Author Topic: Dry yeast calculator  (Read 5093 times)

Big Monk

  • Guest
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #15 on: June 13, 2017, 03:30:43 PM »
So does dry yeast make beer that tastes great or less filling?   ;D  The debate rages on! 

It would be really nice to get another data point on dry yeast (Abbaye) so I would encourage you to count if you can.  Personally, I am in the dry yeast has roughly 2X cells of wet camp and think it is unwise to OCD about the cell count.  What's next, counting it for every brew???   

I'm in the "trust but verify" camp. There is no industry in the world that's going to give 300% extra of something if they don't have to!

I'm waiting on a follow up response from Lallemand and I'll be grabbing some Abbaye and some of their conditioning/bottling yeast as well.
   I'm sorry to be the guy who wanders off topic, but I bought some of the Lallemand CBC yeast a bit ago - can't remember exactly why - and I have a question about , if you're buying some I'm guessing you might be familiar with it. My understanding is that it is intended to be added post fermentation, at bottling or kegging. My question is, if this yeast is more attenuating than the fermentation yeast, how can one calculate the correct amount of fermentable sugars to use for priming, if you don't know how much attenuation of the residual sugars remaining in the beer will take place? In other words, if CBC provides significantly higher attenuation than the original yeast, and you prime as you would for the original yeast, don't you risk bottle bombs?

It doesn't quite work like that. The yeast attenuation isn't a factor in the calculations for priming. Priming calcs are temperature and extract based. The assumption in priming calcs is that ALL of the sugar added is fermentable so the conditioning yeast attenuation is inconsequential.

Offline Joe Sr.

  • Official Poobah of No Life.
  • *
  • Posts: 4411
  • Chicago - NORTH SIDE
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #16 on: June 13, 2017, 04:01:34 PM »
It's my understanding that the bottling yeasts were - at least in part - selected for their ability to settle out into a tight layer on the bottom of the bottle.  Not as easily disturbed as other yeasts, I guess.
It's all in the reflexes. - Jack Burton

Offline zwiller

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #17 on: June 13, 2017, 04:17:09 PM »
+1 and to me that means high flocc'r, less attenuation, and less risk of bottle bombs. 
Sam
Sandusky, OH

Offline Philbrew

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 867
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #18 on: June 13, 2017, 05:07:59 PM »
So does dry yeast make beer that tastes great or less filling?   ;D  The debate rages on! 

It would be really nice to get another data point on dry yeast (Abbaye) so I would encourage you to count if you can.  Personally, I am in the dry yeast has roughly 2X cells of wet camp and think it is unwise to OCD about the cell count.  What's next, counting it for every brew???   

I'm in the "trust but verify" camp. There is no industry in the world that's going to give 300% extra of something if they don't have to!

I'm waiting on a follow up response from Lallemand and I'll be grabbing some Abbaye and some of their conditioning/bottling yeast as well.
   I'm sorry to be the guy who wanders off topic, but I bought some of the Lallemand CBC yeast a bit ago - can't remember exactly why - and I have a question about , if you're buying some I'm guessing you might be familiar with it. My understanding is that it is intended to be added post fermentation, at bottling or kegging. My question is, if this yeast is more attenuating than the fermentation yeast, how can one calculate the correct amount of fermentable sugars to use for priming, if you don't know how much attenuation of the residual sugars remaining in the beer will take place? In other words, if CBC provides significantly higher attenuation than the original yeast, and you prime as you would for the original yeast, don't you risk bottle bombs?

It doesn't quite work like that. The yeast attenuation isn't a factor in the calculations for priming. Priming calcs are temperature and extract based. The assumption in priming calcs is that ALL of the sugar added is fermentable so the conditioning yeast attenuation is inconsequential.
I would have to disagree.  If the original yeast is low attenuating and doesn't ferment some types of sugars and the conditioning yeast eats those plus the added sugar, you get gushers.
Many of us would be on a strict liquid diet if it weren't for pretzels.

Big Monk

  • Guest
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #19 on: June 13, 2017, 05:16:00 PM »
So does dry yeast make beer that tastes great or less filling?   ;D  The debate rages on! 

It would be really nice to get another data point on dry yeast (Abbaye) so I would encourage you to count if you can.  Personally, I am in the dry yeast has roughly 2X cells of wet camp and think it is unwise to OCD about the cell count.  What's next, counting it for every brew???   

I'm in the "trust but verify" camp. There is no industry in the world that's going to give 300% extra of something if they don't have to!

I'm waiting on a follow up response from Lallemand and I'll be grabbing some Abbaye and some of their conditioning/bottling yeast as well.
   I'm sorry to be the guy who wanders off topic, but I bought some of the Lallemand CBC yeast a bit ago - can't remember exactly why - and I have a question about , if you're buying some I'm guessing you might be familiar with it. My understanding is that it is intended to be added post fermentation, at bottling or kegging. My question is, if this yeast is more attenuating than the fermentation yeast, how can one calculate the correct amount of fermentable sugars to use for priming, if you don't know how much attenuation of the residual sugars remaining in the beer will take place? In other words, if CBC provides significantly higher attenuation than the original yeast, and you prime as you would for the original yeast, don't you risk bottle bombs?

It doesn't quite work like that. The yeast attenuation isn't a factor in the calculations for priming. Priming calcs are temperature and extract based. The assumption in priming calcs is that ALL of the sugar added is fermentable so the conditioning yeast attenuation is inconsequential.
I would have to disagree.  If the original yeast is low attenuating and doesn't ferment some types of sugars and the conditioning yeast eats those plus the added sugar, you get gushers.

The assumption is that unless you are bottling with remaining extract, or adding extract, that you are at Final Gravity when you bottle.

The yeast I referenced was Lallemand's CBC-1 which is meant to be used with sucrose and dextrose. It does not ferment maltotriose.

Offline zwiller

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #20 on: June 13, 2017, 05:40:10 PM »
On a slight tangent.  Next IPA I plan to switch from SO4 to try London ESB which does not ferment maltotriose.  Normally I am rocking 15% crystal.  Per the Lallemand data sheet: "Maltotriose is present in wort in an average of 10-15% all malt worts".  Back 'er down to 5% or? 

Even further off topic.  ;D  The Lallemand website and yeast info is impressive!  Also, the site shows several other strains I never heard of and have not seen before.  Diamond Lager and Classic Munich Wheat (banana clove in the flavor wheel!)  INTERESTING!
Sam
Sandusky, OH

Offline Visor

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 597
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #21 on: June 13, 2017, 06:01:49 PM »
   Maybe I'm just a bit too bony between the ears, but I have split several batches of beer between two different yeasts and always wind up with different final gravities. If CBC-1 would have fermented a wort to a lower FG than the yeast which was used, wouldn't it attenuate out the sugars it would have had it been the original pitch, plus consume whatever is added for prime?
   The business about better settling out in the bottle sounds familiar.
I spent most of my money on beer, tools and guns, the rest I foolishly squandered on stupid stuff!

Offline stpug

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 721
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #22 on: June 13, 2017, 06:29:50 PM »
On a slight tangent.  Next IPA I plan to switch from SO4 to try London ESB which does not ferment maltotriose.  Normally I am rocking 15% crystal.  Per the Lallemand data sheet: "Maltotriose is present in wort in an average of 10-15% all malt worts".  Back 'er down to 5% or? 

If 15% crystal is where you like the flavors then keep it there.  Sub in some simple sugars (10%) to encourage higher attenuation, and mash f*cking low ;D.  Seriously, mash for maximum attenuation and include simple sugars, and you ***might*** hit 73%AA.  It's an awesome yeast - you just gotta adjust for what you're working with, but that should be standard in brewing anyway.

Offline zwiller

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 570
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #23 on: June 14, 2017, 03:58:28 PM »
So I plug some data into the calculator in the OP and start messing around and got results that I expected.  The example the flars posted with 5G of Notty @ 1.042 was fine for me with 1 packet (9.46g)???  Maybe a browser/java thing? 
Sam
Sandusky, OH

Big Monk

  • Guest
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #24 on: June 14, 2017, 04:46:29 PM »
So I plug some data into the calculator in the OP and start messing around and got results that I expected.  The example the flars posted with 5G of Notty @ 1.042 was fine for me with 1 packet (9.46g)???  Maybe a browser/java thing?

Not sure. I got the same as you. That's ~1 M/ml/°P pitching rate.

Offline Wilbur

  • Brewmaster
  • *****
  • Posts: 550
Re: Dry yeast calculator
« Reply #25 on: June 14, 2017, 06:35:04 PM »
I noticed it doesn't seem to be a calculator as much as a packet counter. Maintaining the same yeast and batch size, it recommends the same pitch size up to a point. For ale yeasts it seems to change above 1.060. Kind of seems disappointing, I would hope they'd give some approximate pitching rates, etc. I understand a lot of it depends on how old the yeast is, and how it's been stored, etc. but I'd imagine they should at least factor in expiration date.