Rapid loss of hop aroma (again)

[Miraculix]

Sometimes it works for me, someone's it's not enough time.

 

[Ninoid]

For the last couple of days I have been studying the posts on this forum regarding the empty space to the top of the bottle. Everyone's experience is that a smaller space prolongs the aroma and quality of the beer, but also the time required for natural carbonation. Since I am not willing to wait up to two months for proper carbonation, I will still have to leave a bit more empty space of half a centimeter. So far I have left 4-5 centimeters and that is certainly too much, but I think one centimeter would be optimal.

 

[Miraculix]

For the last couple of days I have been studying the posts on this forum regarding the empty space to the top of the bottle. Everyone's experience is that a smaller space prolongs the aroma and quality of the beer, but also the time required for natural carbonation. Since I am not willing to wait up to two months for proper carbonation, I will still have to leave a bit more empty space of half a centimeter. So far I have left 4-5 centimeters and that is certainly too much, but I think one centimeter would be optimal.

Never happened to me and I also don't see a reason why it should impact carbonation speed.

 

[Ninoid]

Never happened to me and I also don't see a reason why it should impact carbonation speed.

I bottled a pure barley beer over the weekend and also left about 5mm of headspace in the bottle so I'll see how the foam turns out. I've made this recipe many times and there were no problems with the foam. This beer is hoppier and I expect a longer aroma compared to before when I left more headspace in the bottle.

 

[Ninoid]

Obviously there are opinions contrary to those I found on the forum:

https://byo.com/article/master-the-action-carbonation/

In this text they claim:

Headspace. Another factor that will affect the level of carbonation in your bottle-conditioned beer is the amount of headspace you allow in the neck of the bottle above the beer. The CO2 from the bottle fermentation fills the headspace as well as going into the beer, so the more headspace you leave, the more CO2 ends up there. For a given amount of priming sugar, the greater the headspace, the lower the carbonation.

The ideal fill height is a matter of preference. High fills help to eliminate air from the headspace, helping you avoid oxidation. Lower fill levels give some protection against gushing and allow some leeway in carbonating. Sometimes over-carbonating can be corrected by cooling the beer as much as possible, gently prying the cap to release the pressure in the headspace, and then resealing the cap. This won’t work if there is no headspace.

 

[mac_1103]

Another factor that will affect the level of carbonation in your bottle-conditioned beer is the amount of headspace you allow in the neck of the bottle above the beer. The CO2 from the bottle fermentation fills the headspace as well as going into the beer, so the more headspace you leave, the more CO2 ends up there. For a given amount of priming sugar, the greater the headspace, the lower the carbonation.

This should be, as we used to say, intuitively obvious to even the most casual observer. The CO2 generated gets distributed uniformly throughout the entire volume of the bottle, so more headspace means more CO2 in the headspace and less CO2 in the beer. But there are two other important considerations here - 1) going from 6% of the total volume of the bottle being headspace to 3% of the total volume of the bottle being headspace isn't going to have a dramatic effect on the carbonation level of your beer (if you primed individual bottles for 2.5 volumes you'd get what, 2.42 volumes instead?), and 2) if you bulk prime the beer in a bottling bucket then you have more priming sugar in each bottle anyway and therefore more CO2 in each bottle (some of which stays in the beer). I did not notice a change in carbonation when I started filling my bottles higher. That doesn't mean there was no change; it just means that any change wasn't noticeable.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

https://byo.com/article/master-the-action-carbonation/

Pay wall. Published in the Jan 1997 issue of BYO Magazine.

My guess is that the decades long "debate" over the best way to bottle beer is (still) missing the primary considerations.

I don't disagree with the approach that @Miraculix takes, but I have (for me) a different approach.

---

The idea of minimizing head space when bottling beer goes back to at least 1995 ("Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide" chapter 27 "Bottle- and Cask- Conditioning").

And yet ...

---

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale is bottle conditioned and has normal head space. For me, at a normal beer store, SNPA has a useful shelf life of about 3 months. It tastes different at 1 month, 2 months, 3 months - but still an enjoyable beverage. Beyond that, I generally don't like it. If the beer store gets it fresh and refrigerates it, it's 6 months rather than 3.

What is in the SNPA 'brew day' that we're missing and can scale down to 2.5 gal batches?

 

[Ninoid]

Pay wall. Published in the Jan 1997 issue of BYO Magazine.

My guess is that the decades long "debate" over the best way to bottle beer is (still) missing the primary considerations.

I don't disagree with the approach that @Miraculix takes, but I have (for me) a different approach.

---

The idea of minimizing head space when bottling beer goes back to at least 1995 ("Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide" chapter 27 "Bottle- and Cask- Conditioning").

And yet ...

---

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale is bottle conditioned and has normal head space. For me, at a normal beer store, SNPA has a useful shelf life of about 3 months. It tastes different at 1 month, 2 months, 3 months - but still an enjoyable beverage. Beyond that, I generally don't like it. If the beer store gets it fresh and refrigerates it, it's 6 months rather than 3.

What is in the SNPA 'brew day' that we're missing and can scale down to 2.5 gal batches?

Yes, my experiences are different too. Carbonation will work with very little headspace in the bottle, but it takes a bit more time.

 

[Miraculix]

Pay wall. Published in the Jan 1997 issue of BYO Magazine.

My guess is that the decades long "debate" over the best way to bottle beer is (still) missing the primary considerations.

I don't disagree with the approach that @Miraculix takes, but I have (for me) a different approach.

---

The idea of minimizing head space when bottling beer goes back to at least 1995 ("Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide" chapter 27 "Bottle- and Cask- Conditioning").

And yet ...

---

Sierra Nevada Pale Ale is bottle conditioned and has normal head space. For me, at a normal beer store, SNPA has a useful shelf life of about 3 months. It tastes different at 1 month, 2 months, 3 months - but still an enjoyable beverage. Beyond that, I generally don't like it. If the beer store gets it fresh and refrigerates it, it's 6 months rather than 3.

What is in the SNPA 'brew day' that we're missing and can scale down to 2.5 gal batches?

They might cap on foam. If you induce co2 foam by using ultra sound just before capping, the head space will contain virtually zero air, no matter the size. This is probably the best solution, but you need ultra sound for it.


....... Cheap ultra sound bath it is then, me thinks?

 

[mac_1103]

Cheap ultra sound bath it is then, me thinks?

Just stick your Sonicare toothbrush in each bottle for a second or two.

 

[Yesfan]

Just stick your Sonicare toothbrush in each bottle for a second or two.

For that minty clean fresh brewed taste.................

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

What is in the SNPA 'brew day' that we're missing and can scale down to 2.5 gal batches?

Now that we're down with the less than serious ideas, does any one else have some thing useful to add?

 

[mac_1103]

does any one else have some thing useful to add?

Has anyone ever seen their bottling line? Otherwise, guessing isn't likely to be much more informative than humor.

 

[Bassman2003]

@Ninoid, I would not over complicate the process in thinking about it. Yeast eats sugars and creates CO2 as a byproduct. That chain of events will occur no matter how much head space exists or doesn't exist.

Now, yeast like oxygen and are more active when it is around. So one angle could be - if you limit oxygen the yeast might be less active than if you have them in a high oxygen environment. So if you improved your oxygen limitation process maybe you uncovered that you have a deficiency of active yeast cells by the time you get to the bottle. Or insufficient sugars for them to feed on etc...

So you have three variables for carbonation (number of healthy yeast cells, amount of sugars and amount of oxygen) and two variables for speed of carbonation (time & temperature).

You can see why pro breweries (like Sierra Nevada) remove all fermentation yeast and introduce new yeast and sugars (wort for some) to the exact amount into the bottles. This gives them control over the first variables and then they create the best environment for the rest to perform. The homebrew adaptation is to 'add a cup of sugar in the bottling bucket'. But we all know this is tough to mix well and leads to inconsistent carbonation levels bottle to bottle.

So what can you do? Maybe add some new yeast prior to bottling if you can. You could sprinkle a little dry yeast in each bottle before filling.

 

[Ninoid]

@Ninoid, I would not over complicate the process in thinking about it. Yeast eats sugars and creates CO2 as a byproduct. That chain of events will occur no matter how much head space exists or doesn't exist.

Now, yeast like oxygen and are more active when it is around. So one angle could be - if you limit oxygen the yeast might be less active than if you have them in a high oxygen environment. So if you improved your oxygen limitation process maybe you uncovered that you have a deficiency of active yeast cells by the time you get to the bottle. Or insufficient sugars for them to feed on etc...

So you have three variables for carbonation (number of healthy yeast cells, amount of sugars and amount of oxygen) and two variables for speed of carbonation (time & temperature).

You can see why pro breweries (like Sierra Nevada) remove all fermentation yeast and introduce new yeast and sugars (wort for some) to the exact amount into the bottles. This gives them control over the first variables and then they create the best environment for the rest to perform. The homebrew adaptation is to 'add a cup of sugar in the bottling bucket'. But we all know this is tough to mix well and leads to inconsistent carbonation levels bottle to bottle.

So what can you do? Maybe add some new yeast prior to bottling if you can. You could sprinkle a little dry yeast in each bottle before filling.

I put the sugar directly into the bottles because I don't think it will mix evenly, and by mixing I introduce unwanted air into the beer. I would avoid adding yeast for natural fermentation, for now. I will leave 1 cm of headspace in the bottles, instead of half, and I think that will be a good compromise.

 

[Bassman2003]

Ok, but since you are adding the sugar directly, you do not need to mix it at all. The yeast will find it. If you continue to have poor performance, just add a little dry yeast along with your sugar. Again, no need to mix, just add the beer.

Also, no need to "compromise" with the headspace as carbonation activity and headspace are not related! All of the action is in the liquid...

 

[Ninoid]

About ten days more than usual, the amount of foam started to normalize in the beer bottles with half a centimeter of headspace. The taste and aroma are better than before when I left up to 5 cm of headspace.

This change really makes a difference in quality and aroma preservation and thanks to @Miraculix for that tip.

This weekend I'm planning to brew an APA with a more pronounced hop aroma, so I'll see how this change during bottling will affect the preservation of the beer's hop aroma.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

@Ninoid, I would not over complicate the process in thinking about it. Yeast eats sugars and creates CO2 as a byproduct. That chain of events will occur no matter how much head space exists or doesn't exist.

You can see why pro breweries (like Sierra Nevada) remove all fermentation yeast and introduce new yeast and sugars (wort for some) to the exact amount into the bottles. This gives them control over the first variables and then they create the best environment for the rest to perform. The homebrew adaptation is to 'add a cup of sugar in the bottling bucket'. But we all know this is tough to mix well and leads to inconsistent carbonation levels bottle to bottle.

So what can you do? Maybe add some new yeast prior to bottling if you can. You could sprinkle a little dry yeast in each bottle before filling.

Thanks @Bassman2003 .

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

One of the advantages of dosing individual bottles and having 50g/0.001g scales is the ability to do split bottle conditioning.

A while back, I did that with yeast, temperature, and ascorbic acid when bottling.

What I found worked best for me was the combination of fresh yeast (I used CBC-1), 75F and (for hoppy styles) ascorbic acid. 1/32 tsp CBC-1, 1/64 tsp ascorbic acid. 1 week at 75F ensures carbonation, then add some time to "condition to taste" (start with 1 week for hoppy styles and 2 weeks for others).

I did a couple of bottles with EC-1118 in place of CBC-1 - didn't notice any off flavors, but YMMV. I didn't test head space as my solution is to store the conditioned beer cold (instant double).

 

[Bassman2003]

Yes, it would probably be useful to make a simple blonde ale and do all kinds of different approaches and label the bottles. Then let them sit, drink some and let others' age etc... You could emerge from that one batch with your optimal bottling process and not have to drag it out over multiple brews...

 

[Ninoid]

An interesting post that shows that a small headspace makes a very significant difference, and that anti-oxidation caps are useless.

https://www.thehomebrewforum.co.uk/...-caps-and-reduced-headspace-in-bottles.96998/

 

[Ninoid]

Here's another idea worth considering: Instead of filling bottles with very little headspace, pour the beer into the normal headspace left behind the bottling wand, put a makeshift aluminum foil lid on the bottle, and after less than an hour, put the cap on the bottles. This will allow the yeast to start absorbing the sugar and producing CO2, which will force the air out of the bottle headspace and fill it with CO2.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

From the OP in the article that was mentioned in #111:

[that OP has] done 5 brews since trying this method and have only had one bottle bomb.

Maybe it was just a 'gusher' or 'geyser' as opposed to a 'Rapid Unplanned Disassembly' of the bottle.

eta: see also this topic (link) here at HomeBrewTalk.

eta: The concerns related to minimum headspace probably predates the print edition of "Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide" (1995). In that book, chapter 27 covers bottle conditioning including "dry priming" (adding sugar to each bottle), minimizing head space ("fill it to _____"), and a couple of other topics.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Here's another idea worth considering: Instead of filling bottles with very little headspace, pour the beer into the normal headspace left behind the bottling wand, put a makeshift aluminum foil lid on the bottle, and after less than an hour, put the cap on the bottles.

Or, as an alternative to foil, put a bottle cap on the bottle but wait an hour before crimping it.

This will allow the yeast to start absorbing the sugar and producing CO2, which will force the air out of the bottle headspace and fill it with CO2.

Will the yeast used for fermentation get started within an hour? . Based on what I mentioned in #109, I'm skeptical but open minded.

If you decide to give that a try, please let us know the result.

 

[Ninoid]

Or, as an alternative to foil, put a bottle cap on the bottle but wait an hour before crimping it.


Will the yeast used for fermentation get started within an hour? . Based on what I mentioned in #109, I'm skeptical but open minded.

If you decide to give that a try, please let us know the result.

Maybe in an hour the yeast won't produce enough CO2 to fill the bottle headspace. Maybe it takes longer, but I read somewhere that yeast starts consuming simple sugars within half an hour of adding them to the beer, so an hour seems like enough to me.

 

[Ninoid]

From the OP in the article that was mentioned in #111:

Maybe it was just a 'gusher' or 'geyser' as opposed to a 'Rapid Unplanned Disassembly' of the bottle.

eta: see also this topic (link) here at HomeBrewTalk.

eta: The concerns related to minimum headspace probably predates the print edition of "Dave Miller's Homebrewing Guide" (1995). In that book, chapter 27 covers bottle conditioning including "dry priming" (adding sugar to each bottle), minimizing head space ("fill it to _____"), and a couple of other topics.

It's actually the same post from the same guy. I guess he was interested in the different reactions from different forums on the same topic.

 

[mac_1103]

I read somewhere that yeast starts consuming simple sugars within half an hour of adding them to the beer, so an hour seems like enough to me

If it takes two to three weeks for the yeast to consume the 0.1 oz of priming sugar you put into each bottle, just how much CO2 do you expect in one hour?

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

Maybe in an hour the yeast won't produce enough CO2 to fill the bottle headspace. Maybe it takes longer, but I read somewhere that yeast starts consuming simple sugars within half an hour of adding them to the beer, so an hour seems like enough to me.

It's possible, but would it also depend on the amount and condition of the yeast? From my split-bottle trials, it was clear to me that using fresh yeast (CBC-1 or EC-1118) resulted in faster carbonation (5 to 7 days) than using whatever strain fermented the wort (10-14 days). Warmer temperature (75F) helped when using fresh yeast, but didn't make much difference when using the existing yeast.

 

[Ninoid]

If it takes two to three weeks for the yeast to consume the 0.1 oz of priming sugar you put into each bottle, just how much CO2 do you expect in one hour?

Active fermentation of the complete wort in the fermenter lasts about 4 days. All further is the surcease of activity and sedimentation of the yeast.

 

[mac_1103]

Active fermentation of the complete wort in the fermenter lasts about 4 days.

What does that have to do with bottle conditioning? If you bottle condition normally* and open a bottle after four days, it's almost certainly going to be pretty flat. So what exactly do you think is happening in the next ten days that carbonates the beer?

* i.e., at 68F with the yeast already in the beer; not at an elevated temperature with CBC-1.