How to make yeast stick to the bottom a bottle conditioned beer

[smallbatchhomebrew]

Hi guys,

So I've had good results producing very clear beer with Isinglass and Auxillary finings, however I still get loose yeast sediment in the bottom of my beer.

This is my technique, I want to sell my beer one day so thats why I'm trying so hard! I'm doing 12 litre test batches at the moment.

• Boil for 30 mins
• Protofoloc or Caragheen at -15 mins
• I use pellet hops at various times during the boil until the latest -5 mins.
• I then crash cool the copper with water/icepacks
• I then sieve wort into the fermenter through a metal kitchen sieve
• I leave most of the sediment at the bottom of the copper when pouring
• I then ferment for 4-5 days
• I then add Liquid Aux fining to the FV then put in the chiller to cool (around 8*C). I only slightly mix it as the currents from cooling should be enough to mix (apparently)
• I then add Liquid (pre-mixed) Isinglass to the bottom of the cask 24 hours later and siphon the beer from the FV to secondary cask which should mix with the turbulence of filling the cask.
• I siphon all of the beer from the FV to the Cask until I reach anything that isnt clear (usually the last litre or so in the FV)
• Cask is then put back into the chiller (around 8*C) for another day or so
• After another 24 hours I then add carbonation drops to bottles and siphon from the cask. At this stage the beer is very clear. I then cap the bottles and leave in in at room temperature for a few weeks to condition/carbonate.

So all seems to be going well until I go to pour it then I can see floating sediment in the bottom of the bottle.

1) Is their a certain yeast strain which is sticky and will stick to the bottom of the bottle?

2) Do you have any other tips to help reduce the sediment in the bottle so I don't have to be extremely careful when pouring? I don't use any kind of filter when I syphon from the cask, should I filter through a hop bag or something?

3) Does cold conditioning the bottles help to prevent sediment, will the bottles actually carbonate? Should I condition at room temperature for a few week then chill the bottles after that to pack the yeast down?

Thanks!

 

[smallbatchhomebrew]

I forgot to mention the reason why that beer is so clear is because I left about 1/8th of the beer in the bottle, which was full of loose sediment!

 

[joe 90]

if your going to sell your beer its a different ball game bottling beer
your beer is bottle conditioned the beer you buy out of the shops isn't
its processed by killing the yeast just before bottling and co2 added for the fizz the brewers couldn't afford to bottle condition there beer it takes to long and it would be to expensive

the bottle conditioned beer is by far a lot better than processed bottled beer that's why we put up with a little sediment in the bottom of the bottle:drink:

 

[mcc111]

Sorry, I have to disagree with Joe90. I don't think smallbatch is trying to compete with Grolsch/Budweiser/Stella and that lot. There are LOADS of bottle conditioned beers on the market - you can probably even find some on supermarket shelves these days. Certainly if you go to a good independent beer seller you'll probably struggle to find beer that isn't. Unfortunately I can't help with yeast strains, but I've never had issues with yeast after leaving the beer for some time (but that obviously doesn't help you - sorry).

It's totally normal to have to be careful with bottle conditioned beer - even the commercially brewed "craft beer". It always a bit annoying when I buy a really good looking beer but have to wait a few days to drink it because I've shaken it up on the walk home, but that's the price you pay (well, aside from the price!).

 

[MisterFister]

1) Is their a certain yeast strain which is sticky and will stick to the bottom of the bottle?

There are several You might want to look at The Malt Millers West Coast Ale Yeast, The other thing to be aware of is that commercial breweries often filter their beer sterile, and then use a completely different yeast to bottle with. This gives them control over the amount of yeast in the bottle, as well as the amount of carbonation.

 

[smallbatchhomebrew]

Thanks for the replies guys, regarding killing the yeast and carbonating with c02, what is the best way of doing this?

Do you guys have any opinions on protofoloc vs caragheen, cargaheen seemed to produce more solid sediment that the powdery stuff you get with profofoloc.

 

[Fil]

at one tine it was quite common for a mixed pint 1/2 draught and 1/2 bottled , and the bottles of light and mild commonly used would pour bright But would also have a solid stuck sediment remaining in the bottle, so there is a way... anyone know how it was done back in the 70's ??

have you considered dropping a small amount of leaf gelatine in each bottle?
if its best added once the conditioning has occurred, stick it to the cap underside, and once conditioned shake to dissolve the gelatine

Alos you could consider priming in a keg before using a counterpressure bottle filler using a surface drawing float in the keg instead of the usual bottom sucking dip tube

 

[Dave1970]

1) Is their a certain yeast strain which is sticky and will stick to the bottom of the bottle?

2) Do you have any other tips to help reduce the sediment in the bottle so I don't have to be extremely careful when pouring? I don't use any kind of filter when I syphon from the cask, should I filter through a hop bag or something?

3) Does cold conditioning the bottles help to prevent sediment, will the bottles actually carbonate? Should I condition at room temperature for a few week then chill the bottles after that to pack the yeast down?

I think you're already thinking along the right lines

1. Yes, some yeast strains settle better than others. Of the ones I've used Fuller's yeast (from their bottle conditioned Bengal Lancer) is very good at sticking to the bottle and Nottingham is good. US-05 is good for keeping hop flavour but it's rubbish at settling (both in the FV and the bottle). Broadly you want yeasts with high flocculation for good settling.
2. A hop bag won't make any difference to something as small as yeast. You say your beer looks clear going into the bottle so it doesn't sound like you have a problem. You could invest in corny kegs, crusader kegs or polykegs, a CO2 bottle and all the connectors. This would allow you to force carbonate from the CO2 bottle and have sediment free carbonated beer. There are then other devices like counterpressure fillers and beer guns that allow you to bottle from the keg. I've managed to do it with a short length of beer line wedged into the tap - but this is only good for a couple of bottles at a time.
3. Yes. Low temps and time are your friends!....but you still need that couple of weeks in the warm to ensure the secondary ferment happens, then time & cool will give a more compact sediment

 

[IPA]

Hi guys,

So I've had good results producing very clear beer with Isinglass and Auxillary finings, however I still get loose yeast sediment in the bottom of my beer.


1) Is their a certain yeast strain which is sticky and will stick to the bottom of the bottle?

!

The yeast to use is WLP 037 not only does it make an excellent English bitter but if you have made your beer correctly it leaves a deposit that is less than spray paint thick on the bottom of the bottle which does not come off even if you up-end the bottle. In fact it is so hard to shift that you need to use cleaner to get it off. The bad news is that it is no longer available. Perhaps someone should ask Whitelabs why. I use it by continually top cropping and have been doing so for the last nine months with no apparent changes in taste.

 

[J]

Hi,

Your problem was actually covered on a brewing course I went on.

It's is fine to bottle condition your beer, there is a healthy market for this.

Your problem with the sediment is actually caused by the isinglass. Isinglass is used for cask ale to allow quick settling after transit, it works great in casks to get the beer clear quickly, but does leave loose sediment, which is fine in a cask.

Bottle conditioned beer should not have isinglass added as this will prevent the sediment in the bottle forming a tight bed.

Use Irish moss near the end of the boil but no other finnings are needed. Time will allow the sediment to settle in a firm bed.

Hope this helps.

 

[J]

Also using dried yeast tends to be more successful when requiring a tight sediment bed in bottle conditioned beer.

 

[IPA]

Hi,Bottle conditioned beer should not have isinglass added as this will prevent the sediment in the bottle forming a tight bed.Use Irish moss near the end of the boil but no other finnings are needed. .

A bit of misinformation here!!!

It's perfectly alright to fine beer that is going to be bottled but you have to do it like this.
Ferment to your target FG
Transfer to secondary and after three days add finings ( gelatine is cheap and works fine, no pun intended)
Leave it another four days and transfer to a third vessel.
Batch prime then bottle or keg your beer.

Do the transfering by means of a length of silicone hose that reaches to the bottom of the vessel that you are transfering to thereby minimising the loss of co2 in the beer
The problem that most people have is that they bottle or keg direct from the primary FV which just does not work and results in a beer that takes forever to settle down and leaves a large deposit of yeast that would have been removed if the above process had been followed.

 

[J]

A bit of misinformation here!!!

It's perfectly alright to fine beer that is going to be bottled but you have to do it like this.
Ferment to your target FG
Transfer to secondary and after three days add finings ( gelatine is cheap and works fine, no pun intended)
Leave it another four days and transfer to a third vessel.
Batch prime then bottle or keg your beer.

Do the transfering by means of a length of silicone hose that reaches to the bottom of the vessel that you are transfering to thereby minimising the loss of co2 in the beer
The problem that most people have is that they bottle or keg direct from the primary FV which just does not work and results in a beer that takes forever to settle down and leaves a large deposit of yeast that would have been removed if the above process had been followed.

Perhaps you could state your qualification?

I did not say that finings should not be used, I specifically said that isinglass should not be used. Irish moss (another fining) should be used (added 10 minutes before the end of the boil. I said nothing about gelatine, but I wouldn't use it as it seems the professionals generally don't.

You should read more carefully before accusing others!

I stated factual information learnt on a course for professional brewers run by the country's most successful installer of professional microbreweries. He has an impressive reputation and has won numerous competitions, so I will take his word over yours!

Don't use isinglass for bottle conditioned ale. Only use it for cask conditioned!

Transferring to a secondary prior to bottling will improve your result, but transferring again to a third vessel is unnecessary and a relatively pointless extra contamination risk.

If you had read the original poster's question properly, then you would know that the problem enquired about was that the sediment in the bottles was not compacting, not that there was too much of it.

 

[IPA]

Perhaps you could state your qualification

Been making beer for forty years and you? You certainly don't know about basic things like batch priming you can't do it properly without a third transfer! Plus you exhibit all the novice fears about infection. There is a distinct difference between copper fining and fining after fermentation or didn't they tell you that on the brewing course?

 

[J]

The advice comes from a professional microbrewery owner who thinks nothing of brewing a million pints a year.

You are just an amateur. Try brewing professionally without worrying about infection and see how far you get. The idea that infection is not a fear is just stupidity.

Infection is a professional brewers fear. Infection can, and has, shut down whole breweries.

Even with a professional set up like mine there is always risk. You are misguided. Why do you think we are so stringently careful with sanitation?

You are a classic know-it-all in that you think you do and yet you are talking rubbish. You are confusing what you do with what is best or what is necessary. Go and talk to some pro's and get your facts straight.

There is no need to do three transfers to get clear bottle conditioned ale. It is simply a waste of time and effort and a risk. Your poor method results in you wasting time transferring beer to achieve a clear pint when the pro's simply modify their fining appropriately.

Go ahead and listen to this arrogant amateur if you wish, but I will listen to the professionals with a proven record!

There are many microbreweries who run tours. Go along and ask them if they fear infection. Next you'll be telling me that you don't need to worry about temperatures or time. So ridiculous!

 

[J]

Also for your information the terminology is copper finings and auxiliary finings, and yes they were covered on the course.

Both are finings, but you do not need both. Also both have the exact same purpose but a different mechanism.

Copper finings alone are sufficient if the beer is allowed to settle. Auxiliary finings are only needed if you require beer to settle quickly after transit.

Most microbreweries add isinglass to casks for this purpose. If the casks were left to settle for long enough before tapping as is traditional then auxiliary finings such as isinglass would not be necessary to achieve a clear pint. Modern pace makes auxiliary finings such as isinglass almost compulsory for cask conditioned ale, but, as I said before Irish moss alone is sufficient for bottle conditioned ales as the sediment will be left to compact, adding isinglass in particular to bottle conditioned ale leads to a worse result as the sediment does not compact as easily.

 

[IPA]

Also for your information the terminology is copper finings and auxiliary finings, and yes they were covered on the course.

Both are finings, but you do not need both. Also both have the exact same purpose but a different mechanism.

Copper finings alone are sufficient if the beer is allowed to settle. Auxiliary finings are only needed if you require beer to settle quickly after transit.

.

I will stick with this thread in the hope that someone who does not know it all will benefit from it. As I said previously if you are going to prime your finished beer it is easier in my opinion to batch prime especially if you split the brew between barrels and bottles and to do this you need to transfer a third time in order to not have a yeast cake on the bottom which would be disturbed when you stir in your priming be it sugar,malt extract or unfermented wort. That said it is not critical to add sugar in some form because the secondary fermentation, in a correctly formulated recipe, will take place without it but it takes longer for the beer to condition. If you follow the advice that I offered, which I learned from listening to more experienced brewers, you will have much less sediment at the bottom of your bottles.
Now for the person who does know it all I would like to say that copper finings and finished beer fining(call it what you want auxiliary or secondary) are not at all the same thing. Copper fining is done to coagulate proteins which then settle out as trub and auxiliary fining is done to reduce the amount of yeast in suspension
Yes I am an amateur brewer. Amateur is a word that has become misused over the years in it's original (French)sense it means someone who is passionate about something they are doing. It comes from the verb aimer, to love or to like and I am passionate about brewing. That said I do make beer for sale and have more customers than I need or am willing to brew for. One last word of advice for Mr Angry. When you get to the stage in life where you realise that you don't know everything the learning process begins! All that I have learned about brewing came from other more qualified people and I never rejected their advice out of hand without trying it first.

 

[J]

I will stick with this thread in the hope that someone who does not know it all will benefit from it. As I said previously if you are going to prime your finished beer it is easier in my opinion to batch prime especially if you split the brew between barrels and bottles and to do this you need to transfer a third time in order to not have a yeast cake on the bottom which would be disturbed when you stir in your priming be it sugar,malt extract or unfermented wort. That said it is not critical to add sugar in some form because the secondary fermentation, in a correctly formulated recipe, will take place without it but it takes longer for the beer to condition. If you follow the advice that I offered, which I learned from listening to more experienced brewers, you will have much less sediment at the bottom of your bottles.
Now for the person who does know it all I would like to say that copper finings and finished beer fining(call it what you want auxiliary or secondary) are not at all the same thing. Copper fining is done to coagulate proteins which then settle out as trub and auxiliary fining is done to reduce the amount of yeast in suspension
Yes I am an amateur brewer. Amateur is a word that has become misused over the years in it's original (French)sense it means someone who is passionate about something they are doing. It comes from the verb aimer, to love or to like and I am passionate about brewing. That said I do make beer for sale and have more customers than I need or am willing to brew for. One last word of advice for Mr Angry. When you get to the stage in life where you realise that you don't know everything the learning process begins! All that I have learned about brewing came from other more qualified people and I never rejected their advice out of hand without trying it first.

Firstly as we are communicating in English you will want to use an English dictionary for definitions you desire clarity on, and not worry too much about the origin of a word to understand its usage. Word origins are interesting but they do not always have relevance to the current usage of the word investigated. Despite being so very old, as you like to brag about, you seem not to have grasped language and how it evolves. Current definition is important to understand present day conversation. You can be old and stupid, wisdom only comes to some, it is not automatic with age, there are plenty of extremely stupid old people.

You can batch sparge without a third transfer. You miss out the secondary vessel not the batch priming vessel. It is unecessary to use a secondary vessel if beer is left for an adequate time in the primary and then racked off gently. I always batch prime my bottled beers. No one wants to be priming individual bottles.

You really should read more carefully. I did not say all finings were the same. I said their purpose (clear beer) is the same. I specifically mentioned that their mechanism is different, and clearly they are different substances, hence their different names and application methods.

Looking back at our interaction you can clearly identify where you have not understood what you have read. You have wrongly accused me of saying things I have not. It is all there to check.

You also still haven't understood the problem this thread refers to. The poster was not complaining about the quantity of sediment in his bottles, he was complaining about its lack of compaction!

You also mistake anger for disgust. The combination of your arrogance and stupidity is very unpleasant. If you wish to correct people then read properly and understand what they have said!

If you can't be bothered to read posts properly then simply don't read them at all.

Islinglass should not be used for bottle conditioned ales, it will prevent the sediment from compacting.

Also dried yeasts tend to perform better for bottle conditioning. Not always of course, just a tendency.

You may notice that vegans can drink most bottle conditioned ales for that very reason. Before adding isinglass or gelatine beer is vegan, but after it is not even vegetarian.

I am not at all vegetarian, but I don't choose to add any unnecessary ingredients to my beer.

Perhaps our ancient freind is suffering age related mental decline, and will still fail to absorb any of what I am saying. The majority of people do suffer such a fate so it wouldn't be unlikely, but then maybe it's is just arrogance and stupidity.

Perhaps the ancient lord of brewing is confusing a bunch if old decrepit men's superstitions and blind practice with fact. A lot has been learnt about brewing since you began. Some of your 'knowledge' has been superseded. Brake drums and shoes are no longer the best technology for stopping cars. Things change and knowledge improves.

In the not too distant past brewers believed in magic sticks they stirred into wort to start brews off and had no knowledge of yeast. Magic sticks are not relevant today just as some of your knowledge will have been replaced with more scientific information. Many practices are performed purely out of superstition and are found to be useless when the final product is judged in scientific studies.

Age can bring wisdom, but it can also bring a closed mind and a lack of ability to stay up-to-date.

It's hard to keep up when you begin the slowdown before the inevitable end of cognition altogether.

 

[IPA]

You also mistake anger for disgust. The combination of your arrogance and stupidity is very unpleasant. If you wish to correct people then read properly and understand what they have said!

.

Islinglass should not be used for bottle conditioned ales, it will prevent the sediment from compacting.


It's hard to keep up when you begin the slowdown before the inevitable end of cognition altogether.

I have no problem keeping up and you still have not grasped that the third transfer removes whatever you have used as finings therefore it cannot affect the bottled beer. It is your arrogance that will not accept that perhaps there are people who have more experience and wisdom than yourself and I am offering to send a bottle of my beer to the originator of this thread so that he can judge for himself.

 

[J]

I have no problem keeping up and you still have not grasped that the third transfer removes whatever you have used as finings therefore it cannot affect the bottled beer. It is your arrogance that will not accept that perhaps there are people who have more experience and wisdom than yourself and I am offering to send a bottle of my beer to the originator of this thread so that he can judge for himself.

Priceless! You really are dim. The end result of your beer would be almost identical regardless of the unnecessary step. Whether your beer is good or not does not show whether all of the steps you take are necessary. You don't understand how to think scientifically. You need to brew two beers, one with and one without that step if you wish to prove anything. I'm having a right giggle here, that is one of the most moronic attempts to back up a view I have heard in a long while. You really need to get an education!

Also the transfer will not entirely remove the fining agents, (which is why you cannot mark your beer as vegetarian if you use isinglass or gelatine) not that this matters to the taste of the beer as the quantities of which remain will not be noticeable. However there is no point in adding something with no need, like isinglass, to bottle conditioned ale, which in fact will lead to a worse result.

If you want to waste your time and your money to ahead. I will listen to the professionals.

Try brewing some beer and use Irish moss at the end of the boil. Add isinglass to half of the beer after it has been racked from the primary and leave the other half without. Bottle it up and you will see the result. The sediment will compact better in the bottles of beer without isinglass time permitting.

If it doesn't (and it will) then you would prove your point, but only to yourself as I wouldn't trust someone who talks such rubbish as you.

The orignal poster can do the same experiment and see that you are talking a load of old wife's-tale nonsense.

You are still mistaking old for wise and mistaking all experience as being of equal quality. If you were wise and had quality life experience then it would show in your logical reasoning. The contrary is what we see instead!