--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "rye_junkie1" <rye_junkie@...> wrote:
>
> --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "abbababbaccc" <abbababbaccc@> wrote:
> >
> > I know some of you have built your versions of the Thor's hammer so here's
some of my recent whisky making experiences:
>
>
> What is Thors Hammer (the Still Version)  I have heard the legend but never
met the actual beast.
>
> Mason
>

That's my latest reflux condenser / automatic heads remover combo as described
in the book. Looks a bit like Harry's cross flow condenser on the outside.

Slainte, Riku

Do you not think there's some value even on the end of a reflux rig? I
haven't got one, and I've been thinking of making one.... Seems to me it
would be worth being able to monitor the ABV output over time...

R

abbababbaccc wrote:
> I meant to say whisky and other flavored drinks. Must get me morning cup of
tea before I start writing these things.
>
> Slainte, Riku
>
> --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "abbababbaccc" <abbababbaccc@...> wrote:
>
>> It is quite useful if you make whisky with a potstill. Other than that
there's little use for it.
>>
>> Slainte, Riku
>>
>>

With reflux rig the value is 95.6% all the time if your rig is good and you do
things correctly. It COULD be useful if you were to use reflux rig for flavored
drinks in ensuring the repeatability, but I can see no point in it for neutral
alcohol. Either the ethanol is neutral or not, you can and often will have non
neutral alcohol at 95.6% ABV as the tails set in.

Actually the Thor's hammer whisky experiment I wrote about, I was using parrots
beak for that. Had I written down the starting ABV and amount of mash, ABV of
cut points and flow rate for reflux action I could repeat that batch of whiskey
without any trouble. Almost as easy as a pot still, only you get more hearts
out. The key to that procedure was the reflux that happens as the column warms
up. It compresses the heads quite a lot which makes for less heads. The reflux
return I started after the heads cut which again compressed tails considerably.

Slainte, Riku

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Rasputin Paracelsus <rasputin@...> wrote:
>
> Do you not think there's some value even on the end of a reflux rig? I
> haven't got one, and I've been thinking of making one.... Seems to me it
> would be worth being able to monitor the ABV output over time...
>
> R
>
> abbababbaccc wrote:
> > I meant to say whisky and other flavored drinks. Must get me morning cup of
tea before I start writing these things.
> >
> > Slainte, Riku
> >
> > --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "abbababbaccc" <abbababbaccc@> wrote:
> >
> >> It is quite useful if you make whisky with a potstill. Other than that
there's little use for it.
> >>
> >> Slainte, Riku
> >>
> >>
>

Thank-you!

R

abbababbaccc wrote:
> With reflux rig the value is 95.6% all the time if your rig is good and you do
things correctly. It COULD be useful if you were to use reflux rig for flavored
drinks in ensuring the repeatability, but I can see no point in it for neutral
alcohol. Either the ethanol is neutral or not, you can and often will have non
neutral alcohol at 95.6% ABV as the tails set in.
>
> Actually the Thor's hammer whisky experiment I wrote about, I was using
parrots beak for that. Had I written down the starting ABV and amount of mash,
ABV of cut points and flow rate for reflux action I could repeat that batch of
whiskey without any trouble. Almost as easy as a pot still, only you get more
hearts out. The key to that procedure was the reflux that happens as the column
warms up. It compresses the heads quite a lot which makes for less heads. The
reflux return I started after the heads cut which again compressed tails
considerably.
>
> Slainte, Riku
>
> --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Rasputin Paracelsus <rasputin@...> wrote:
>
>> Do you not think there's some value even on the end of a reflux rig? I
>> haven't got one, and I've been thinking of making one.... Seems to me it
>> would be worth being able to monitor the ABV output over time...
>>
>> R
>>
>>

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "abbababbaccc" <abbababbaccc@...> wrote:
<snip>

  The key to that procedure was the reflux that happens as the column warms up.
It compresses the heads quite a lot which makes for less heads. The reflux
return I started after the heads cut which again compressed tails considerably.
>
> Slainte, Riku


Riku,

May I suggest we NOT use the word "compressed"?  It may give the illusion that
we are applying pressure, and there's (almost) no pressure in our stills.

You can compress water, or almost any material. However, it requires a great
deal of pressure to accomplish a little compression. For that reason, liquids
and solids are sometimes referred to as being incompressible.


The word to use should be "concentrate", which is increased strength or
percentage of a substance (heads / tails) in a given volume of distillate.

Sorry if it sounds pedantic but ther is a real difference, especially for
newcomers to the hobby.


Slainte!
regards Harry
ps...posted in public only for enlightening purposes.  No malice intended.  :)

Meet the Maker
http://tinyurl.com/da855o

wal

I'll be there at the conference and the Meet the Maker with or without free
tickets. See ya there.
Pint O' Shine

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "waljaco" <waljaco@...> wrote:
>
>
> Meet the Maker
> http://tinyurl.com/da855o
>
> wal
>

You're right Harry. I was thinking heads as a layer on top of the column which
in this case gets "compressed" as in coming shorter and more concentrated. Well,
English being my third language these things do happen.

Slainte, Riku

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "Harry" <gnikomson2000@...> wrote:
>
>
> Riku,
>
> May I suggest we NOT use the word "compressed"?  It may give the illusion that
we are applying pressure, and there's (almost) no pressure in our stills.
>
> You can compress water, or almost any material. However, it requires a great
deal of pressure to accomplish a little compression. For that reason, liquids
and solids are sometimes referred to as being incompressible.
>
>
> The word to use should be "concentrate", which is increased strength or
percentage of a substance (heads / tails) in a given volume of distillate.
>
> Sorry if it sounds pedantic but ther is a real difference, especially for
newcomers to the hobby.
>
>
> Slainte!
> regards Harry
> ps...posted in public only for enlightening purposes.  No malice intended.  :)
>

I've got a parrot beak.  It's fun to watch, but I've essentially stopped using
it in favor of monitoring the vapor temperature at takeoff.  One can easily work
backward from vapor temperature to %ABV, right?  Is there any reason to prefer a
parrot beak?


--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Rasputin Paracelsus <rasputin@...> wrote:
>
> Do you not think there's some value even on the end of a reflux rig? I
> haven't got one, and I've been thinking of making one.... Seems to me it
> would be worth being able to monitor the ABV output over time...
>
> R
>
> abbababbaccc wrote:
> > I meant to say whisky and other flavored drinks. Must get me morning cup of
tea before I start writing these things.
> >
> > Slainte, Riku
> >
> > --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "abbababbaccc" <abbababbaccc@> wrote:
> >
> >> It is quite useful if you make whisky with a potstill. Other than that
there's little use for it.
> >>
> >> Slainte, Riku
> >>
> >>
>

Parrot's beak is typically more accurate than your thermometer. As an example
the ABV range of 57%-62% presents a change from 81C-82C in vapor temperature.
Unless you have an accurate digital thermometer the parrot's beak is better in
accuracy.

As a negative aspect the heads components do mix and stay longer in the beak due
to it's volume making your heads cut larger. On the other hand this may well
contribute to the flavor of whisky, these things are very hard to judge
correctly without extensive and detailed testing.

Slainte, Riku

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "PhilipWilson" <pgw@...> wrote:
>
> I've got a parrot beak.  It's fun to watch, but I've essentially stopped using
it in favor of monitoring the vapor temperature at takeoff.  One can easily work
backward from vapor temperature to %ABV, right?  Is there any reason to prefer a
parrot beak?
>
>
>

OK, I'll correct meself. 57% ABV = 81.9C, 62% ABV = 81.4C. I read the wrong line
in the table... That 81-82C would then be 65%-56% which would be the same as
difference inbetween regular cut and very late cut.

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "abbababbaccc" <abbababbaccc@...> wrote:
>
> Parrot's beak is typically more accurate than your thermometer. As an example
the ABV range of 57%-62% presents a change from 81C-82C in vapor temperature.
Unless you have an accurate digital thermometer the parrot's beak is better in
accuracy.
>
> As a negative aspect the heads components do mix and stay longer in the beak
due to it's volume making your heads cut larger. On the other hand this may well
contribute to the flavor of whisky, these things are very hard to judge
correctly without extensive and detailed testing.
>
> Slainte, Riku
>
> --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "PhilipWilson" <pgw@> wrote:
> >
> > I've got a parrot beak.  It's fun to watch, but I've essentially stopped
using it in favor of monitoring the vapor temperature at takeoff.  One can
easily work backward from vapor temperature to %ABV, right?  Is there any reason
to prefer a parrot beak?
> >
> >
> >
>

Hello group,
I have some wine to distil to make some brandy.
Besides the "Home Distillation of Alcohol" website and Harry's site is there a
good source of information on the web about making brandy?

I would like to know more about making cuts, the smells and taste versus the
percentage alcohol and the still vapour temperature.

Any help would be greatly appreciated.
regards

Hari.

I think I need new glasses, I was AGAIN reading the wrong line of that b***dy
table as pointed out by one of our members. Or perhaps I just need to learn how
to use it ...

Anyway, new example now:
55% abv -> 92.6C
65% abv -> 89.7C
75% abv -> 85.2C

The problem as I pointed out is the accuracy. Now a high quality digital
thermometer works just as well as parrot's beak if you know the cut points. The
problem is that cheap thermoprobes have 0.2C accuracy and cheap digital
thermometers/probes sometimes loose their calibration (as has happened to me) or
are calibrated wrong to begin with. With non-digital thermometers the cut can be
done but the accuracy is not very good.

Another problem with thermometers is that what they show can also vary depending
on the location in the still head and mounting (heat conductivity) and so on.

If you want to use thermometer, by all means do it. Just remember that you need
to find the correct cutpoint values for your still and thermometer. With parrots
beak it is possible to give out generic cut points for a generic pot still, with
thermometer there are too many variables to do that accurately.

Slainte, Riku


--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "abbababbaccc" <abbababbaccc@...> wrote:
>
> OK, I'll correct meself. 57% ABV = 81.9C, 62% ABV = 81.4C. I read the wrong
line in the table... That 81-82C would then be 65%-56% which would be the same
as difference inbetween regular cut and very late cut.
>
> --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "abbababbaccc" <abbababbaccc@> wrote:
> >
> > Parrot's beak is typically more accurate than your thermometer. As an
example the ABV range of 57%-62% presents a change from 81C-82C in vapor
temperature. Unless you have an accurate digital thermometer the parrot's beak
is better in accuracy.
> >
> > As a negative aspect the heads components do mix and stay longer in the beak
due to it's volume making your heads cut larger. On the other hand this may well
contribute to the flavor of whisky, these things are very hard to judge
correctly without extensive and detailed testing.
> >
> > Slainte, Riku
> >
> >

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, abbababbaccc <abbababbaccc@...> wrote:
>
> The problem as I pointed out is the accuracy. Now a high
> quality digital thermometer works just as well as
> parrot's beak if you know the cut points. The problem is
> that cheap thermoprobes have 0.2C accuracy and cheap digital
> thermometers/probes sometimes loose their calibration (as
> has happened to me) or are calibrated wrong to begin with.
> With non-digital thermometers the cut can be done but the
> accuracy is not very good.

Or in my case, my cheap ol' thermometer is of unknown accuracy, but only
displays to the whole degree.  It's a handy tool to keep an eye on things as the
rig is warming up and to have a ballpark idea of where I am in the run.  In the
end, the parrot's beak fine tunes that without having to invest in a more spendy
thermometer.  I still go primarily by taste/smell, but all the tools have their
uses.

Trid
-the only guarantee we can make is that there are no absolutes

Exactly the point. For a beginner parrots beak and ABV based cuts serve as
extremely useful guide for getting the feel of that taste and smell. Once you
figure it out and start making cuts to your taste you can do without the beak or
thermometer. Well, for ending the distillation they still serve a purpose of
course.

Slainte, Riku

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Trid <triddlywinks@...> wrote:
>
> Or in my case, my cheap ol' thermometer is of unknown accuracy, but only
displays to the whole degree.  It's a handy tool to keep an eye on things as the
rig is warming up and to have a ballpark idea of where I am in the run.  In the
end, the parrot's beak fine tunes that without having to invest in a more spendy
thermometer.  I still go primarily by taste/smell, but all the tools have their
uses.
>
> Trid
> -the only guarantee we can make is that there are no absolutes
>

As a new member, Hello all, I have been brewing and distilling for about 5 years
now and want to improve my brew (rum). Have been using a home constructed reflux
still and would like to move on to a more specific pot still for rum without
essencing everything. So I need some help, suggestions, or to be told I am
totally mad
A australian rum lover.

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "noelbaker46" <noelbaker46@...> wrote:
>
> As a new member, Hello all, I have been brewing and distilling for about 5
years now and want to improve my brew (rum). Have been using a home constructed
reflux still and would like to move on to a more specific pot still for rum
without essencing everything. So I need some help, suggestions, or to be told I
am totally mad
> A australian rum lover.
>
This is not a specific answer to your post but being that you are new, if you do
some searches on this group you will find that there are people that have been
successful at making rum with a reflux still and not using essences.  These
people have posted how and when to make the cuts to get the flavors you are
after.  if i may, i suggest you do some reading here and on the home distillers
web site before going through with the pot still.

good luck.

No, your not mad. You're simply setting out on a long trail with diverse routes.

Some use Dunder. Others don't.Some use brown sugar. Others, white. Some use
ordinary yeast. Others, special yeast. Some say you need a tropical climate.
Others have got results in a temperate one. Some get good result in one strip.
Others would use two. Some use a Liebig. Others an un-refluxed, fluxed still.
Some use the middle third of fresh dunder. Some wait for it to go off. Some make
their caramel. Others would buy it. Some use dunder simply for its water
content. Molasses is a subject of its own. Oaking. You might get away with
charring some with a blow lamp.

The good thing about distilling is that it kills off most of the un-pleasant
things and what you have left is usually pleasantly drinkable or flavourable.

Good Luck!

Tony

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "noelbaker46" <noelbaker46@...> wrote:
>
> As a new member, Hello all, I have been brewing and distilling for about 5
years now and want to improve my brew (rum). Have been using a home constructed
reflux still and would like to move on to a more specific pot still for rum
without essencing everything. So I need some help, suggestions, or to be told I
am totally mad
> A australian rum lover.
>

From: Trid

To: Distillers@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Friday, April 03, 2009 12:57 PM

Subject: Re: [Distillers] Re: Parrot's beak...

--- On Fri, 4/3/09, abbababbaccc <abbababbaccc@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> The problem as I pointed out is the accuracy. Now a high
> quality digital thermometer works just as well as
> parrot's beak if you know the cut points. The problem is
> that cheap thermoprobes have 0.2C accuracy and cheap digital
> thermometers/probes sometimes loose their calibration (as
> has happened to me) or are calibrated wrong to begin with.
> With non-digital thermometers the cut can be done but the
> accuracy is not very good.

Or in my case, my cheap ol' thermometer is of unknown accuracy, but only displays to the whole degree. It's a handy tool to keep an eye on things as the rig is warming up and to have a ballpark idea of where I am in the run. In the end, the parrot's beak fine tunes that without having to invest in a more spendy thermometer. I still go primarily by taste/smell, but all the tools have their uses.

Trid
-the only guarantee we can make is that there are no absolutes

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "Zapata Vive" <zapatavive@...> wrote:
>
> Question on reading a hydrometer in a beak precisely.  I admit I've been
wondering this for a long time, and just guessing.  Do I read at the level of
the top of the beak?  At the level of the bubble on top of the beak opening?  At
the slightly higher spot that rises where it meets the glass of the hydrometer? 
Personally I think that the top of the bubble, but not where it curves up where
it meets the glass.  At least that is where I've been reading it, but don't know
for sure.  It's only about 2% either way, and that fine of a cut I make by taste
anyway, but always been curious.
>
> And just a note, I don't even put my thermometer in for flavored runs anymore.
Why bother?  I can guestimate what the hydrometer reads from well across the
room by how much of it is sticking up out of the beak.  Have to be right on top
of it to read the thermometer.
>
> Thermometer is used for making tails cut on neutral though.  It will rise
before the ABV drops in my experience.


That slightly curvy bit where liquid touches the shaft of the hydrometer (or
thermometer) is known as the Meniscus,  Always measure the lower surface level
of the meniscus.  See here for a fun thing to make...
http://www.ecawa.asn.au/home/jfuller/liquids/hydrometers.htm

Slainte!
regards Harry

'Craft Whiskey Distilling' by Bill Owens was mentioned earlier (message 44652).

He is planning to release a new book in November 2009,
subtitled
'An enthusiast's guide to artis(t)an distilling of potent potables'

http://tinyurl.com/cy6v2l

wal

Wal this is a huge coincidence. I was at the ADI Brany Conference, this weekend.
I have been invited by Bill to come to his place and teach him and his crew
Micro scale corn mashing.
Some of the things he said he would like to add to the information are:
1. Sour Starter
2. Sour steeping
3. Steam injection cooking
4. Fermentation on grains
5. Practical Separation of the grains between fermentation and distillation.
6. Starting the "Sour Mash" cycle using a combination of back set and lees.

His vision of micro scale is mashing in a 220L polyester barrel with the top
removed and a ss keg as a boiler for the steam.
I know there were others there, from these groups and forums whenever this
discussion came up. This was my take on what Bill was specifying was the reason
for the invitation and I am sure there are others that agree he want to
demonstrate the highest quality micro process that could be repeated by anyone
with a small investment.
I intend to show him my version of mashing in the Woodford Reserve Style. I
checked with Chris Morris in March when I attended the Bourbon Academy that they
are using injection for mashing but have eliminated injection for distilling. He
confirmed that this was so. I have a picture of their piping to their cooker to
confirm it for myself.
I am hoping this will be a value to those wanting to produce exceptional quality
all grain spirits. I do believe this book is going down the "Coffee Table" style
and will have lots of pictures. The lack of demonstration and visuals is where
most books have fallen very short to date.
I am looking forward to sharing all these techniques. He stated a June time line
for the mashing. I'll keep you updated.



--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "waljaco" <waljaco@...> wrote:
>
> 'Craft Whiskey Distilling' by Bill Owens was mentioned earlier (message
44652).
>
> He is planning to release a new book in November 2009,
> subtitled
> 'An enthusiast's guide to artis(t)an distilling of potent potables'
>
> http://tinyurl.com/cy6v2l
>
> wal
>

--- On Tue, 4/7/09, Sherman <pintoshine@...> wrote:
>
> 3. Steam injection cooking
<snip>
> His vision of micro scale is mashing in a 220L polyester
> barrel with the top removed and a ss keg as a boiler for the
> steam.

Have you any first hand time steam mashing?  I know possible questions that have
come up elsewhere is denaturing enzymes due to excessive heat and such things.
Either way, it sounds like a nifty experiment to undertake along that scale.  I
have a stainless milk can that I might be able to fashion into a boiler for the
sake of experimentation.

Thoughts?  Ideas?  Input?

Trid
-mad tinker is warming up...RUN!

I understand the question quite well and this is a question I ask others
regularly. It mostly comes in the terms of "Can you show me?"
I would not volunteer to demonstrate a process that I have not worn out. I hate
being made to look stupid because of a unplanned gotcha.

I have been steam mashing for more than ten years. I developed a steam masher
that works on as little as 20 L at a time for my own personal use. My experience
with syrup making and mashing barley for making thickened malt extract syrup,
since 1980 has helped to build a foundation of similar technologies that lends
well to this art.

I have never encountered a difficulty with denaturing enzymes using steam
injection. My worst issue was to work out how to get the grain in the hot water
without making dough balls and how much grain to start with being the water from
the steam accumulates in the tun. Other issues are how to get better conversion
with less protein bonding the starch and more pleasant aromas and more mouth
feel from the finished spirit.
I am always happy to answer any questions and show picture of the processes that
I have accomplish in making practical. I not one to discuss discuss practices at
a theoretical level unless I am experimenting and then I will be clear when
proposing solutions.

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Trid <triddlywinks@...> wrote:
>
>
> --- On Tue, 4/7/09, Sherman <pintoshine@...> wrote:
> >
> > 3. Steam injection cooking
> <snip>
> > His vision of micro scale is mashing in a 220L polyester
> > barrel with the top removed and a ss keg as a boiler for the
> > steam.
>
> Have you any first hand time steam mashing?  I know possible questions that
have come up elsewhere is denaturing enzymes due to excessive heat and such
things.
> Either way, it sounds like a nifty experiment to undertake along that scale. 
I have a stainless milk can that I might be able to fashion into a boiler for
the sake of experimentation.
>
> Thoughts?  Ideas?  Input?
>
> Trid
> -mad tinker is warming up...RUN!
>

--- On Tue, 4/7/09, Sherman <pintoshine@...> wrote:
>
> I understand the question quite well and this is a question
> I ask others regularly. It mostly comes in the terms of
> "Can you show me?"
> I would not volunteer to demonstrate a process that I have
> not worn out. I hate being made to look stupid because of a
> unplanned gotcha.

Been there...done that...still embarrassed...

> I am always happy to answer any questions and show picture
> of the processes that I have accomplish in making practical.
> I not one to discuss discuss practices at a theoretical
> level unless I am experimenting and then I will be clear
> when proposing solutions.

Can you give a quick 'n dirty description of the mechanics and procedure?

Trid
-seeing some 'sperimentin' in my future

Sherman!

Sorry to have missed you at Alameda. Bill assured me that you were onsite, but
it seemed we just kept passing each other. Hope you got the ticket to the
tasting I left (though it seemed that all of us who attended has plenty enough
to sample regardless).

I haven't seen the final version of the book, but I contributed a chapter and
Mike McCaw and Ian Smiley both wrote for it. We'll see what it looks like with
edits. Max Watman (author of the forthcoming "Chasing the White Dog") has some
in there as well as Bill Smith and Drew Faulkner from ADI.

Glad to hear you'll be coming back West for some mashing. If you end up in
Hayward, give a call or email: I'm always looking for an excuse to hit northern
California.

~ rowley


--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "Sherman" <pintoshine@...> wrote:
>
> Wal this is a huge coincidence. I was at the ADI Brany Conference, this
weekend. I have been invited by Bill to come to his place and teach him and his
crew Micro scale corn mashing.
> Some of the things he said he would like to add to the information are:
> 1. Sour Starter
> 2. Sour steeping
> 3. Steam injection cooking
> 4. Fermentation on grains
> 5. Practical Separation of the grains between fermentation and distillation.
> 6. Starting the "Sour Mash" cycle using a combination of back set and lees.
>
> His vision of micro scale is mashing in a 220L polyester barrel with the top
removed and a ss keg as a boiler for the steam.
> I know there were others there, from these groups and forums whenever this
discussion came up. This was my take on what Bill was specifying was the reason
for the invitation and I am sure there are others that agree he want to
demonstrate the highest quality micro process that could be repeated by anyone
with a small investment.
> I intend to show him my version of mashing in the Woodford Reserve Style. I
checked with Chris Morris in March when I attended the Bourbon Academy that they
are using injection for mashing but have eliminated injection for distilling. He
confirmed that this was so. I have a picture of their piping to their cooker to
confirm it for myself.
> I am hoping this will be a value to those wanting to produce exceptional
quality all grain spirits. I do believe this book is going down the "Coffee
Table" style and will have lots of pictures. The lack of demonstration and
visuals is where most books have fallen very short to date.
> I am looking forward to sharing all these techniques. He stated a June time
line for the mashing. I'll keep you updated.
>

----- Original Message -----

From: Trid

To: Distillers@yahoogroups.com

Sent: Tuesday, April 07, 2009 3:40 PM

Subject: [Distillers] Steam Mashing (Was: The Art of Distilling Whiskey and Other Spirits)

--- On Tue, 4/7/09, Sherman <pintoshine@artisan-distiller.org> wrote:
>
> 3. Steam injection cooking
<snip>
> His vision of micro scale is mashing in a 220L polyester
> barrel with the top removed and a ss keg as a boiler for the
> steam.

Have you any first hand time steam mashing? I know possible questions that have come up elsewhere is denaturing enzymes due to excessive heat and such things.
Either way, it sounds like a nifty experiment to undertake along that scale. I have a stainless milk can that I might be able to fashion into a boiler for the sake of experimentation.

Thoughts? Ideas? Input?

Trid
-mad tinker is warming up...RUN!

--- On Tue, 4/7/09, Zapata Vive <zapatavive@...> wrote:
Several homebrewers have done it with great success
and described their results thoroughly.  I've just started dabbling.
Just to point out though, that you'll want to get some stainless tube, as you
want to super heat the steam, not just pipe it over straight from the
boiler.  Most folks are doing this by making a coil of stainless tube which
is between the flame and the pot.  From this coil the steam goes to the
mash tun, either straight, or into a type of diffuser of some sort.

I'll share some links and more details when I have
more time, but it is a fascinating subject I'd like to explore further and
perfect so I'd love more details.

==================

Right nifty, thanks :)
In the mean time, I'll poke around the intarwebs and see what I can turn up.  I
have an abundance of copper and no stainless on hand so I might give that a try
for the superheat (unless there's compelling evidence to NOT use copper).

Trid
-crap...rather be doing this than the "day job"

--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Trid <triddlywinks@...> wrote:
> Right nifty, thanks :)
> In the mean time, I'll poke around the intarwebs and see what I can turn up.  I have an abundance of copper and no stainless on hand so I might give that a try for the superheat (unless there's compelling evidence to NOT use copper).
>
> Trid
> -crap...rather be doing this than the "day job"
>

You want steam generators?

http://www.nature-helps.com/Distillation/essentie/production/EN/alembiceng.html

Slainte!
regards Harry