1.020 Strikes Again!

[Mainer]

I was making a dry stout on WY1084 and I've fallen victim to the 1.020 stall curse. I'm pretty sure the problem was that I overshot my mash temp; I'd been shooting for 147, but ended up at 154.
To make matters worse, I also undershot my initial gravity by four points. I was aiming for a really sessionable stout with an IG of 1.047 and an FG of 1.012, resulting in about 4.6%. I ended up with IG of 1.043. So if 1.020 really is my finishing point, I'll be at 3.07%, which is much lower than I'd want.
I know that the remedy steps are as follows:

1. Physically agitate the yeast (done, no effect)
2. Raise the temp (I can't; I don't use artifical temp control so the current 65 is as high as I can go)
3. Run and pitch a new yeast starter (that's my next plan)

So the question is this: if the new pitch doesn't help, can I throw in dark candi to artificially raise the abv over 4? By my calculations, a pound of sugar in 5 gallons should raise my gravity by about .010, which should get me into the right neighborhood, and wouldn't be too off-style for a dry stout. (1.020 will be a little chewy, but that, again, isn't too off-style.)

Recipe follows
5.5# Golden Promise
1.5# Flaked Barley
10 oz Roasted Barley
10 oz Dark Chocolate
6 oz Caramunich
6 oz Carapils
4 oz Carafa II

60 minute mash @147 (overshot @154)
75 Minute Boil
1 oz EKG @76
.5 oz Fuggles @30
.5 oz Fuggles @15

Pitch WY 1084 @70, no starter (yeah, yeah, I know, but with such a low initial gravity, I thought I could get away with it.)

 

[Mainer]

Although now that I look at it... I may have overestimated the diastic power of that Golden Promise. That *is* a lot of barley...

 

[FVillatoro]

You have a lot of adjunct and specialty grains in that bill, along with a rather low diastatic power base malt.
According to Morebeer, the Diastatic Power is 71 for Golden promise vs. 140 for 2 row and 120 for Marris Otter.

The 154 mash temp didn't help your cause either.

I would suggest using some Maris Otter in place of the GP, and mash no higher than 151.
Some weeks ago I brewed a Munich Dunkel with all Weyerman light and Dark munich, with a hint of Vienna an a touch of Cafara, all lower diastatic power malts were mashed at 151 and I got 75% attenuation using W34/70.

Keep on Brewin!

 

[Mainer]

You have a lot of adjunct and specialty grains in that bill, along with a rather low diastatic power base malt.
According to Morebeer, the Diastatic Power is 71 for Golden promise vs. 140 for 2 row and 120 for Marris Otter.

The 154 mash temp didn't help your cause either.

I would suggest using some Maris Otter in place of the GP, and mash no higher than 151.
Some weeks ago I brewed a Munich Dunkel with all Weyerman light and Dark munich, with a hint of Vienna an a touch of Cafara, all lower diastatic power malts were mashed at 151 and I got 75% attenuation using W34/70.

Keep on Brewin!

Yeah, the 154 was an overshot. And I did think that MO and GP were basically equivalent, and it seems they're not. Valuable lessons for next time.

But for this current batch, are there any problems with adding sugar to bump up the alcohol, and drinking it as a 1.020 beer?

 

[jfolks]

Adding sugar will only increase the alcohol if the yeast consumes it. Given your stall, this scenario is questionable. If the yeast has already retired, then adding sugar will only increase the final gravity and will make an even sweeter beer. In short, don't add the sugar!

 

[FVillatoro]

Yeah, the 154 was an overshot. And I did think that MO and GP were basically equivalent, and it seems they're not. Valuable lessons for next time.

But for this current batch, are there any problems with adding sugar to bump up the alcohol, and drinking it as a 1.020 beer?

Oh yeah, making mistakes is the best way to learn!

As for the sugar, personally I have not boosted with sugar. I would imagine completely fermentable corn or table sugar will bump up the OG while remaining at 1.020 after the fermentation finishes.

Or you can blend the beer.

One time I brewed with all Vienna malt with a 156 degrees mash and went from 1.050 to 1.020 FG (65% attenuation). I think the yeast was bad that time though.
I then brewed another one with almost the same recipe, but this time I replaced some Vienna with base malt and mashed at 147 degrees and went from 1.052 to 1.007 (84% attenuation).

I blended half and half in a fermenter, then kegged for a final gravity of 1.051 to 1.012FG (MUCH BETTER).

 

[Mainer]

Oh yeah, making mistakes is the best way to learn!

As for the sugar, personally I have not boosted with sugar. I would imagine completely fermentable corn or table sugar will bump up the OG while remaining at 1.020 after the fermentation finishes.

Or you can blend the beer.

One time I brewed with all Vienna malt with a 156 degrees mash and went from 1.050 to 1.020 FG (65% attenuation). I think the yeast was bad that time though.
I then brewed another one with almost the same recipe, but this time I replaced some Vienna with base malt and mashed at 147 degrees and went from 1.052 to 1.007 (84% attenuation).

I blended half and half in a fermenter, then kegged for a final gravity of 1.051 to 1.012FG (MUCH BETTER).

If you think the sugar boost will work, I'll give that a try. I probably won't blend, though. I'm a bottler, not a kegger, and I don't feel like having four cases of low abv stout sitting around.

Is it worth trying a second yeast pitch, just to see if I can get an extra point or two out of it? 1.017 or 1.018 would be markedly better than 1.020...

 

[troglodytes]

I would think that the yeast would wake up with the sugar addition to eat at a minimum the sugar addition. If they do get going again to munch on that, I'd think that you could coax them (thru temp or other means) to try to get the wort as close as possible to its terminal gravity. Maybe that would be eaking out a couple more points, but maybe its already there, and all you'll do is get back to 1.020. Either way you will be adding a little complexity and increasing you're ABV so the maybe won't be so cloying.

I'd go for it, and if it doesn't go beyond 1.020 call it a day and either bottle or dump. I would bottle as you'll have a +4% stout that may taste decent given a little time for the candi flavors to mature a little in bottle. You may be happy you did. I'm a bottler too, though, and understand how annoying it is to bottle a batch that might end up being a complete waste of time.

Just note that I had something similar happen about 2 years ago with a low ABV stout that I bottled @ low ABV and slowly sipped through grudgingly. I forgot about the last 6 pack and ended up moving to a new house when I found them stashed away in the basement. At 2 years old I can't believe the difference and I actually really enjoy them. It was a nice little treat to find.

 

[Mainer]

I would think that the yeast would wake up with the sugar addition to eat at a minimum the sugar addition. If they do get going again to munch on that, I'd think that you could coax them (thru temp or other means) to try to get the wort as close as possible to its terminal gravity. Maybe that would be eaking out a couple more points, but maybe its already there, and all you'll do is get back to 1.020. Either way you will be adding a little complexity and increasing you're ABV so the maybe won't be so cloying.

I'd go for it, and if it doesn't go beyond 1.020 call it a day and either bottle or dump. I would bottle as you'll have a +4% stout that may taste decent given a little time for the candi flavors to mature a little in bottle. You may be happy you did. I'm a bottler too, though, and understand how annoying it is to bottle a batch that might end up being a complete waste of time.

Just note that I had something similar happen about 2 years ago with a low ABV stout that I bottled @ low ABV and slowly sipped through grudgingly. I forgot about the last 6 pack and ended up moving to a new house when I found them stashed away in the basement. At 2 years old I can't believe the difference and I actually really enjoy them. It was a nice little treat to find.

Yeah, at 1.020, I won't dump. Even if it all goes pear-shaped and I end up with something closer to a 3% sweet stout, the missus would probably dig that.

 

[GrogNerd]

I believe the 1.020 Curse is for extract beers.

you have several issues which created less fermentables in your beer, therefore raising the FG. I'm sure if you go back to your software and back-adjust your numbers, you'll probably find you're where you should be, as far as attenuation. from the start, you created a sweeter beer

an extract batch is a known amount of fermentable sugars. just like hitting your volumes will guarantee your predicted OG (I never bother taking a reading if I brew an extract batch. well... yes I do, now I have a refractometer) given that same attenuating yeast, you should end up at your expected FG, but the Curse says you stall at 1.020

 

[kangabrew]

Sorry for hijacking your thread but it seemed unnecessary to create a new one as I have a similar problem.
I recently brewed http://howtobrew.com/book/section-2/steeping-specialty-grains/example-batch
and landed on 1.022, however the recipe calls for 14.3 % special malts (5.7 crystal 60, 5.7 chocolate and 2.9 patent), so that might be the reason for the high FG. It has fermented for 10 days, and I have also stirred the yeast once, but it didn't help.
OG was 1.058.

 

[The_Bishop]

I would gently swirl the yeast back into suspension and get it somewhere warmer.

 

[troglodytes]

Sorry for hijacking your thread but it seemed unnecessary to create a new one as I have a similar problem.
I recently brewed http://howtobrew.com/book/section-2/steeping-specialty-grains/example-batch
and landed on 1.022, however the recipe calls for 14.3 % special malts (5.7 crystal 60, 5.7 chocolate and 2.9 patent), so that might be the reason for the high FG. It has fermented for 10 days, and I have also stirred the yeast once, but it didn't help.
OG was 1.058.

If that was an extract batch , I don't think the grain steeping will result in a higher FG but you may be victim to the 1.020 issue due to the extract. With that beer I would give it a lot longer the 10 days to come into its own anyway, so rouse those yeasties (gently, with a sanitized spoon), raise the temp, but more importantly give it time. I would never call a batch stuck after only 10 days unless I know the fermentability of the wort from a fast ferment test.

Only after multiple readings across multiple days would I resign myself to the yeast being done. Take another gravity reading in two days and you may find that it is still working slowly with no airlock activity.

 

[Mainer]

For the record, my beer, the OP, has been in primary for... wait... is this journal entry right? Only 12 days? I was thinking it had been like three weeks! Okay, I won't panic yet.

 

[kangabrew]

If that was an extract batch , I don't think the grain steeping will result in a higher FG but you may be victim to the 1.020 issue due to the extract. With that beer I would give it a lot longer the 10 days to come into its own anyway, so rouse those yeasties (gently, with a sanitized spoon), raise the temp, but more importantly give it time. I would never call a batch stuck after only 10 days unless I know the fermentability of the wort from a fast ferment test.

Only after multiple readings across multiple days would I resign myself to the yeast being done. Take another gravity reading in two days and you may find that it is still working slowly with no airlock activity.

Thank you for your answer. It was no extract, it was AG. I raised the temp after 5 days (I usally do this), and swirled it after 10 days (I took a reading showing 1.022 which prompted me to swirl it). After 12 days I took a reading and it still showed 1.022. It might just be because all of the unfermentables, but I will give it another week then take a new reading.

 

[Bauzer]

Thank you for your answer. It was no extract, it was AG. I raised the temp after 5 days (I usally do this), and swirled it after 10 days (I took a reading showing 1.022 which prompted me to swirl it). After 12 days I took a reading and it still showed 1.022. It might just be because all of the unfermentables, but I will give it another week then take a new reading.

You know your link shows the 'Pale Malt Extract' as a syrup right? If you did this recipe all grain (ALL of it, not just the steeped grains), you'd probably need more than 6 LBs of Pale Malt. Not realizing that field is an extract number is probably why you are having some issues.

Otherwise, grain crush, boil time could also affect these things if you aren't quite nailed down on how your brew house works. I know its affected me. So is understanding diastic power of the grains.

 

[kangabrew]

You know your link shows the 'Pale Malt Extract' as a syrup right? If you did this recipe all grain (ALL of it, not just the steeped grains), you'd probably need more than 6 LBs of Pale Malt. Not realizing that field is an extract number is probably why you are having some issues.

Otherwise, grain crush, boil time could also affect these things if you aren't quite nailed down on how your brew house works. I know its affected me. So is understanding diastic power of the grains.

Well what I did was to simply take the ratios of the syrup to get the ratio of the different malts, then I used this to create the AG recipe (I slighty increased the pale ale malt though).
My grain bill:
Maris Otter (instead of pale ale): 85.7 % 6.39 pounds
Chocolate: 5.7 % 0.43 pounds
Crystal 60: 5.7 % 0.43 pounds
Black Patent: 2.9 % 0.21 pounds
This was for a total batch size of 3.43 gallons (13 liter) using BIAB. At least it worked out OK with respect to OG (I was 3 points over the expected), however maybe I should have researched how to properly convert extract to AG. I didn't even consider the steeping step; I just added everything to bag, so basically I mashed all of the malt, even the ones which were intended for 30 min steeping, during 90 min... At least it tasted OK, maybe a little bitter.

 

[jfolks]

Another thought I had on dropping the gravity - make a starter (on a stir plate ideally) of a big attenuator yeast and add the whole starter once the starter is at high Krausen (pitching straight yeast won't help due to the alcoholic environment of the 1.020 beer)

 

[Bauzer]

Well what I did was to simply take the ratios of the syrup to get the ratio of the different malts, then I used this to create the AG recipe (I slighty increased the pale ale malt though).
My grain bill:
Maris Otter (instead of pale ale): 85.7 % 6.39 pounds
Chocolate: 5.7 % 0.43 pounds
Crystal 60: 5.7 % 0.43 pounds
Black Patent: 2.9 % 0.21 pounds
This was for a total batch size of 3.43 gallons (13 liter) using BIAB. At least it worked out OK with respect to OG (I was 3 points over the expected), however maybe I should have researched how to properly convert extract to AG. I didn't even consider the steeping step; I just added everything to bag, so basically I mashed all of the malt, even the ones which were intended for 30 min steeping, during 90 min... At least it tasted OK, maybe a little bitter.

Plugged in your recipe in to BS2 and it should have been pretty close to what you were hoping for had it all gone correctly. So likely not your crush or ratios

My thoughts are it may be one of two things:
Mash temp (too high and you don't pull those sweet sweet simple sugars the yeast love)
Underpitching yeast. Not enough yeast to do the job. I've had this happen for me personally. I always make a starter now. Also with activity dropping sooner than you thought, could be related (or old yeast).

or a mix of both.

I don't have a solution for you though. For me, I live and die by what I brew, be it too light/weak or bottle bomb-esque. As long as its drinkable.

You could consider repitching, but if you mashed too high, you may not have any luck. Doing a LME/DME on top could cause the opposite problem of you spilling over if it was a matter of just not enough yeast, but okay sugar..

Maybe someone else has a suggestion..

 

[Mainer]

I picked up an envelope of Nottingham at the LHBS last night. I know one doesn't generally have run a wort starter for dry yeast, but in this case, where I'm trying to get it to kick my gravity down a couple points, it would probably be a good idea... right?

I also grabbed a pound of dark candi syrup, which I'll pitch when I pitch the starter.

 

[jfolks]

Yes, make a starter, but make sure you rehydrate the yeast first. Wait til high Krausen on the starter, which could be as long as 48 hours since you are using dry yeast. Really don't agree with the sugar addition, fwiw

 

[kh54s10]

I picked up an envelope of Nottingham at the LHBS last night. I know one doesn't generally have run a wort starter for dry yeast, but in this case, where I'm trying to get it to kick my gravity down a couple points, it would probably be a good idea... right?

I also grabbed a pound of dark candi syrup, which I'll pitch when I pitch the starter.

NO, making a starter with dry yeast is not a good idea. It is said that if you make a normal sized starter with dry yeast half of the cells die, the rest reproduce and you end up with about the same number of cells as you started with.

The yeast is engineered so that a starter is not needed.

Just re-hydrate the yeast and pitch it.

 

[Mainer]

Yes, make a starter, but make sure you rehydrate the yeast first. Wait til high Krausen on the starter, which could be as long as 48 hours since you are using dry yeast. Really don't agree with the sugar addition, fwiw

What are the cons of a sugar addition to bump up the abv?
Sugar additions are not considered inauthentic in a dry stout...

 

[Mainer]

I mean, even if the irish ale yeast is spent, the new Nottingham addition should take the sugar, right? And if I'm adding a pound, even if the Nottingham gets my gravity all the way down to the originally-targeted 1.012, we're still talking about a final abv in the neighborhood of 5.25%.

 

[eric19312]

What are the cons of a sugar addition to bump up the abv?
Sugar additions are not considered inauthentic in a dry stout...

I think worrying about "inauthenticating" is moot at this point. It is never going to be a dry stout...Treat this as a rescue project working to get to a tasty beer and if you want a dry stout start a new batch with less specialty grain, low mash temp, and high attenuating yeast.

I think Nottingham is a good idea. But don't add sugar at same time as the Notty. Let the new yeast do whatever it will with the beer first, then if you still want more alcohol add sugar. Yeast will almost always wake up to eat pure sugar that is why we use it to prime bottles. Dark candy might be overkill on the dark flavors at this point, I'd keep it cheap and add table sugar or corn sugar.

Not sure I see the need to make a starter...I'd rehydrate and pitch. If you think you need more cells it is probably similar cost and lower risk to just add 2 packs as it is to build a starter out of 1 pack.

Another thing I am not sure the diastatic power of the Golden Promise is your issue with attenuation. It may be reason you undershot OG.

I had an RIS that finished too sweet for me (about 1.028 is too sweet for me) and I hit it with brett. Came out very good but not an RIS anymore.

 

[sendai]

I was making a dry stout on WY1084 and I've fallen victim to the 1.020 stall curse.

Just in case: Did you use a hydrometer or a refractomer to measure the FG? If that latter, you can't just use the raw reading once there is alcohol present. It needs to be converted using a calculator like this one:

http://seanterrill.com/2012/01/06/refractometer-calculator/

If you used a hydrometer, then never mind.

 

[Mainer]

Just in case: Did you use a hydrometer or a refractomer to measure the FG? If that latter, you can't just use the raw reading once there is alcohol present. It needs to be converted using a calculator like this one:

http://seanterrill.com/2012/01/06/refractometer-calculator/

If you used a hydrometer, then never mind.

Hydrometer.

 

[brewbama]

According to Morebeer, the Diastatic Power is 71 for Golden promise vs. 140 for 2 row and 120 for Marris Otter.

Interesting. beersmith list GP Diastatic Power: 120.0 Lintner but the Simpson's website lists Diastatic Power IOB "Dry" min 45 max 70. http://www.simpsonsmalt.co.uk/our-malts/finest-pale-ale-golden-promise/

 

[Bauzer]

Interesting. beersmith list GP Diastatic Power: 120.0 Lintner but the Simpson's website lists Diastatic Power IOB "Dry" min 45 max 70. http://www.simpsonsmalt.co.uk/our-malts/finest-pale-ale-golden-promise/

Hmm, now you got me on a quest learning about GP's diastatic power!!

There is a second tab on there listed 'ASBC' which lists the Lintner at Min 50, Max 75

then I stumbled up on this article, that while on the surface I did know these things, reading up a bit more now, I can see not all base malts are created even remotely equal.

http://beersmith.com/blog/2010/01/04/diastatic-power-and-mashing-your-beer/

found it interesting, thought i'd share.

 

[kangabrew]

Plugged in your recipe in to BS2 and it should have been pretty close to what you were hoping for had it all gone correctly. So likely not your crush or ratios

My thoughts are it may be one of two things:
Mash temp (too high and you don't pull those sweet sweet simple sugars the yeast love)
Underpitching yeast. Not enough yeast to do the job. I've had this happen for me personally. I always make a starter now. Also with activity dropping sooner than you thought, could be related (or old yeast).

or a mix of both.

I don't have a solution for you though. For me, I live and die by what I brew, be it too light/weak or bottle bomb-esque. As long as its drinkable.

You could consider repitching, but if you mashed too high, you may not have any luck. Doing a LME/DME on top could cause the opposite problem of you spilling over if it was a matter of just not enough yeast, but okay sugar..

Maybe someone else has a suggestion..

Thank you for you answer and for taking your time to check the recipe in BS2. I pitched 1 package dry yeast which according to mrmalty is slighty overpitching. However I rehydrated it around 68 F which I later come to realize is too cold, don't know if that could be the problem. My biggest concern is if it is not fully fermented, I will end up with bottle bombs (expected FG 1.014). Does BS2 take into account unfermentable grains like chocolate malt?

 

[Bauzer]

It should, as long as its entered correctly. The chocolate grain I viewed did list lintner at zero, but there are several listed for each grainery. I think the cold should be okay, as long as it warms up to ferm temp, but expect that it may take some time for them to wake up due to it. If you are close to 2 weeks now, I'd just wait another week. 3 weeks shouldn't affect your beer too much to notice anything.

Side note, honestly I haven't pitched too cold, so I'm just assuming.

I don't like bottle bombs either. Been close twice, and I believe it was due to underpitching. So I bit the bullet and get a stir plate, and can't speak more highly of doing starters. Like a wort chiller, its a great investment to avoid headaches.

 

[Mainer]

Update! Even though I don't have temperature control, I've been using warm water baths to raise the temp of the yeast cake, and I'm seeing results. Down to 1.017ish. I haven't pitched the Notty or sugar yet.

 

[Bauzer]

Interesting! How long you gonna keep that up for?

 

[Mainer]

Interesting! How long you gonna keep that up for?

Until it stops working.

Edit: (Isn't that always the answer in brewing?)

 

[Bauzer]

Until it stops working.

Edit: (Isn't that always the answer in brewing?)

True. But surly you have something in your mind. If gravity halts after.. 2-3 days straight you stop?

 

[Mainer]

True. But surly you have something in your mind. If gravity halts after.. 2-3 days straight you stop?

My target FG was 1.012. I'd be satisfied with 1.015. I pitched the sugar last week at 1.017 and haven't taken a reading since, but there's been consistent bubbler activity.

 

[Bauzer]

My target FG was 1.012. I'd be satisfied with 1.015. I pitched the sugar last week at 1.017 and haven't taken a reading since, but there's been consistent bubbler activity.

Hmm.. well as long as their is activity, leave it alone.

I'd assume with the concern you've had over this you have taken several gravity readings and at this point you are more likely to ruin this due to oxidation than having a low alcohol, sweet, dumper.

 

[Mainer]

Hmm.. well as long as their is activity, leave it alone.

I'd assume with the concern you've had over this you have taken several gravity readings and at this point you are more likely to ruin this due to oxidation than having a low alcohol, sweet, dumper.

I think I've only taken a total of 3-4 readings, so I'm not too worried. But I don't want to over-tinker.

 

[Chesterbelloc]

If all else fails use a good lager higher temp yeast that eats maltoriose.

https://www.wyeastlab.com/yeast-strain/kölsch

 

[Mainer]

Nottingham to the rescue! Pitched it last Wednesday, now we're down to 1.014.