Using US-05 as a bottling yeast

[_Keven]

Hello, I'm brewing a Belgian quad using wyeast 3787 and its now reached FG at 1.018 (OG was 1.091) so its roughly 9.6%. Now we're 9 weeks out from brew day so I'm planning on adding yeast for bottling as its likely the Belgian yeast has gone dormant. My local home brew shop says they only have US-05 for bottling yeast which has a slightly higher attenuation than the wyeast 3787 (about 3-4% higher attenuation). I'm a bit concerned that I may run the risk of bottle bombs if I use this strain of yeast. One question I have is can I just pitch a pack of US-05 into my fermenter and let it get to a slightly lower FG and then bottle the beer? Or at this high alc percentage would the yeast go dormant pretty fast? Would it just be better to bottle with the yeast immediately?

 

[hotbeer]

Given a choice, I'd use a proper bottling yeast. At 9.6% you are already in the range that is the alcohol tolerance for US-05. Granted you are at the lower end, but that is why they give a range. It's not a exact number that can be applied to every beer and circumstance.

LalBrew CBC-1 or SafAle F-2 will probably be the preferred choice. Essentially you really want a yeast that will only chew on your priming sugar. And has a very high alcohol tolerance when you are doing big beers.

If that's all you got though, use it. You don't need much. However it might take longer to get those bottles fully carbonated. So I'll recommend you store the bottles where their temps will be in the upper part of the yeast ideal temp range till you think they are carb'd enough.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

... US-05 as [an additional] bottling yeast?

IMO and assuming a longer bottle conditioning time frame: No.

Would it just be better to bottle with the yeast immediately?

Wyeast 3787 product information: https://wyeastlab.com/product/belgian-high-gravity/

Assuming a longer bottle conditioning time frame, 3787 is a "medium" flocculation strain so there should be some yeast in suspension. Just give it a lot of time.

Another (safe) option would be to use a bottle conditioning yeast (e.g. CBC-1) or a neutral wine yeast (e.g EC-1118). These strains only ferment simple sugars.

---

as a "fall back" for using the existing yeast (WY 3787) for bottle conditioning, see https://www.homebrewtalk.com/threads/beer-not-carbonating-in-the-bottle.733500/ where OP reports being able to pitch CBC-1 (using 1/32 tsp measuring spoons) into bottles that were not carbonating.

 

[MikeCo]

A bottling yeast or wine/champagne yeast would be better, but US-05 will work. I always add fresh bottling yeast for high ABV or longer aged beers since the residual yeast is not likely in very good shape. If you can get thicker bottles, use them. It will help prevent bottle bombs and allow you to carbonate to a higher level which is correct for the style.

 

[hotbeer]

I should have taken time to look yesterday at your Wyeast 3787.

It has a better alcohol tolerance than US-05. So even if you add/added the US-05, your results may have been about the same without. And you really won't know which did more if you did add it to your bottles already.

If you still are waiting, do some with and some without. Compare what they taste like and how well and how long it takes to carbonate. Both are medium flocculation/sedimentation, so it might take a while for them to go to the bottom. Particularly if you bottle beer that is still cloudy with stuff yet to go to the bottom.

While you are already at the max attenuation for the wyeast, I think that's got more to do with what type sugars are in the typical wort and how much of each type of sugar that particular yeast will chew on then combined as one number to give the total attenuation. There are various types of sugars, some more easily fermented and some preferred by certain yeasts.

So adding a priming sugar, that most any yeast will favor, will still be fermented regardless of whether you've reached or exceeded the attenuation stated for that yeast.

I don't know what sugars either likes to chew on, but when you add a different yeast, then you are potentially affecting the ratios of those remaining sugars in your beer. Some sugars more than others do have an effect on your sensory perceptions of the beer for body and taste.

But I'm only self trained on this stuff. So maybe another that fully knows about attenuation will fill us in on how it applies here.

 

[_Keven]

IMO and assuming a longer bottle conditioning time frame: No.


Wyeast 3787 product information: https://wyeastlab.com/product/belgian-high-gravity/

Assuming a longer bottle conditioning time frame, 3787 is a "medium" flocculation strain so there should be some yeast in suspension. Just give it a lot of time.

Another (safe) option would be to use a bottle conditioning yeast (e.g. CBC-1) or a neutral wine yeast (e.g EC-1118). These strains only ferment simple sugars.

---

as a "fall back" for using the existing yeast (WY 3787) for bottle conditioning, see https://www.homebrewtalk.com/threads/beer-not-carbonating-in-the-bottle.733500/ where OP reports being able to pitch CBC-1 (using 1/32 tsp measuring spoons) into bottles that were not carbonating.

I ended up just using US-05 as that is all I could get locally. I'm definitely going to pick up something like CBC-1 for next time. But I might've screwed up, maybe you could let me know. Essentially I made a yeast starter using a can of fast pitch waited a day for the starter to kick off and then poured the yeast into my fermenter and immediately bottled. (I read somewhere that making a starter for bottling yeast is a good idea, but I probably could've gone a few days to let the wort from the starter fully ferment). Now I'm concerned that I overlooked the obvious issue of adding more wort and then bottling immediately. Now I think I'm running the risk of having bottle bombs. The gravity of the starter was 1.040 (according to the label) with a volume of 32 oz (1/4th a gallon). There was about 5 gallons before pitching this yeast bringing the total to 5.25 gallons of beer. I also added about 200 grams of melted down candy sugar as a priming sugar.... I'm guessing this is way too much for a bottle to handle?

 

[mashdar]

What temperature was the beer at bottling? At 68F, you're at about 3.3 volumes. Hopefully you're using plastic bottles or high quality Belgian bottles.

For US-05, why a starter?

Using a new random yeast is a bigger bottle bomb risk. If it attenuates more than the first yeast, it could be risky.

Wear gloves and safety goggles?

 

[_Keven]

What temperature was the beer at bottling? At 68F, you're at about 3.3 volumes. Hopefully you're using plastic bottles or high quality Belgian bottles.

For US-05, why a starter?

Using a new random yeast is a bigger bottle bomb risk. If it attenuates more than the first yeast, it could be risky.

Wear gloves and safety goggles?

well my local shop said US-05 should be fine to use as a bottling yeast and the attenuation rates when compared to Wyeast 3787 are quite similar. I also heard its good to make a starter when using a bottling yeast especially for a beer that has a higher abv. As for the 3.3 volumes does that include the starter? Because the priming sugar is only at 3.0 volumes I thought which I've done before with no issues. 3.3 does sound like a problematic amount

 

[mashdar]

I was getting 2.8 vols without the starter, and was figuring 20 points of attenuation left on starter (2/3, ~0.001 diluted, ~0.5vol)

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I ended up just using US-05 as that is all I could get locally.

Looks like @mashdar and your local home brew store may get you through this situation.

Bottle conditioning with a higher attenuating yeast (US-05) than what was used for fermentation (3787) is outside of my range of experiences (and like outside the range of experiences for most people who bottle condition).

Back in #3, I stated

so I'm going to "drop out" of this topic.

 

[_Keven]

I was getting 2.8 vols without the starter, and was figuring 20 points of attenuation left on starter (2/3, ~0.001 diluted, ~0.5vol)

ugh well this isn't good. Well the starter was going for about an entire day and already had a thick krausen in it at that point if that counts for anything. I honestly have no clue how much of it was fermented but I'd have to imagine at least some of it no?

 

[mashdar]

Hard to say. I was being a little conservative.

If it were me: I keep bottles in a big plastic bin for a while (3 mo for this beer) in case of bombs. If I'm at all worried, I wear thick gloves, long sleeves, and eye protection to move one to fridge.

You can judge how bad it is when you open a cold one. If it seems normal, just keep being cautious for a while, since everything goes slower at 10% ABV.

Some people burp caps, but I don't have pointers on that.

 

[Miraculix]

well my local shop said US-05 should be fine to use as a bottling yeast and the attenuation rates when compared to Wyeast 3787 are quite similar. I also heard its good to make a starter when using a bottling yeast especially for a beer that has a higher abv. As for the 3.3 volumes does that include the starter? Because the priming sugar is only at 3.0 volumes I thought which I've done before with no issues. 3.3 does sound like a problematic amount

You have got really bad advice there.
You would be in a better situation if you would have skipped the additional yeast entirely and just stayed with the current yeast in the hope that it will wake up (Which it probably would at some point).

Next time use a dedicated bottling yeast without a starter. CBC 1 for example.

Now you will have to closely monitor the carbonation level to avoid bottle bombs. For the next few months.

 

[MikeCo]

Next time, just mix the dry bottling yeast in a small amount of sanitized water to help it mix in the beer. No starter.

 

[_Keven]

Hard to say. I was being a little conservative.

If it were me: I keep bottles in a big plastic bin for a while (3 mo for this beer) in case of bombs. If I'm at all worried, I wear thick gloves, long sleeves, and eye protection to move one to fridge.

You can judge how bad it is when you open a cold one. If it seems normal, just keep being cautious for a while, since everything goes slower at 10% ABV.

Some people burp caps, but I don't have pointers on that.

Hello, its been a few months so I just wanted to update you guys on how the beer is doing.

After about 7 weeks after bottling we did have a single bottle bomb. It was contained in a box so no shards of glass or injuries anywhere thankfully. After this we decided to try and save the beer by putting them all in the fridge to hopefully slow the yeast down. Its been 2 weeks since the bottle bomb and we haven't had any issues since.

We recently tried the beer (we were very careful opening it) and there was no gushing at all. It was very carbed though. It was as carbed as Tripel Tarmeliet or Achouffe if I had to guess. The beer tasted great and had very little residual sugars left if any at all. My guess is the bottle bomb might've been one of the last beers to bottle from the fermenter and maybe had a bit extra sugar in it because of that.

One thing I will say is the yeast isn't really sticking to the bottom of the bottle yet, so a lot of the yeast is in the beer. It definitely has a mild yeasty sour aftertaste. We're hoping it will create that layer of sedimentation on the bottle by Christmas but we're not sure with this yeast yet. Maybe another month in the fridge will help with that? Anyone have any experience with this yeast and how long that typically takes?

You guys were right though, definitely never going to use this yeast for bottling again (and maybe any bottling yeast ever again).

 

[mac_1103]

maybe any bottling yeast ever again

Bottling yeasts have two key properties that prevent the issues you had with US-05. First, they only ferment simple sugars. Second, they have a kill factor that keeps any of the original yeast from fermenting anything else that might still be in your beer. So they won't change the character of the beer and they won't give you bottle bombs unless you overprime.

 

[MikeCo]

You SHOULD use bottling yeast in certain beers in my opinion. Anything higher ABV or aged long enough will not have enough healthy yeast to carbonate the beer in a reasonable time if at all. It's not the added yeast that is usually the problem with under or over-carbonated beer. It's an incorrect amount of priming sugar or an under-attenuated beer.

 

[z-bob]

Your LHBS should have sold you champagne yeast if they didn't have bottling yeast. It's cheap, too. I'm glad it mostly worked out for you. Keep the bottles cold and they should be okay.

 

[mashdar]

You SHOULD use bottling yeast in certain beers in my opinion. Anything higher ABV or aged long enough will not have enough healthy yeast to carbonate the beer in a reasonable time if at all. It's not the added yeast that is usually the problem with under or over-carbonated beer. It's an incorrect amount of priming sugar or an under-attenuated beer.

I like to use the original yeast for bottle conditioning my big beers in case there's any "magic" to it. But I'm always tempted by the ease of CBC-1 or similar.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

One thing I will say is the yeast isn't really sticking to the bottom of the bottle yet

A bottle conditioning yeast (like CBC-1) will "get out of the way" quickly once it's done (fall to the bottom and compact tightly). OTOH and IMO, US-05 seems to be slower on both aspects. Cold storage (and time) may help.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

You SHOULD use bottling yeast in certain beers in my opinion. Anything higher ABV or aged long enough will not have enough healthy yeast to carbonate the beer in a reasonable time if at all.

Agreed (and I gave your reply a like for this).

It's not the added yeast that is usually the problem with under or over-carbonated beer. It's an incorrect amount of priming sugar or an under-attenuated beer.

Agreed, but with the additional condition that if one is adding yeast when bottling, it needs to be a strain that ferments only simple sugars.

---

In this topic, primary fermentation used Wyeast 3787 (Apparent Attenuation: 74 - 78% (link)) and bottle conditioned with US-05 (Apparent attenuation 78-82% (link)). So, over time, some additional complex sugars were fermented - which resulted in the bottle bomb.

 

[MikeCo]

Agreed, but with the additional condition that if one is adding yeast when bottling, it needs to be a strain that ferments only simple sugars.

I agree using a strain that only ferments simple sugars is the safest to use as a bottling yeast, but I have used ale strains with success too. The key is to make sure the beer is fully fermented and that the bottling strain is not more attenuative than the fermentation strain.

When just letting residual yeast do the bottle conditioning, is that not the equivalent of adding the same strain at bottling?

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I agree using a strain that only ferments simple sugars is the safest to use as a bottling yeast, but I have used ale strains with success too. The key is to make sure the beer is fully fermented and that the bottling strain is not more attenuative than the fermentation strain.

When just letting residual yeast do the bottle conditioning, is that not the equivalent of adding the same strain at bottling?

There are combinations of beer yeast strains where this works. But it requires some thought, some planning (to have the yeast at home), and some additional attention when bottling multiple batches on the same day.

To me, a bottle conditioning yeast (I use CBC-1, but there are others) is "the right tool for the job". It works in high ABV environments, flocculates well, compacts well. I've used sachets of CBC-1 that were past the recommended 'use by' date without problems.

Using the residual yeast is the 'simplest thing possible'.

 

[mac_1103]

I've used sachets of CBC-1 that were past the recommended 'use by' date without problems.

And also previously opened.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I've used sachets of CBC-1 that were past the recommended 'use by' date without problems.

And also previously opened.

Yes, opened/closed numerous times (maybe 11? as I brew 2.5 gal batches and use the the 2g / 5 gal pitch rate).

I'm at the bottom of a sachet, so maybe I'll track the history of the next one I open.

When just letting residual yeast do the bottle conditioning, is that not the equivalent of adding the same strain at bottling?

The BYO Mar 2024 "Mr Wizard" column has some research/science on the topic of bottle conditioning. I currently have a subscription (and stay logged in) so I'm not sure if that article is freely available.

 

[_Keven]

Agreed (and I gave your reply a like for this).


Agreed, but with the additional condition that if one is adding yeast when bottling, it needs to be a strain that ferments only simple sugars.

---

In this topic, primary fermentation used Wyeast 3787 (Apparent Attenuation: 74 - 78% (link)) and bottle conditioned with US-05 (Apparent attenuation 78-82% (link)). So, over time, some additional complex sugars were fermented - which resulted in the bottle bomb.

Agreed and also worth mentioning, I was aiming for a very high volume of CO2 initially . I believe 3.2-3.3 volumes or so (I know, I'm pushing standard bottles to their limits). I've done this volume level several times in the past with no issues so yeah the added yeast likely pushed it over the edge. But given only 1 bottle so far has exploded, I'd guess that if I shot for a lower CO2 volume say 2.0-2.4 then US-05 probably would've worked fine in this scenario.

 

[_Keven]

A bottle conditioning yeast (like CBC-1) will "get out of the way" quickly once it's done (fall to the bottom and compact tightly). OTOH and IMO, US-05 seems to be slower on both aspects. Cold storage (and time) may help.

good to know, yeah they've only been in the fridge a few weeks so I'm hoping another 4-6 weeks I'll see some clumping on the bottom.

 

[BrewnWKopperKat]

I'd guess that if I shot for a lower CO2 volume say 2.0-2.4 then US-05 probably would've worked fine in this scenario.

IIRC, there are models / equations that would allow you to know (rather than guess) that bottle bombs were being made.

For me, a bottle conditioning (or wine) yeast removes the need to "do the math".