needed to finish the job.

In fact adding the sugar will re-activate the flocculated (more than likely NOT DEAD) yeast in the trub. (Adding a little sugar has been a good method of fixing a stuck fermentation is a huge beer, just because the fresh simple sugars help re-awaken any dormant (NOT DEAD) yeast down there.

I usually wait til the first krausen falls before adding the next sugar addition. The beer will then re-krausen. If you have multiple feedings of sugars for a huge beer, the wait til each krausen falls and add the next feeding.

If you are a secondary user, then AFTER all the fermentation has ceased (check gravity) then you can rack to secondary to bulk age. More than likely if you are doing this, it's a big beer, and bulk aging in a secondary is a good idea.

But wait til after and fermentations have ceased.

And yes technically adding the sugar is a TRUE secondary fermentation step. Noobs tend to get "Secondary fermentation" and using a secondary mixed up. They're really 2 separate things. A secondary fermentation is where additional NEW sugars are consumed by the yeast, be it a sugar addition, fruit, and many bottle conditioned commercial beers call the process where we prime the beer on bottling day secondary fermented beer.)

This can happen can happen anywhere, in a primary or a bright tank (secondary vessel) or in the bottles.

This is different from what we talk about when we say racking to secondary. Which is referring to the vessel we move the beer to. Sometimes secondary fermentation (the process) does occur in there like when we rack on fruits. But commonly when we reffer to a secondary it's moving the beer for the process of clearing (which these days many opt to do in an extended primary) or to add oak, or to bulk age the beer (either at room temp or in the case of a lager at near freezing conditions.)

Hope this helps.

 

[ArcaneXor]

one of the good reasons to use a secondary is that it allows fermentation to continue without having to sit on dead yeast...

To expand on the comments of my fellow forists to your response quoted above, transferring "half of the yeast cake" to the "second primary", as called for by the recipe in question, does not distinguish between live yeast, dead yeast and trub. Only yeast washing can accomplish that. Therefore, the transfer doesn't accomplish your stated goal.

A traditional secondary minimizes yeast transfer from the cake. This has the effect of removing 98%+ of yeast cells, meaning that any additional fermentation will be sluggish at best. The point of a secondary is not additional fermentation, but rather bulk conditioning and clarification of the beverage. There are exceptions, of course, such as encouraging a slow fermentation of fruit added to the secondary to minimize loss of aromatics.

In many cases in contemporary home brewing, the secondary is identical to the serving vessel (i.e. the keg that is cold conditioned in the kegerator).

 

[Revvy]

but didn't Palmer himself go back on this in the newest edition of How to Brew?

Yup, but he also retracted it and discussed it in a couple podcasts, at one of the homebrewer's conferences, and a discussion with Jamil, which are all quoted and referenced in that thread I posted earlier.

Some of his original initial comments like the one at the conference seemed to echo verbatum what I and a few others had said when we began these discussions and recording our experiences on here 4 years ago. I believe a lot of the shift can be attributed to us here. Which influenced basic brewing and byo magazine to start the dialogue more publically.

 

[tasteebrewer]

You're about thirty years behind in your belief in this. In fact if you read about "Dead Yeast" in Palmer, even John Palmer has changed his belief about that. Now it's quite common and quite acceptable practice to skip secondary and opt for a long primary instead. Many of us leave our beers in primary for a month then bottle. I find my beer is clearer and cleaner tasting and has consistantly scored higher in contest as compared to when I used a secondary.

I suggest you read THIS thread, it's become the "uber discussion" on this topic thread.

To Secondary or Not? John Palmer and Jamil Zainasheff Weigh In .

You can choose to believe what you want, but at least by doing some reading about what's been covered quite extensively in brewing culture over the last 4 years, you can be up to date on information. All the citations, podcasts, links to articles and folks experiences are in that thread.

first I did not say it was required, I only said it was an advantage. It is an advantage. I have done plenty of reading an have a good amount of homebrew and commercial experience. Please continue to believe that good beer I'd produced by taking short cuts...

 

[tasteebrewer]

really? i think revvy nailed it, this cr@p's been debunked a while a go. yeast doesn't die or cannibalize itself in the size batches we home brewers use. it's just silly to even think this, the books that talk about this are at least a decade and a half old, and correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't Palmer himself go back on this in the newest edition of How to Brew?

yes let revvy speak for you... yeast always dies in any batch size, and decomposition occurs.

 

[tasteebrewer]

to settle the does yeast die question: take a vial of white lab yeast, let it sit for a year in a fridge and then try and use it. among other things yeast will die without food and with over exposure to CO2... you guys can read Palmer all you want, he is respected and has a great deal of knowledge but it's all boiled down to make home brewing easier. If you dump yeast from a conical you always have a substantial amount of dead yeast that comes out first. It's easy go see and smell the difference. it's darker, thicker and smells like death. once the the living dormant yeast starts to flow it become much for viscus, lighter in color and smells like like unstressed, undead yeast.

 

[bwomp313]

I have a feeling that this thread is going somewhere that they always seem to go...

But just to get back to the OP, it is not necessary for you to do this step. Just add the sugar into your primary.

 

[NordeastBrewer77]

yes let revvy speak for you... yeast always dies in any batch size, and decomposition occurs.

huh? i'll let modern brewing practices and my own experience speak for me. yeast doesn't die in the fermenter in the time frames we use. yeah, a year old vial is not fit to pitch, but make a starter and it'll be fine. do some reading, guy.

Yup, but he also retracted it and discussed it in a couple podcasts, at one of the homebrewer's conferences, and a discussion with Jamil, which are all quoted and referenced in that thread I posted earlier.

.

i think i worded that funny. that's what i meant, he initially talked of autolysis in edition 1 of How to Brew, but has since gone back on that publicly and in edition 3. the thread with him and jamil talking on the subject is very informative and a bit more up to date than tasteebrew (the irony) and his info.

 

[NordeastBrewer77]

If you dump yeast from a conical you always have a substantial amount of dead yeast that comes out first. It's easy go see and smell the difference. it's darker, thicker and smells like death. once the the living dormant yeast starts to flow it become much for viscus, lighter in color and smells like like unstressed, undead yeast.

the pressures in a conical are completely different from what your avg home brewer experiences. most of us ferment in carboys and buckets, 5-10 gal batches. NO worries of this stuff going on on that scale.

 

[tasteebrewer]

I also want to clarify that I do not think I am the end all be all of brewing knowledge , but I do think that better bright ales and lagers are produced with proper yeast management. By this I mean the following. either move you beer to a secondary or practice yeast dumps (if your lucky enough to use conicals) after fermentation is complete. I even recommend using a brite tank for ales to even further clarify your beers. A brite tank should not e needed for lagers as it should have been passed through a filter prior to storage.

 

[NordeastBrewer77]

I also want to clarify that I do not think I am the end all be all of brewing knowledge , but I do think that better bright ales and lagers are produced with proper yeast management. By this I mean the following. either move you beer to a secondary or practice yeast dumps (if your lucky enough to use conicals) after fermentation is complete. I even recommend using a brite tank for ales to even further clarify your beers. A brite tank should not e needed for lagers as it should have been passed through a filter prior to storage.

to each their own. i use secondaries from time to time as well. but to claim that you NEED to because of the phantom autolysis is not accurate. i've left beers on the yeast in primary for well over a month with only clearer, more conditioned beer going into the package to show for it. some here have gone MONTHS in primary with NO autolysis. you're beating a dead horse with the 'your yeast will die right after FG is reached' stuff.

that said, we're off topic and theres a thread for this debate, revvy posted the link at the top of this thread. check it out, but lets not carry on this debate on someone else's thread.

 

[tasteebrewer]

I just think its funny to think you don't have any dead yeast after fermentation. volume of beer does not change the science!

Just so you all know the company I work for took home about 12 medals form GABF this year. I work with the former Director of Brewing Operations who is classily trained in Germany and has been brewing commercially for 20 plus years. I use best practices, not short cuts to make beer that competes on a level that most people only dream about while try sleep.

You guys can simplify everything if you like, and quote Palmer all you want. I won't make up for practical experience.

I was only trying to helping the OP accomplish the requirements of his recipe. You guys seem happy to teach him shortcuts...

 

[NordeastBrewer77]

I just think its funny to think you don't have any dead yeast after fermentation. volume of beer does not change the science!

Just so you all know the company I work for took home about 12 medals form GABF this year. I work with the former Director of Brewing Operations who is classily trained in Germany and has been brewing commercially for 20 plus years. I use best practices, not short cuts to make beer that competes on a level that most people only dream about while try sleep.

You guys can simplify everything if you like, and quote Palmer all you want. I won't make up for practical experience.

I was only trying to helping the OP accomplish the requirements of his recipe. You guys seem happy to teach him shortcuts...

well, then you must be right, and we must be wrong. too bad no home brewers who know about our 'shortcuts' has ever won any awards for their beer.

you're experience brewing professionally is probably very helpful, but it doesn't mean that we home brewers are wrong, or ill informed. comparing certain things in the commercial brewery to that which we experience in the home isn't always a direct correlation. what happens in a large conical may or may not happen in a 7.5 gal bucket. brewing in general appears to be a progressive science, with old beliefs being changed and new practices being utilized regularly. that seems to apply across the board, in the home and in the 10,000 bbl brewhouse.

 

[tasteebrewer]

to each their own. i use secondaries from time to time as well. but to claim that you NEED to because of the phantom autolysis is not accurate. i've left beers on the yeast in primary for well over a month with only clearer, more conditioned beer going into the package to show for it. some here have gone MONTHS in primary with NO autolysis. you're beating a dead horse with the 'your yeast will die right after FG is reached' stuff.

that said, we're off topic and theres a thread for this debate, revvy posted the link at the top of this thread. check it out, but lets not carry on this debate on someone else's thread.

I never said you NEED to, or anything about it dying after FG... you all seem to think I mean all the yeast dies... it's all black, white and Palmer with you guys...

 

[tasteebrewer]

I'm letting this drop, I was the one attack for telling the op to use secondary since is recipe called for it. I have no since of superiority. But you all seem to because you have read Palmer...

take care and happy brewing in the new year...

 

[NordeastBrewer77]

I never said you NEED to, or anything about it dying after FG... you all seem to think I mean all the yeast dies... it's all back, white and Palmer with you guys...

? that hardly made sense, but here; you may not have used those words....

yeah, just leave it in the dead yeast... that's always a good idea...

one of the good reasons to use a secondary is that it allows fermentation to continue without having to sit on dead yeast...

but these instead....

yes let revvy speak for you... yeast always dies in any batch size, and decomposition occurs.

or these....

not sure what point you're trying to make here.... maybe that you'd like us all to tell you how knowledgable you are, or how many outdated books to base your practices on, or maybe you're just arguing for the sake of argument.
either way, i'll go on reading/listening to JZ and Palmer, or Cris White.... i know those guys don't come with the clout that you claim your boss does, but they're pretty well received in the brewing community.
none said they were superior for reading ANYTHING. in fact, you came off that way cuz you claim to be a pro and that we're all wrong. you didn't tell the OP to do anything based on recipe, when someone suggested secondary was not needed, you had a snarky comment on 'dead' yeast. this isn't about you helping the OP, it's about you using dated info to bash those who were trying to help. big difference there pal.

 

[lud]

I think i'll be siding with Revvy, Jamil, Palmer,and the rest of the crew on this one...I want to make the best beer I can possibly make...I have the luxury of time on my side...just because a commercial brewer does it a certain way, doesn't necessarily mean its the quality way. Seen first hand...

 

[Komodo]

I think an important point here is that many homebrewers thought you HAD to move it to a secondary as soon as you could, and then killed the fermentation activity. Lots of stuck ferments, unecessary handling of beer, and infections. With the threat of autolysis and the thought that the ferment was done, the move to a secondary was natural.

But, as someone pointed out, many/most aren't using conicals with high pressures and heat on the yeast cake. Leaving it for 3-4 weeks can only be good! It gives a complete ferment, robust yeast for additional sugars and carbing and time to scrub the beer. Secondary vessels do give time for conditioning and clarification, and certainly have their place. But a 4 week primary and then bottle has a lot going for it.

Btw-I add my sugars right as the krausen falls, so I was considering this a continued fermentation. Of course if fermentations completes, and then you add an addition, it would be a true second fermentation. So, then carbing would be a third ferment?

 

[davegrande]

FWIW...I'm okay with the fact that this thread wandered a bit.
I learned a lot more than I ever expected.....
thanks so much!
Cheers
Davegrande