Jump to content
Coopers Community

Is it ... diacetyl?


Recommended Posts

28 minutes ago, Shamus O'Sean said:

It is still an ale type yeast.  So no great need for a diacetyl rest.  Me, I would up the temp by 2°C for 24-48 hours to encourage any yeast cleaning up.  Bottle on Friday.  Cold crashing not necessary with a wheat beer.  

Just convenient to bottle tomorrow and being impatient 🤣

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whenever I need heat in my brew fridge I can't fit the flask on the bottom so it does sit on a wire shelf above the fermenter. I suppose the difference is that there's only one fermenter in there and nothing blocking the heat from eventually filling the whole fridge. It does the job. I don't have a heat belt or anything because I don't need heat often enough to bother with one. 

In your case there is a barrier of sorts preventing the lower fermenter getting as much heat as the top one, so it would work better putting the heat source in the bottom. 

Edited by Otto Von Blotto
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, UncleStavvy said:

Maybe hole saw some ventilation holes through the ply wood shelf. Looks like there's a good gap in front for air flow anyway so maybe heat belt on the bottom and tweek the correction factor on the temp probe maybe?

There's plenty of space both sides of the shelf that the top fermenter sits on

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, Norris! said:

Thanks for sharing Ruddy. So basically time and temp will reduce the diacteyl to levels that make it drinkable. Noted.

Good luck with the future brews and videos

Norris

Not really. If it's not removed early enough it stays put, and it's most effective when the yeast are still active. That's why I always raise the temperature on lagers before fermentation finishes, to speed up the process and make sure it happens. 

I raise the temperature on ales too but not for diacetyl, that's just to speed up the finishing off and prevent the temperature dropping off and sending the yeast dormant too early. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BlackSands said:

I would also suggest if you're not taping the probe to the side of one of the FV's then it might be better to at least put it into a small container of water.

Im thinking that wont work because where does he put the container. Also the temperature change in the container will be a lot faster then the fv's.  Dilemma 🙃🙃

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Otto Von Blotto said:

Not really. If it's not removed early enough it stays put, and it's most effective when the yeast are still active. That's why I always raise the temperature on lagers before fermentation finishes, to speed up the process and make sure it happens. 

I raise the temperature on ales too but not for diacetyl, that's just to speed up the finishing off and prevent the temperature dropping off and sending the yeast dormant too early. 

So basically what the link stated and time and temp. Cheers for clarifying. I probably shouldn't have been so vague and been clearer with my statement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Norris! said:

So basically what the link stated and time and temp. Cheers for clarifying. I probably shouldn't have been so vague and been clearer with my statement. 

Yeah, the simplest way to put it is that you want it gone before the beer is bottled or kegged. If it's not and the yeast go dormant before they get rid of it then you get butterscotch beer. 

I know it's been posted in the past that with bottled lagers it can be removed in the bottles by carbonating them at ale temps but I always preferred to do the rest in the fermenter rather than let the yeast go dormant first and then hope they take care of it when they wake up again in the bottles.

Edited by Otto Von Blotto
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Titan said:

Im thinking that wont work because where does he put the container. Also the temperature change in the container will be a lot faster then the fv's.  Dilemma 🙃🙃

I wasn't suggesting this was a best idea, but more a better compromise than the one currently implemented.  KR currently has the sensor probe monitoring the air temperature.  I don't think this is a good idea in this situation.  Air has a low thermal mass and will be more prone to small temperature fluctuations which means the controller may end up cycling on and off far more frequently than it needs to.  Immersing the probe in water will simply help buffer this and 'smooth' out those fluctuations. But it's still not ideal. A temperature gradient almost certainly exists in this configuration and relying on convection to the distribute the heat evenly won't be enough, hence the fan recommendations made by others. 

Having said all that I do wonder what the temperature difference is top vs bottom FV?  If it's just a degree or two I personally wouldn't be worrying about it too much. i.e. if the one brew is fermenting at 18.2º and the other is closer to 19.7º...  who cares?   The only time that might matter is if you were doing a split batch to evaluate some aspect of the brew.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, BlackSands said:

I do wonder what the temperature difference is top vs bottom FV?

It was probably 5°, which is significant

My ultimate solution to this will be to get a second heat belt, as I actually do have another controller and it's only an issue in winter. Will just need to make sure I don't cause a feedback loop!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, King Ruddager said:

It was probably 5°, which is significant

My ultimate solution to this will be to get a second heat belt, as I actually do have another controller and it's only an issue in winter. Will just need to make sure I don't cause a feedback loop!

Crikey 5º difference is far more than I expected!   Seriously, you won't have a feedback loop but you will have a competition.  I think you're going to run into problems with two controllers... they'll be competing with each other -  fighting for ultimate dominance!  

👹

The best solution, in my ever so humble and modest (but actually educated) opinion is - stop ignoring what people above have been saying:  and get a fu**ing FAN installed in there! 

💨

Edited by BlackSands
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm ignoring the fan comments because I don't think it will work for me. Heat belts should be used directly on a fermenter (unlike what I did in the picture above) - they can overheat otherwise. If I'm applying direct heat to one of the fermenters it's always going to be the hottest.

If I was going to use a fan I'd need a different source of heat and would need to measure the ambient temperature (or the temperature inside a small vessel of water, as suggested).

The easiest way out of this for me is just to get another heat belt so that each fermenter will have a temperature controller (I already have two) and a heat belt. The weather isn't even forecast to get above 17° during the day for at least a week at the moment, so if I unplug the fridge then no worries. Maybe one of them will get a little warm, but not outside the ideal range and it ought to even out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All beer has some level of diacetyl especially in ale yeast fermentation brews. Lager yeast beers predominantly want very low levels of diacetyl or they present poorly so measures need to be adopted to greatly minimise these levels.

On 6/2/2020 at 11:37 PM, King Ruddager said:

Yep, it’s diacetyl alright.

Your diacetyl test would have only proved it was present on some level.

The sweetness you have described is likely due to the increased maltotriose level left by the S-04 yeast combined with an increased crystal malt quantity you mentioned using in the grist, magnified by a 15°C temp measure of your fridge during primary ferment that would have induced a stalled ferment increasing the remaining sugars remaining in the sample you tasted.

image.png.cd4723990104b96673ca8f7ba34d3065.png

Given you never offered up a FG for this brew or which of the US-05 or S-04 brews was at 15°C, in my mind some doubt still remains about the source of the excessive sweetness you describe.

The only reason I am doubting the diacetyl angle is that you would be the first to claim this as a cause (& be correct) of excessive sweetness of an ale brew in the 8 odd years I have been present as a member on the forum (that I can recall).

If you end up tipping it, I'll believe it may have been diacteyl related if you can also discount the other areas you have yet to answer conclusively.

Lusty.

Edited by Beerlust
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you put a fan in there then both fermenters should be basically the same temperature as the air temperature inside the fridge should be pretty much the same all through it, so you wouldn't have to control it based on ambient. There'd probably only a be degree or so difference between them, in which case you'd put the probe on the cooler one to prevent it dropping too low.

If it was me I'd be getting a different heat source that definitely won't overheat just sitting in there and putting a fan in, which would be a lot simpler and likely work better than complicating it more than necessary by using two heat belts and controllers. At least that way the fridge can still be plugged in and come on if the brews get too warm.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...