Re: [Distillers] Re: New equipment
- abbababbaccc wrote:
Subject: [Distillers] Re: New equipment
That's really interesting, a 12" column that delivers as good as 1 meter column with scrubbers? I'll make an educated guess after
peeking at the theory section of compleat distiller. The packing gives less resistance to the vapor and liquid flow thus having less
pressure than a column filled with scrubbers. You have found a way to efficiently distribute the refluxed liquid over the whole packing volume in order to make it more efficient?Nice try Riku! Sorry, but that is not the whole answer. It's not just the packing . Good packing helps, but my first experiments were carried out using good old scrubbers, and a 4" so-called 'column' gave me 91%. Pic attached:
Would a taller and wider column with more power provide additional benefits in separation via increased reflux and packing volume? It would be very nice to have really precise cuts for all the components while maintaining (or increasing) the output.It might. Haven't tried that, so unable to comment.
Shame I allready built my system, otherwise you'd have one more customer calling. Allthough I might consider that copper mesh packing in future.Let me make one thing clear. This is not a blatant attempt to advertise to the distillers groups to rush out NOW and buy our equipment. Of course, if you want to do that, then we will probably give you a glass of wine to enjoy as you wander around the store :-) The majority of customers will be those who are not on the distillers lists at all, and have no interest in messing around with soldering irons etc and annoying our families with our smelly experiments. When I posted to the lists about our new website, the main motive behind it was simply to inform. Of course, being absolutely honest (which I always am) there was the ulterior motive of gleefully sticking a pin in yet another Old Wives' Tale about whether size matters. Bottom line: if you already have a system that delivers all you wish, then stick to it. The fun is in the building and proudly saying "I made that!".Cheers!Mike N
- i posted below about the pipe in pipes not working. this was when
setup for a thumper though rather than a packed column. maybe they
are onto something. what if you have a packed narrow pipe with a
closed pipe sitting on top of it (like a upside down glass). this
pipe is packed to and has room at the top. then this pipe is inside
another packed pipe. so vapour goes up then down and then up again. i
will sketch it if you cant understand what i mean. if you have a
condenser on top you will have a temp variation in the initial thin
pipe. say 90 at the bottom and 85 at the top. now what will happen
when the vapour at 85 goes back down the outer pipe and is heated by
the lower part of the narrow pipe still at 90C? i remember asking
what happens when vapour goes DOWN a packed column, but cant remember
--- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, "peter_vcb" <viciousblackout@y...>
> Tip & Alexa
> i mentioned pipes in pipes when i first joined here. i think it was
> Tony who put me straight. it would work like a thumper, Mike is not
> fan of thumpers so i doubt it is it. it is essentially the same aswould
> having a horizontal copper spiral which would act like multiple
> thumpers. it would end up choking and spluttering when distillate
> builds up in the bottom of each spiral/pipe-in-pipe. aswell it
> be difficult to clean and remove packing.described.
> any more comments on my "reverse liebeg still"?
> i think a good name for the short column is the NixCaw column!
> --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, BOKAKOB <bokakob@y...> wrote:
> > Eventually it will happen. However it is my belief that there is
> nothing controversial about the height of the column. Combined
> theoretical knowledge, practical close tolerances and careful
> planning along with practical tests can produce results as
> It said only 12" high. Add to this the height of other parts and acolumn
> possibility of "folding" the column inside, making it a concentric
> double column twice as high, and the the whole thing becomes
> 12"+12"+5"=27" or something like that. Taking in account the output
> at 300mL/hour makes it possible. I sincerely hope that both Mikes
> and other people involved in this project will make some money off
> it. Good luck!
> > Brandon Lee <blueflame456@y...> wrote:I can solve the short
> controversy--someone buy a unit dismantle it-photo the parts andput
> it on the web-- then that will clear the matter up--there is alwaysbrother
> going to be something that comes along which is new and improved--
> but just as my indian (choctaw) grandfather told me when i was
> younger--if u have something that works--leave it alone-your
> in the spiritsBlueflame456
> > I can be wrong I must say
> > Cheers, Alex...
> > A
> > ---------------------------------
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > The New Yahoo! Search - Faster. Easier. Bingo.