A question about fermenting in a secondary

[james138]

I'm working on my second batch of beer after I thought I might have ruined my first and I have some questions about fermenting in a secondary. From what I've read here it seems a lot of people don't even use a secondary. That being said, since I'm new to this I wanted to see for myself if the secondary is worth the work.

At my beer brewing class, we were told that if the amount of beer isn't towards the start of curve of the carboys neck, that water needed to be added to get it to that level. I think the reasoning had to do with carbonation, but I'm not sure. The problem is I had to add like 6 pints of water to get it there and I feel like I watered down my beer. So the question is, was the guy right and should I do it in my next batch? If I do I'll at least use boiled water this time.

 

[helibrewer]

That is done to reduce the headspace and prevent oxidation. I use CO2 because I don't like adding water, you are correct, it will dilute the beer some.

With CO2 I use tubing and just trickle the CO2 in until a lighter will not stay lit at the carboy lip, then stopper it. Can't oxidize without oxygen.

 

[BradleyBrew]

how far into the carboy do you place the tubing to achieve this. I would like to perform this tomorrow when i rack my lager over to secondary. thanks!

 

[helibrewer]

how far into the carboy do you place the tubing to achieve this. I would like to perform this tomorrow when i rack my lager over to secondary. thanks!

Just above the beer surface (sanitize it!!) Use the largest diameter tubing you can, you want a soft laminar flow if possible to prevent mixing

 

[james138]

Being a novice (at best) I don't think I'm quite ready for the co2 method you described. Are there any other options?

When I racked into my secondary I left a bunch of that gunk stuff in the bottom of the primary. Should I have racked all of that stuff over to the secondary to at least give me more mass so I have to add less water?

Also, what do people do for oxidation who don't use a secondary? It seems like there would be a lot of extra headroom in an ale pale.

 

[Yooper]

Being a novice (at best) I don't think I'm quite ready for the co2 method you described. Are there any other options?

Yes, if you want to avoid oxidation and don't have a smaller carboy, then I'd suggest not racking to a "secondary". Keep in mind that the word "secondary fermentation" is incorrect terminology. It is a winemaking term, when there is generally a true secondary fermentation and not really applicable to most beermaking applications. It's sort of an old holdover when yeast quality was poor and there was a risk of the yeast causing off flavors in the beer.

In a brewery, there are two vessels. One is the fermenter, one is called a "bright tank". The beer ferments in the fermenter, and then is moved to the bright tank for clearing before packaging. In our homebreweries, it's the same way. The "secondary" is more often a clearing vessel where no new fermentation is taking place. Since fermentation is over, the beer is no longer producing co2 to protect the beer so oxidation would be a risk in a carboy or bucket with wide headspace. That's why it's ok to not move it. As long as the beer is not disturbed, that co2 in the headspace in the fermenter is protective of the beer.

Racking a beer doesn't cause a beer to clear, so that's not why a bright tank is used. It's just used so that a brewer can start a new batch in the fermenter.

Some people do continue to rack to a clearing vessel- but they should take steps to protect the beer with techniques like reduced headspace and topping up, or flooding the receiving vessel with c02.

 

[james138]

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. The size carboy I've been using is a five gallon one.

So if I don't rack to a secondary, the co2 in my 7 gallon (I think) ale pale will prevent oxidation?

Maybe I will give it some thought and not transfer my beer to a secondary. Not moving the beer won't ruin it at all? Sorry I'm a rookie.

Would not racking into a secondary change the timeframe at all? For instance, my beer was supposed to age three weeks in the secondary once it had been in the primary for 7-10 days. Do I follow the same aging process?

 

[Enxaine]

I am also new ( on my first batch ), I moved my beer after fermentation slowed down considerably once it was moved I pitched a 1/4 pack of new yeast to ensure more fermentation. Ten days later and it's still bubbling slowly. I have no idea if I wrecked my beer but it seemed like a good idea at the time. I like having it in the glass as I can see it clearing, and there is less yeast cake to get stirred up latter. If this was a bad idea. Let me know so I don't do it again lol.

 

[BradleyBrew]

Yes, if you want to avoid oxidation and don't have a smaller carboy, then I'd suggest not racking to a "secondary". Keep in mind that the word "secondary fermentation" is incorrect terminology. It is a winemaking term, when there is generally a true secondary fermentation and not really applicable to most beermaking applications. It's sort of an old holdover when yeast quality was poor and there was a risk of the yeast causing off flavors in the beer.

In a brewery, there are two vessels. One is the fermenter, one is called a "bright tank". The beer ferments in the fermenter, and then is moved to the bright tank for clearing before packaging. In our homebreweries, it's the same way. The "secondary" is more often a clearing vessel where no new fermentation is taking place. Since fermentation is over, the beer is no longer producing co2 to protect the beer so oxidation would be a risk in a carboy or bucket with wide headspace. That's why it's ok to not move it. As long as the beer is not disturbed, that co2 in the headspace in the fermenter is protective of the beer.

Racking a beer doesn't cause a beer to clear, so that's not why a bright tank is used. It's just used so that a brewer can start a new batch in the fermenter.

Some people do continue to rack to a clearing vessel- but they should take steps to protect the beer with techniques like reduced headspace and topping up, or flooding the receiving vessel with c02.

I plan to begin lagering my first lager beginning starting tomorrow. Would you recommend not racking and lager on top of the original yeast cake?

 

[PseudoChef]

At my beer brewing class, we were told that if the amount of beer isn't towards the start of curve of the carboys neck, that water needed to be added to get it to that level. I think the reasoning had to do with carbonation, but I'm not sure. The problem is I had to add like 6 pints of water to get it there and I feel like I watered down my beer. So the question is, was the guy right and should I do it in my next batch? If I do I'll at least use boiled water this time.

Without boiling the water, you simply created the very problem you set out to solve, i.e., adding O2 to the beer, which you do no want to do. Next time, save yourself the trouble and don't rack it (it has nothing to do with carbonation, btw).

I am also thinking this "beer brewing class" isn't of the highest caliber, preaching this type of information.

 

[Yooper]

I plan to begin lagering my first lager beginning starting tomorrow. Would you recommend not racking and lager on top of the original yeast cake?

No, I'm only talking about ales. I've heard that others have lagered on the yeast cake, but I wouldn't. First, when I'm talking about keeping the beer in the fermenter, I'm not talking about for months but instead for two weeks or so. For a lager, which is very "clean" and crisp and without yeast character, I would rack right after the diacetyl rest prior to lagering.

 

[BradleyBrew]

Thanks!

 

[JLem]

Thanks, that makes a lot of sense. The size carboy I've been using is a five gallon one.

So if I don't rack to a secondary, the co2 in my 7 gallon (I think) ale pale will prevent oxidation?

Maybe I will give it some thought and not transfer my beer to a secondary. Not moving the beer won't ruin it at all? Sorry I'm a rookie.

Would not racking into a secondary change the timeframe at all? For instance, my beer was supposed to age three weeks in the secondary once it had been in the primary for 7-10 days. Do I follow the same aging process?

Keeping the beer in primary for a reasonable amount of time will not harm your beer. How long is "reasonable"? Hard to say what the upper limit is, but 3-4 weeks is definitely fine. In general, I would leave the beer in primary for 2-4 weeks and then bottle. Most time frames given in recipes are just guidelines. This is where some of the art come into the the process - it might be ready in 2 weeks, it might need 4 or more. Depends on the type of beer, the strain of yeast, the beer's OG, fermentation conditions, etc. Most likely, the beer will be ready to bottle after 3 weeks in the primary, but if you have any doubt, leave it another week.