Oxygen while bottling

[p_p]

Hi all. I do bottle my beers using a spigot, I do so gently without creating much foam or splashing in the process.
I do not flush the bottles with CO2 (beer gun style).

After the bottle is filled, I place the sanitized crown cup on top, but don't crimp for a couple of minutes.
In the meantime, CO2 tends to escape from solution and I can hear and see the crown cup lifting periodically and letting the CO2 scape.

Is this also getting rid of oxygen in the head space ??
Is there any way I can improve my practice given the equipment I use?

thanks!
pp

 

[Rockn_M]

I think with the equipment you have your doing it right. Just take your time and go slow. Also make sure your caps are oxygen absorbing, that will help as well.

 

[NeoBrew]

I assume you are talking about bottle conditioning beer? This should help. It covers it pretty well.

http://www.northernbrewer.com/learn/homebrewing-101/step-4/

I would suggest you use a racking cane so as not to splash the beer down into the bottle. The more the beer is exposed to air the higher your chance of oxidation.

You can cap right away or wait a few minutes. I don't think it matters much for bottle conditioned beer.

 

[unionrdr]

Oxygen mixing with the beer won't come out of solution so easily. Use a bottling wand to fill the bottles from the bottom up. This will eliminate o2 from dissolving into the beer by just using the spigot. Some things you can't shortcut.

 

[ArthurDigbySellers]

This is the procedure that I use from this thread by revvy - https://www.homebrewtalk.com/showthread.php?t=94812

It works really well and allows you to use both your spigot and a bottling wand together and eliminates oxygen from getting in your beer. If you don't have a bottling wand yet it is an inexpensive tool that will greatly help with filling your bottles without introducing oxygen.

 

[Sailingeric]

As you bottle condition the yeast to carb the beer will be filling up the space and then some with CO2. Get a bottling wand and you will be good to go!

 

[McGarnigle]

After the bottle is filled, I place the sanitized crown cup on top, but don't crimp for a couple of minutes.
In the meantime, CO2 tends to escape from solution and I can hear and see the crown cup lifting periodically and letting the CO2 scape.

I have to say, that sounds very surprising to me. Enough CO2 is escaping that quickly so as to lift the bottle cap?

 

[ChucknBeer]

Hey, I used my homemade venturi aerator by mistake while transfering my beer to my bottling bucket; at least 20% of the beer got foamy and received a lot of air... but the beer is fine after 1 month in the bottle.

I think it is very hard to over-oxygen your beer while bottling.

 

[Spartan300man]

I also use a bottling wand, and I attach it to the spigot if I am using the spigot bucket. One small benefit about the bottling wand, when you push it down into the bottom of the bottle, fill the bottle to the brim, and then you pull the wand out, you get a perfect amount of headspace in the top of the bottle. Every bottle has the same space, every one the same amount of beer, no foam, minimal amount of air introduced into it. I then record the amount of carbonating sugars I use and can duplicate it for the perfect carbonation next time.

 

[unionrdr]

^ That's what's known as volume displacement. It leaves the right head space in every bottle, regardless of size. He definitely needs a bottling wand.

 

[mattdee1]

I also use a bottling wand, and I attach it to the spigot if I am using the spigot bucket. One small benefit about the bottling wand, when you push it down into the bottom of the bottle, fill the bottle to the brim, and then you pull the wand out, you get a perfect amount of headspace in the top of the bottle. Every bottle has the same space, every one the same amount of beer, no foam, minimal amount of air introduced into it. I then record the amount of carbonating sugars I use and can duplicate it for the perfect carbonation next time.

^^ that's my method as well. The ability to get consistent headspace without even trying is a fabulous outcome of this approach.

As far as oxidation goes, you read some info sources on brewing and you'd think that if you get one little gurgle from your spigot during bottling and the beer might as well be poured down the drain.

I wouldn't get too stressed about it unless you're planning to store the bottles for several months. On a recent batch of pale ale, I wanted to purposely ruin one bottle to train myself on what oxidation tastes like. I filled a bottle half way, shook vigorously for about a minute, filled it the rest of the way, then capped it and set it aside. I drank it after about 3 months and could not tell the slightest difference with the rest of the batch (which turned out quite well, mind you).

 

[KeninMN]

It's pretty hard for a bottle-conditioned beer to get oxidized, even if you're trying. I also did experiments like mattdee1 described above. I also did not detect oxidization, even in beers over a year old. Yeast will consume any oxygen you may put into solution via bottling.

I also suggest a bottling wand. They are cheap, easy to clean and leave the perfect amount of head space.

 

[unionrdr]

The thing you guys are forgetting here is that there isn't much o2 in the bottle with your thumb over the top shaking it. My old wing capper's bell wore out, & left some caps a hair loose. So little, you'd be hard-pressed to notice it. But by the time those beers should've been ready to drink, they were oxidized. I mean like damp, musty cardboard oxidized. So it takes time & more o2 it seems. But it can happen.

 

[KeninMN]

I actually fully aspirated beers into a bottle rather than shaking. It was always the last bottle from the bottling batch and I pumped those suckers full of air.

 

[slym2none]

OP, ignore these fine folk telling you that you need a bottling wand. You sound like you are doing fine the way you do things now.

 

[slym2none]

I have to say, that sounds very surprising to me. Enough CO2 is escaping that quickly so as to lift the bottle cap?

I have had it happen before, where the cap will fall off the bottle completely. And I get 24 bottles max from my 'half batches".

 

[slym2none]

The thing you guys are forgetting here is that there isn't much o2 in the bottle with your thumb over the top shaking it. My old wing capper's bell wore out, & left some caps a hair loose. So little, you'd be hard-pressed to notice it. But by the time those beers should've been ready to drink, they were oxidized. I mean like damp, musty cardboard oxidized. So it takes time & more o2 it seems. But it can happen.

So, it was a leaky cap that caused your oxidation, it sounds like. Not aeration at bottling.

 

[Calder]

One small benefit about the bottling wand, when you push it down into the bottom of the bottle, fill the bottle to the brim, and then you pull the wand out, you get a perfect amount of headspace in the top of the bottle.

It leaves the right head space in every bottle, regardless of size. He definitely needs a bottling wand.

I also suggest a bottling wand. They are cheap, easy to clean and leave the perfect amount of head space.

OK, it's convenient, but where does it say it leaves the 'Perfect' head space. I think it leaves way too much headspace, and I'm sure I have seen in both Papazian and Palmer, that a smaller headspace is better, roughly half inch to an inch (...... zero headspace is no good).

Yes, the bottle fillers leave headspace similar to commercial bottles, but commercial bottle machines inject a small stream of high pressure water into the beer immediately prior to capping to foam the beer to displace the air in the bottle, so it is capped with the minimum possible amount of oxygen in the headspace. A smaller headspace leaves less O2 in the bottle.

 

[unionrdr]

So, it was a leaky cap that caused your oxidation, it sounds like. Not aeration at bottling.

Yeah, the bell on the caper stretched out a little. That's why I bought a bench capper. It doesn't so much
say it as explain it. When you use it, fill the bottle to the top. Then, when withdrawing the bottling wand, it leaves the right head space by volume displacement. And the o2 in the head space isn't compressed, like the Co2 will as it carbonates. So there's very little o2 in the headspace.

 

[Redlantern]

I simply use vinyl hose on the end of the spigot at the bottom of my fermenter. It works out wonderfully when I hold the hose to the bottom of the bottle, open the spigot, slow the flow just before it hits the very top of the bottle, and then stop.

The amount of beer displaced by the tube is perfect. When I pull the tube out, there is about 3/4" of space at the top of the bottle. No foam, mess or bubbles.

I remove the full bottle and place the hose in the next empty bottle. I then cap the full one. Very little dripping or mess.

Have had good results and the process is quite smooth.

 

[Snowden]

Good timing for me to stumble across this thread. Was bottling a batch last night, went to transfer into the bottling bucket, and my auto-siphon wouldn't work! It just pushed bubbles of air into the beer when I tried to rack it. I discovered that the little flapper at the bottom which closes when you pump it had somehow come off when I was cleaning it. Got that back on and it worked like a charm, but not before I had pushed a few big bubbles of air into the beer.

Hopefully everything will turn out alright. I will sure as hell be checking to make sure that little piece is present on the autosiphon from here on out!

 

[Kampenken]

I can see how bottling without a wand can work, but why? A wand is $3-$4, one of the cheapest pieces of equipment for this hobby, so not a cost issue. From a process it's extremely helpful and efficient too. I now have 2 spigots on my bucket (with a dip tube inside bucket) and the wand attached with a 2" piece of tubing. I sit at the table and bottle two at a time. Quick, simple and effective every time! Why anyone would want to turn the tap each time is beyond me! And now I wouldn't want to go back to one at a time bottling or tipping the bucket at the end (no need with dip tube).

 

[Kampenken]

I actually fully aspirated beers into a bottle rather than shaking. It was always the last bottle from the bottling batch and I pumped those suckers full of air.

I've had similar experience with end bottling or knocking one over in process. Marked cap with batch # and an O to indicate for tasting later. No noticeable difference either.

 

[MaxStout]

I'll chime in with the others. A bottling wand is the best $4 you'll spend for this. Attach it to the spigot with 2 or 3 inches of plastic tubing, set the bottling bucket on the counter top with the wand hanging over the edge. Sit in a chair and fill them up. It fills from the bottom up, so the beer does not drop or pour into the bottle, minimizing exposure to air.

BTW, there are two versions of bottling wands. One has a spring-loaded tip, the other has a "drop down" gravity-actuated tip. I've used both, but prefer the spring-loaded wand, as it seems to shut off better and drip less.

 

[slym2none]

I can see how bottling without a wand can work, but why?

I like to keep things simple. As simple as possible. I guess that makes me simple, too...

 

[p_p]

Thank you everybody for your answers.

Language did get in the way sorry, I thought a spiggot is the tube that allows you to fill the bottle from the bottom. I do use one of them (now I know it is called a wand!). I fill the bottles carfully, and don't go full throttle until there is enough beer to cover the wand's opening, so I guess I am doing ok with what I have on hand

Cheers!

 

[p_p]

I have to say, that sounds very surprising to me. Enough CO2 is escaping that quickly so as to lift the bottle cap?

Oh, it does not escape quickly at all... After placing the cap on to prof the bottle, it takes about a minute before I hear tic,tic as a see the cap lifting slightly to release gas. I add a carbonation drop on each bottle, I guess it acts as a nucleation site and some of the little co2 in solution escapes...
Sounds about right?

 

[MaxStout]

Yes, it's normal. If those caps have been sanitized, they are wet and probably stick to the tops of the bottles. CO2 pressure pushes them up, like a little burp.

 

[Kampenken]

Thank you everybody for your answers.

Language did get in the way sorry, I thought a spiggot is the tube that allows you to fill the bottle from the bottom. I do use one of them (now I know it is called a wand!). I fill the bottles carfully, and don't go full throttle until there is enough beer to cover the wand's opening, so I guess I am doing ok with what I have on hand

Cheers!

Mystery solved. Your English is way better than any 2nd language I attempt!

Seems like you're doing perfectly with your setup. I assume that O2 is escaping (good) as it's lighter than CO2, which we all hope to achieve. Regardless haven't seen oxidation issues on 50+ batches now, even on those bottles that don't receive best practices.

 

[aprichman]

A bottling wand is much gentler compared to a spigot and tube. When I first started I used the latter and was surprised at how much of a difference a spring tipped bottling wand made.

 

[mattdee1]

I can see how bottling without a wand can work, but why? A wand is $3-$4, one of the cheapest pieces of equipment for this hobby, so not a cost issue. From a process it's extremely helpful and efficient too. I now have 2 spigots on my bucket (with a dip tube inside bucket) and the wand attached with a 2" piece of tubing. I sit at the table and bottle two at a time. Quick, simple and effective every time! Why anyone would want to turn the tap each time is beyond me! And now I wouldn't want to go back to one at a time bottling or tipping the bucket at the end (no need with dip tube).

No doubt. I bottled my first two batches by turning the spigot on and off every time. Then I picked up a $3 spring-loaded wand. Bottling day was instantly transformed from tedious to relaxing.

 

[Calder]

BTW, there are two versions of bottling wands. One has a spring-loaded tip, the other has a "drop down" gravity-actuated tip. I've used both, but prefer the spring-loaded wand, as it seems to shut off better and drip less.

I have used both. I really like the springless one, but after a while they leak and can cause a mess. I think it is due to salts (beer stone) forming on the hard sealing surfaces. It is a glued assembly, so cannot be taken apart to clean.

I tried the version with a spring, and the end came off after a few uses, leaving a bigger mess than I ever had with the springless model.

What I use now. I removed the spring, and use it as a sprngless model. Works great. The elastomer seal works better than the hard seal of the springless models, and it can be taken apart for cleaning.