When To Rack?

[richardo]

I have been racking most of my beers to secondary and i have noticed a drop in the yeast flavours, making the beer taste better earlier.

Initially I was racking after fermentation had finished, at around 7 days. However, recently i was advised to rack a particular recipe before fermentation had finished, at around 4 days. This resulted in fermentation continuing in the secondary.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this? What are the likely end results of the different methods, and does it depend on the type of beer being made?

 

[raven19]

I usually only rack when ready to keg / bottle nowadays.

I used to rack after 7 -ish days but now I tend to leave it in primary for a while longer.

 

[manticle]

Towards the end of primary/high krausen, usually when about 3/4 the way to final gravity for me. Not only trying to get clearer beer but also allow the yeast to clean up after itself away from dead cells and such.

Sometimes I miss that point in which case I just rack at the end and cold condition which isn't really a secondary fermentation - just a maturing period (and beer clarity, less sediment, less sedimenty flavour etc).

 

[MarkBastard]

Is there any point to racking if you're kegging, doing ales only, and you're crash chilling in primary?

 

[manticle]

If you rack for secondary fermentation then yes. If you rack purely for clarity or because you are paranoid about autolysis (which you probably shouldn't be) then no.

It really depends on why you do it and what difference you notice (if any) when you do. It's certainly not an essential part of making beer.

There's a good description of secondary fermentation (not just racking to a second vessel but actual fermentation) here:

http://www.howtobrew.com/section1/chapter8-2-3.html

and here: http://www.allaboutbeer.com/homebrew/secondar.html

 

[matti]

l listened to Brew strong last night and they were talking about different type of fermenter and racking.
A second fermenter is always good to have.
But you must ask why you are racking.

I generally rack my lager at 2/3 of fermentation for one major reason.
By transferring the beer you rouse the yeast and get higher attenuation and a drier beer.
The yeast will clear earlier and i don't require filtering.
The yeast remains in secondary will also clean up some fusel and ester that may remain in the beer over a few weeks.

Ales I rack to secondary if I need to dry hop.
If not i dont bother as the more tampering in my dusty garage the worse iI'll be off,

A fully fermented beer is very likely to get infected easily once moved to many times.
That is my 2c and the pod cast agrred fully or I agreed fully qwith what they had to say.

Matti

 

[richardo]

Thanks for the feedback. I checked JP's site as well which backed up my thinking.

Racked after 4 days, when the airlock had stopped bubbling, but not settled. Once in secondary it started bubbling again, so it nudged the fermentation along a bit. Also, as it is still fermenting, it is pushing C02 out, so less chance of infection. Tried this with an English bitter which came out fine.

 

[Ross]

Sorry, but i really can't see any reason to rack other than wanting to put in to a more convenient shaped vessel for cold conditioning, or for getting off the yeast to bulk prime. Every time you move your beer you just increase the chance of infection. If you want to rouse your yeast, just give the fermenter a gentle swirl, or preferably just lift the fermentation temp a few degrees.

cheers Ross

 

[///]

If repeat ... lots of Firefox issues at the moment ...

If the ferment is done the risk of infection diminishes greatly ... but by only as much as the cleaning you do ....

Sad that Mr Google of a search function on AHB does not give you reasons to Rack. A whole bunch of bog standard brewing practices scientifically proven over the years say why racking is good ... are we making soup or beer!

 

[chucke]

It all depends on -why- you brew. IMO, there are two types of brewers:
1) For the first type, brewing focuses on BJCP categories, contests and judging. He seeks perfection.
2) The second type brews for himself and to share with mates, maybe a lazy brewer. He looks for ways to make the process easier, shorter and cheaper while still brewing great beer.

I confess I fall into the latter category. I’m definitely a lazy brewer, only brew ales, cold crash -n- keg … and rarely secondary brews. It just seems superfluous.

 

[Fourstar]

Sorry, but i really can't see any reason to rack other than wanting to put in to a more convenient shaped vessel for cold conditioning, or for getting off the yeast to bulk prime. Every time you move your beer you just increase the chance of infection. If you want to rouse your yeast, just give the fermenter a gentle swirl, or preferably just lift the fermentation temp a few degrees.
cheers Ross

Alot of these details im reading are actually quite scary, especially when people are racking close to the end of fermentation. I agree totally with what Ross has pointed out.

For those that are racking at 3/4 thru fermentation, by doing this you are reducing the yeast cell count when your beer is in secondary and are more likely to end up with fermentation precursors in your beer post fermentation such as acetaldehyde, diacetyl or unwanted phenolics/esters. You should be reacking EARLY during the growth phase or POST fermentation if you feel the need to.

The only time it is adventageous for a homebreweris in the following scenarios:
- If you are brewing a light lager/pilsner and after the growth phase to rack off any cold break as this can aid in the production of sulfur noted or fusel alcohol and can be detrimental to a clean profile.

- You are adding something to your beer such as fruit or excessive dry hopping, at this point its a nice idea to be able to remove your beer post fermentation from the trub and more importantly the yeast and directly onto your fruit/hops for greater stability and flavour extraction during this storage time. If you do this in your primary, yeast and trub will strip away alot of this profile.

- If you do not have access to a fridge for cold conditioning, 2days~ post fermentation (to allow for precursors to be chewed up) you can rack to aid in clarification and storage stability when bottling. This is something cosmetic, and will not make your beer better as this will happen over the same period in bottles anyway.

If you are kegging, you are better off just racking direct to the keg over transferring. Essentailly your keg IS your secondary if you do not store cold and if you do, even better! The trub/yeast will drop out once in the fridge anyway.

I used to rack, since i stopped i havnt noticed anything detrimental to my beers so i no longer do it. As ross noted, its just another point of infection and if i can avoid it, I will. The last beer i racked was for my Raspberry Wheat Beer and that must be around 12 months ago now.

Cheers!

 

[manticle]

Interesting thoughts. I might have to do a side by side. Never noticed any acetylaldehyde or diacetyl in my brews though (and yes I have tasted acetylaldehyde, less sure about diacetyl)

 

[drsmurto]

Agree 100% with Scotty, racking is only an infection issue if your sanitation procedures aren't up to scratch.

Some of the CO2 formed during fermentation dissolves in the beer. The act of racking provides enough nucleation points that some of this CO2 will come out of solution providing the beer in its new container with a blanket of CO2 to protect it.

EDIT - spelling/grammar

 

[BoilerBoy]

I confess to being a serial racker and have been for 5 years and never had an infection from that process, always rack when FG has been reached though.
BB

 

[manticle]

Alot of these details im reading are actually quite scary, especially when people are racking close to the end of fermentation. I agree totally with what Ross has pointed out.

For those that are racking at 3/4 thru fermentation, by doing this you are reducing the yeast cell count when your beer is in secondary and are more likely to end up with fermentation precursors in your beer post fermentation such as acetaldehyde, diacetyl or unwanted phenolics/esters. You should be reacking EARLY during the growth phase or POST fermentation if you feel the need to.

The only time it is adventageous for a homebreweris in the following scenarios:
- If you are brewing a light lager/pilsner and after the growth phase to rack off any cold break as this can aid in the production of sulfur noted or fusel alcohol and can be detrimental to a clean profile.

- You are adding something to your beer such as fruit or excessive dry hopping, at this point its a nice idea to be able to remove your beer post fermentation from the trub and more importantly the yeast and directly onto your fruit/hops for greater stability and flavour extraction during this storage time. If you do this in your primary, yeast and trub will strip away alot of this profile.

- If you do not have access to a fridge for cold conditioning, 2days~ post fermentation (to allow for precursors to be chewed up) you can rack to aid in clarification and storage stability when bottling. This is something cosmetic, and will not make your beer better as this will happen over the same period in bottles anyway.

If you are kegging, you are better off just racking direct to the keg over transferring. Essentailly your keg IS your secondary if you do not store cold and if you do, even better! The trub/yeast will drop out once in the fridge anyway.

I used to rack, since i stopped i havnt noticed anything detrimental to my beers so i no longer do it. As ross noted, its just another point of infection and if i can avoid it, I will. The last beer i racked was for my Raspberry Wheat Beer and that must be around 12 months ago now.

Cheers!

Been thinking about this and while I'd credit your technical brewing knowledge as being leaps above my own there's a couple of things that have confused me.

Why would you rack early in the growth phase? Surely that's interfering with the cell count just as it's getting moving. What would be the advantage?

To my mind racking for secondary fermentation and racking for clarity are two different things so racking post ferment is for a different purpose.

Also the yeast during the secondary phase that is doing the work is generally in suspension - the stuff you rack off and leave behind is mainly inactive or dead yeast as far as I'm aware so is racking 3/4 through really going to affect your cell count?

Again I've never noticed any phenolics or esters that I could attribute to the process of racking and generally the ferment seems to continue afterwards (and considering it's a recommended solution to stalled ferment as a way of rousing yeast it makes sense that it would.

Still keen to do the side by side. I've noticed a definite taste difference in my beers after I started racking but there's too many variables as when I started doing that I also started cold conditioning, moving away from kits and into extracts, hops spec grains and finally partial and AG). There's also admittedly no way of telling if that difference is the same difference that racking simply for clarity (sediment affects flavour to my mind regardless of how many people suggest it's cosmetic).

 

[Fourstar]

Hey Mants, see my reponses in red below.

Been thinking about this and while I'd credit your technical brewing knowledge as being leaps above my own there's a couple of things that have confused me.

Why would you rack early in the growth phase? Surely that's interfering with the cell count just as it's getting moving. What would be the advantage?
-Sorry, what i was implying if you ahve a conical fermenter, at the point of passing growth phase and into fermentation its common practice to dump the break/turb material from your conical fermenter. What i mean is, once you begin to see krausen and growth period has completed (ales 16-24 hours) you transfer your wort to a secondary container, leaving the cold break material behind.

To my mind racking for secondary fermentation and racking for clarity are two different things so racking post ferment is for a different purpose.
-Yes, that is correct. Which is why secondary for my above comment is at the point of getting off the break material.

Also the yeast during the secondary phase that is doing the work is generally in suspension - the stuff you rack off and leave behind is mainly inactive or dead yeast as far as I'm aware so is racking 3/4 through really going to affect your cell count?
- If you have had issues with unstable temperatures and excessive yeast flocculation, it can be a big issue racking this late into fermentation. Take Wyeast 1968 ESB as an example, that stuff floccs out at the drop of a hat. If not handled correctly and kept at correct stable temperatures you will have diacetyl and a whole world of other fermentation pre-cursors in your beer, then if you rack, you might struggle to get rid of them. With yeats like US05 and other moderate flocculation yeasts you are usually pretty safe. So yes, what you're saying is correct, cell counts are not much of an issue if your fermentation has been stable and there has not been any excessive flocculation during fermentation. It can be a risky process as i have outlined.

Again I've never noticed any phenolics or esters that I could attribute to the process of racking and generally the ferment seems to continue afterwards (and considering it's a recommended solution to stalled ferment as a way of rousing yeast it makes sense that it would.
- This is only attributed to flocculation issues as noted above, if you are lacking cell counts at the point of racking, you will struggle to rid your beer of these notes. If you have it still in primary, you can rouse the whole fermenter and knock them off.

Still keen to do the side by side. I've noticed a definite taste difference in my beers after I started racking but there's too many variables as when I started doing that I also started cold conditioning, moving away from kits and into extracts, hops spec grains and finally partial and AG). There's also admittedly no way of telling if that difference is the same difference that racking simply for clarity (sediment affects flavour to my mind regardless of how many people suggest it's cosmetic).
- Do a side by side with the same beer and same pitching rates, given time for both of them to age and floc out, i'd doubt you could taste the difference (or moreso what one was racked) with a blind triangle tasteoff. Yes, i agree (its not your mind, its your tongue ). Sediment does attribute taste, protien and yeast have a flavour. Sediment also harbours tannins and hop resins, which is why your beer is 'mellower' once it drops bright.

Hope that clarifys things bud

Cheers! :icon_cheers:

 

[manticle]

It does clarify what you mean yes. In that sense a lot of what you're saying is specific to particular equipment and ingredients. Both Daniels and Palmer talk about the benefits of secondary fermentation in a different vessel which is what I've been trying to emulate. Good to know there may be things to watch out for (my fermenter is not conical and I haven't used 1968).

Apparently 1099 flocs quite well too and I've just bought some for a planned brew so maybe I'll tread carefully with that one.

 

[buttersd70]

Brewing science and practice, chapter 15.2.1. Bold, underline, and Italics added by myself.

15.2.1 Principles of secondary fermentation
Secondary fermentation permits continued activity by the yeast at a reduced rate limited
by the low temperature and the lower yeast count in the beer. Traditionally after primary
fermentation (Chapter 12) the beer would pass to the conditioning or maturation vessel
and would contain 14 million yeast cells/ml of beer and about 4 (degrees, symbol doesnt paste well) of gravity (1.1%
fermentable extract). There are many temperature regimes which are subsequently
applied, and they represent compromises between promoting production of carbon
dioxide and hence providing condition to the beer and allowing the removal of
undesirable flavour compounds. The beer was cooled, traditionally to 8 C (46 F) at the
end of primary fermentation to remove most of the surplus yeast before transfer to the
warm maturation vessel. In this process the remaining yeast becomes re-suspended and
there is a small uptake of oxygen, which activates the yeast to start the slow secondary
fermentation. This results in the conversion of many unwanted flavour compounds into
flavourless products (O'Rourke, 2000).
Flocculent yeasts separate easily at the end of primary fermentation and conditions can
be adjusted such that sufficient yeast can be retained in the beer to effect the flavour
changes required in maturation (Chapter 12). Powdery yeasts, not separating effectively,
may ferment too fully in secondary fermentation and remove all residual extract and may
remain in suspension making clarification difficult. These different situations provide
constant challenges to fermentation and maturation management. In any event the yeast
must have access to fermentable carbohydrate for the process to succeed. This
carbohydrate is provided, as above, by residual gravity in the beer or by the addition of
sugar by priming or by krausening. Krausening is the addition of wort from the active
`krausen' stage of the primary fermentation usually at 510% by volume of the green
beer. In shorter secondary fermentation regimes yeast activity must be intense to achieve
carbonation, purging of the undesirable volatiles, removal of all residual oxygen and
chemical reduction of many compounds. This leads to immediate improvement of flavour
and aroma and flavour stability.

 

[manticle]

Brewing science and practice, chapter 15.2.1. Bold, underline, and Italics added by myself.

Informative but technical explanataion. As someone who obviously understands it better than I can (I've read it before but only once) can you tell me if my following basic process is right or if I should tweak it or change it?

1. Wait till brew is around 1020-ish (depnding on OG - most between 1050 and 1065)
2. Rack to second vessel
3. Leave till Fg reached
4.Leave 3 -5 days further
5. Crash chill/cold condition for 2 -7 days (usually closer to 7)
6. Bulk prime and bottle.

Should I be adding a touch of top cropped yeast or cooling slower?

Cheers

On reading again the article would suggest I cool before racking (to around 8) but the secondary vessel should be warmed (obviously more problematic with plastic).

 

[buttersd70]

Informative but technical explanataion. As someone who obviously understands it better than I can (I've read it before but only once) can you tell me if my following basic process is right or if I should tweak it or change it?

1. Wait till brew is around 1020-ish (depnding on OG - most between 1050 and 1065)
2. Rack to second vessel
3. Leave till Fg reached
4.Leave 3 -5 days further
5. Crash chill/cold condition for 2 -7 days (usually closer to 7)
6. Bulk prime and bottle.

Should I be adding a touch of top cropped yeast or cooling slower?

Cheers

On reading again the article would suggest I cool before racking (to around 8) but the secondary vessel should be warmed (obviously more problematic with plastic).

By warm, it means fermentation temp, and bringing it back up to fermentation temps....To be honest, I skip the chill prior to racking, particularly with highly flocculant yeasts. The chill is to assist some of the yeast in dropping out, so that when you rack you have only yeast in suspension, and not too much. In practice, in a HB setup, physics is on your side anyway, in relation to this. Remember that commercial fermentation vessels are huge.....the time it takes to physically drop is greater than in a short HB fermenter. Stokes law is the law in question....
So in the shorter vessels we use, the yeast drops more quickly than in the taller commercial vessels, so by the time it gets to rack time, it's most likely OK anyway.

As for your points....
1. Wait until 4 SG points above predicted FG
2-6, as you said.

The main point is, you need a lot less yeast than some would think, to clean up the brew. And the small o2 uptake being beneficia to the process, and the release of co2 by the movement of the beer (causing a co2 blanket of it's own, as smurto mentioned earlier),and the continued production of co2 to contribute to this blanket, are often overlooked......due to the lazy, lazy truncation of the term down to 'secondary', which can mean multiple things......the info I posted is in relation to secondary fermentation, more specifically to the traditional English method of secondary fermentation.