Racking and yeast

[Bandito]

So I've got a few batches under my belt. First batch had a perfect amout of carbonation. Next two both really struggled to carbonate. I just racked my current batch into my secondary, and the fermentation really dropped off.

Each of the last three batches I used the same procedure to transfer to my secondary. I only have one carboy, so I rack my beer to a sanitized plastic bucket, clean and sanitize the primary and rack back to the same carboy as my secondary.

Each time I rack, I siphon off the beer, and leave any sediment behind. So my question is am I loosing active yeast in the process? Should I allow some of the sediment to transfer over?

I just seems like each time I rack, the yeast activity drops off. Any thoughts?

 

[Suthrncomfrt1884]

The yeast activity should drop off in secondary. There's enough yeast still in suspension though to carbonate your beer and do it's thing. You're doing it the right way, but it's probably a waste of time.

I concider secondary pretty much pointless unless it's a pretty high gravity beer (above 1.080) or I'm adding something to it. I even dry hop in my primary after fermentation has finished. Most of my beers sit in primary for 4 weeks and then I bottle or keg. If it's a big beer though, I like secondary because bulk aging is faster than bottle aging.

For the most part though, smaller beers can just sit in primary for 4 weeks and then get bottled.

 

[hector]

The yeast activity should drop off in secondary. There's enough yeast still in suspension though to carbonate your beer and do it's thing. You're doing it the right way, but it's probably a waste of time.

I concider secondary pretty much pointless unless it's a pretty high gravity beer (above 1.080) or I'm adding something to it. I even dry hop in my primary after fermentation has finished. Most of my beers sit in primary for 4 weeks and then I bottle or keg. If it's a big beer though, I like secondary because bulk aging is faster than bottle aging.

For the most part though, smaller beers can just sit in primary for 4 weeks and then get bottled.

Have you ever read Section 8-2-3 in John Palmer's "How To Brew" ?!

Hector

 

[Yooper]

Have you ever read Section 8-2-3 in John Palmer's "How To Brew" ?!

Hector

In the new, updated "How to Brew" book, or the online book? The "new" John Palmer information contradicts some of his earlier advice about a secondary.

 

[hector]

In the new, updated "How to Brew" book, or the online book? The "new" John Palmer information contradicts some of his earlier advice about a secondary.

I always use the online Book as I don't have access to the printed one .

Hector

 

[Bandito]

I haven't come across "How to Brew" until this thread. Thanks for the mention, it looks like a good resource.

I was mostly curious if the yeast needed for conditioning are suspended, or dormant in the sediment. If there is enough active yeast in suspension, I guess I'll keep trying to prime with 2/3 cup corn sugar and see what happens.

 

[hector]

I meant , NEVER more than 3 Weeks in the Primary .

Hector

 

[Suthrncomfrt1884]

Have you ever read Section 8-2-3 in John Palmer's "How To Brew" ?!

Hector

Thanks for the vote of confidence here. Yes, I've read Palmers book. Cover to cover multiple times. I also know that, as Yooper pointed out, things change in brewing. Practices that were once though of us bad are now practiced widely by modern homebrewers.

When I make a comment, 95% of the time, it's coming from experience...not what some book tells me is true or false. If I brew 50 batches and don't have any issues with off-flavors, then the theory has been proved false in my mind.

 

[Revvy]

You're looking at the wrong reason for there being carbination issues. There's plenty of yeast to carbonate our beers no matter whether you opt for a long primary, use a secondary, or some combination of the two. You can have your beer in secondary for 6 or more months and still have enough yeast to carb your beers.

Taking that off the table let's get to the REAL reasons for your beer not carbing.

Temp and gravity are the two factors that contribute to the time it takes to carb beer. But if a beer's not ready yet, or seems low carbed, and you added the right amount of sugar to it, then it's not stalled, it's just not time yet.

The 3 weeks at 70 degrees, that that we recommend is the minimum time it takes for average gravity beers to carbonate and condition. Higher grav beers take longer.

Stouts and porters have taken me between 6 and 8 weeks to carb up..I have a 1.090 Belgian strong that took three months to carb up.

If a beer isn't carbed by "x number of weeks" you just have to give them ore time. If you added your sugar, then the beer will carb up eventually, it's really a foolroof process. All beers will carb up eventually. A lot of new brewers think they have to "troubleshoot" a bottling issue, when there really is none, the beer knows how to carb itself. In fact if you run beersmiths carbing calculator, some lower grav beers don't even require additional sugar to reach their minimum level of carbonation. Just time.

There's really no issues with a beer not carbing, if you've added your sugar, except the temp you are storing it at, and the length of time you are waitning. So forget any ideas other wise. There's plenty of yeast to do the job.

Everything you need to know about carbing and conditioning, can be found here Of Patience and Bottle Conditioning. With emphasis on the word, "patience."

 

[Revvy]

I always use the online Book as I don't have access to the printed one .

Hector

Then you can read the 10,000,000 threads on here that has been discussing it for the last 4 years. Like this thread.

https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f163/secondary-not-john-palmer-jamil-zainasheff-weigh-176837/

 

[Revvy]

Have you ever read Section 8-2-3 in John Palmer's "How To Brew" ?!

Hector

Did you ever notice what else he said?

Even in his "dreaded autolysis" passage in How To Brew (which was in the LAGER section and not talking about nales anyway);

Leaving an ale beer in the primary fermentor for a total of 2-3 weeks (instead of just the one week most canned kits recommend), will provide time for the conditioning reactions and improve the beer. This extra time will also let more sediment settle out before bottling, resulting in a clearer beer and easier pouring. And, three weeks in the primary fermentor is usually not enough time for off-flavors to occur.

And this;

John Palmer

As a final note on this subject, I should mention that by brewing with healthy yeast in a well-prepared wort, many experienced brewers, myself included, have been able to leave a beer in the primary fermenter for several months without any evidence of autolysis.

People have left it as much as six months.

This is where the most up to date brewing wisdom and ideas can be found...In fact a lot of stuff has been started on here, and made it into byo or zymurgy or podcasts...in fact BYO DID a piece on no secondary/long primary, along with the BASIC BREWING PODCAST and even they said that there were no issues/harm with doing it and in some beers it did actually improve the flavor and clarity. And I believe that really WAS influenced by the discussion we have had for the last couple years on here.



Believe me, after three years of doing the long primary/ no secondary I find no need to go back to doing it any other way. The quality of my beers has upped 10 ten fold.

As have my judging scores in contests. There's at least one beer among the 3-4 different one's I enter in contests where a judge notes the clarity and crisp taste of my beers- One was even described as "Jewell like in appearance."