Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: nutrizima enzymes

Expand Messages
  • Harry
    ... That s a hard, and very expensive, way to do conversions )if it even works). Bite the bullet and order your enzymes online.
    Message 1 of 19 , Jun 2, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Louis Lenz <loulenz2002@...> wrote:
      >
      > i was hoping to use the pills as my enzymes for conversion, for a corn whiskey mash.  If these would work what kind of quantity would i use for a 5gal. mash with 4.5kgs of flaked corn.  Lou
      >



      That's a hard, and very expensive, way to do conversions )if it even works). Bite the bullet and order your enzymes online. http://www.milehidistilling.com/Alpha_Amylase_Enzyme_1_Pound_p/13215.htm

      BA-100 and GA-100 enzymes are the exact same enzymes used by both the beverage alcohol and fuel alcohol industries. These are very concentrated and just 1/10 pound of each of these enzymes will break down 100 pounds of grain or starch into fermentable glucose.

      For 30 bucks + shipping you'll have 2 pounds of powder, enough for 1,000# grain.


      Slainte!
      regards Harry
    • Rasputin Paracelsus
      Hello A while back I asked a question about setting up a VM on a 3 column rather than 2 . There was some variance in opinion with regards to the constriction
      Message 2 of 19 , Jun 2, 2009
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello

        A while back I asked a question about setting up a VM on a 3" column
        rather than 2". There was some variance in opinion with regards to the
        constriction of the vapour for turbulence purposes. (I note this here
        only for the record, it's not really the focus of my question this time
        around.)

        Supposing that problem were to be solved in an acceptable fashion--I am
        wondering about the Cross-flow condenser itself. Given that the
        cross-sectional increase is 2.25:1 (3-squared over 2-squared)

        * would I then want 2.25 times as much surface area in terms of
        coolant pipes?
        * if so, perhaps most simply implemented by using 2.25 times more
        pipes of the same size (smaller pipes yield greater surface area
        per volume than larger ones) and
        * presumably this would mean a correponding increase in pump power...

        (I assume I can sort out the question of the liebig adjustment without
        too much problem using the handy calculator on the homedistiller site...)

        Thanks

        R
      • Harry
        ... time ... am ... power... ... site...) ... There s a lot of fudge factor built in to a 2 crossflow. Increasing the coolant flow volume is the easiest
        Message 3 of 19 , Jun 2, 2009
        • 0 Attachment

          --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Rasputin Paracelsus <rasputin@...> wrote:

          >
          > Hello
          >
          > A while back I asked a question about setting up a VM on a 3" column
          > rather than 2". There was some variance in opinion with regards to the
          > constriction of the vapour for turbulence purposes. (I note this here
          > only for the record, it's not really the focus of my question this time
          > around.)
          >
          > Supposing that problem were to be solved in an acceptable fashion--I am
          > wondering about the Cross-flow condenser itself. Given that the
          > cross-sectional increase is 2.25:1 (3-squared over 2-squared)
          >
          >     * would I then want 2.25 times as much surface area in terms of
          >       coolant pipes?
          >     * if so, perhaps most simply implemented by using 2.25 times more
          >       pipes of the same size (smaller pipes yield greater surface area
          >       per volume than larger ones) and
          >     * presumably this would mean a correponding increase in pump power...
          >
          > (I assume I can sort out the question of the liebig adjustment without
          > too much problem using the handy calculator on the homedistiller site...)
          >
          > Thanks
          >
          > R
          >

           

          There's a lot of "fudge factor" built in to a 2" crossflow.  Increasing the coolant flow volume is the easiest way of removing heat and ramping up performance of any existing condenser.  Because there is little restriction/resistance in the crossflow's multi-tube coolant arrangement (parallel flow), you can increase the coolant flow considerably to suit the amount of vapor being fed in.

           That's a decided advantage over coils, which must be designed to suit the particular rig's vapor capacity.  Coolant flow in coils has limited adjustability due to high friction (requires high-pressure pumping).

          It's not unusual to have coolant flows of 6+ litres per minute in a 2" crossflow.
          However, if for some reason you don't want to up the coolant flow, and you want to design a larger one specifically for your volume & velocity of vapour flow, then you could start by studying the following basic math and parameters.  It ain't as simple as people think.

          Slainte!
          regards Harry

           

           

           

        • Rasputin Paracelsus
          Hi Harry, Quick and brief responses inline. ... Yes, I had consdiered this idea as well, as it was clear to me that in the Cross-flow the resistance was pretty
          Message 4 of 19 , Jun 2, 2009
          • 0 Attachment
            Hi Harry,

            Quick and brief responses inline.

            Harry wrote:
            > There's a lot of "fudge factor" built in to a 2" crossflow.
            > Increasing the coolant flow volume is the easiest way of removing heat
            > and ramping up performance of any existing condenser. Because there
            > is little restriction/resistance in the crossflow's multi-tube coolant
            > arrangement (parallel flow), you can increase the coolant flow
            > considerably to suit the amount of vapor being fed in.
            Yes, I had consdiered this idea as well, as it was clear to me that in
            the Cross-flow the resistance was pretty low, comparatively speaking.
            >
            > It's not unusual to have coolant flows of 6+ litres per minute in a 2"
            > crossflow.
            >
            I seem to recall that was a standard figure in your design...
            >
            > However, if for some reason you don't want to up the coolant flow, and
            > you want to design a larger one specifically for your volume &
            > velocity of vapour flow, then you could start by studying the
            > following basic math and parameters. It ain't as simple as people think.
            >
            That, I know from all our past interchanges--which is why I asked the
            question. I'll be happy to study these equations somewhat (I started out
            in astrophysics but ultimately ended up in computer science... and that
            was 30 years ago almost; so I'll get some of it at least). But sounds
            like maybe the bigger condenser may not be necessary, so long as I
            increase the flow...

            That's helpful in itself. Thanks

            R
          • Harry
            ... I ll be happy to study these equations somewhat (I started out ... You re most welcome. I could have just said up the flow rate , but some people wouldn t
            Message 5 of 19 , Jun 2, 2009
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Rasputin Paracelsus <rasputin@...> wrote:
              I'll be happy to study these equations somewhat (I started out
              > in astrophysics but ultimately ended up in computer science... and that
              > was 30 years ago almost; so I'll get some of it at least). But sounds
              > like maybe the bigger condenser may not be necessary, so long as I
              > increase the flow...
              >
              > That's helpful in itself. Thanks
              >
              > R
              >


              You're most welcome.
              I could have just said "up the flow rate", but some people wouldn't have accepted that or understood why. It happens on occasion.

              I posted those pages to show people what's involved in condenser design and to back up why I said to "up the flow rate". Let me know how you interpret the figures. :)

              Slainte!
              regards Harry
            • gff_stwrt
              Hi, Rasputin, A couple of thoughts from someone with no expertise at all in this. If you re not sure it will have enough capacity, make the tubes a bit longer.
              Message 6 of 19 , Jun 2, 2009
              • 0 Attachment
                Hi, Rasputin,

                A couple of thoughts from someone with no expertise at all in this.

                If you're not sure it will have enough capacity, make the tubes a bit longer. So long as the maximum water flow is not too small (small diameter of the tubes/low capacity of the pump) you will have the benefit of increased area of cooling surfaces, WITH NO EXTRA WORK (same number of tubes).

                And would you need a liebig at all if you have a cross-flow condenser of sufficient capacity with a bit in reserve?

                Regards,

                The Baker

                PS I want one of those condensers one day. B

                --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Rasputin Paracelsus <rasputin@...> wrote:
                >
                > Hi Harry,
                >
                > Quick and brief responses inline.
                >
                > Harry wrote:
                > > There's a lot of "fudge factor" built in to a 2" crossflow.
                > > Increasing the coolant flow volume is the easiest way of removing heat
                > > and ramping up performance of any existing condenser. Because there
                > > is little restriction/resistance in the crossflow's multi-tube coolant
                > > arrangement (parallel flow), you can increase the coolant flow
                > > considerably to suit the amount of vapor being fed in.
                > Yes, I had consdiered this idea as well, as it was clear to me that in
                > the Cross-flow the resistance was pretty low, comparatively speaking.
                > >
                > > It's not unusual to have coolant flows of 6+ litres per minute in a 2"
                > > crossflow.
                > >
                > I seem to recall that was a standard figure in your design...
                > >
                > > However, if for some reason you don't want to up the coolant flow, and
                > > you want to design a larger one specifically for your volume &
                > > velocity of vapour flow, then you could start by studying the
                > > following basic math and parameters. It ain't as simple as people think.
                > >
                > That, I know from all our past interchanges--which is why I asked the
                > question. I'll be happy to study these equations somewhat (I started out
                > in astrophysics but ultimately ended up in computer science... and that
                > was 30 years ago almost; so I'll get some of it at least). But sounds
                > like maybe the bigger condenser may not be necessary, so long as I
                > increase the flow...
                >
                > That's helpful in itself. Thanks
                >
                > R
                >
              • Rasputin Paracelsus
                Hello Baker, Thanks for the comments. Yes, longer is not a big deal, is it. As far as I can see, the liebig is needed because all the X-flow does is ensure
                Message 7 of 19 , Jun 3, 2009
                • 0 Attachment
                  Hello Baker,

                  Thanks for the comments. Yes, longer is not a big deal, is it.

                  As far as I can see, the liebig is needed because all the X-flow does is
                  ensure reflux. Still need a condenser to deal with the vapours taken
                  off, right?

                  (Someone correct me if I'm out to lunch. Actually, at the moment, I'm
                  out doing a stripping run on one of my MUM washes. Started it May 21st.
                  Last night, it was very slow, today quiet and down to 0.990. The other
                  one, with the slow BK-1, is still going at a reasonable rate)

                  R

                  gff_stwrt wrote:
                  > Hi, Rasputin,
                  >
                  > A couple of thoughts from someone with no expertise at all in this.
                  >
                  > If you're not sure it will have enough capacity, make the tubes a bit longer. So long as the maximum water flow is not too small (small diameter of the tubes/low capacity of the pump) you will have the benefit of increased area of cooling surfaces, WITH NO EXTRA WORK (same number of tubes).
                  >
                  > And would you need a liebig at all if you have a cross-flow condenser of sufficient capacity with a bit in reserve?
                  >
                  > Regards,
                  >
                  > The Baker
                  >
                  > PS I want one of those condensers one day. B
                  >
                • gff_stwrt
                  Hi, Rasputin, Thanks for that, I only use a pot still and I m still learning about the different classes of reflux still. I guess you are talking about vapour
                  Message 8 of 19 , Jun 3, 2009
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Hi, Rasputin,

                    Thanks for that, I only use a pot still and I'm still learning about the different classes of reflux still.
                    I guess you are talking about vapour management and I was probably thinking of liquid management (?) where a part of the cooled liquid in the dam at the bottom of the condenser is drawn off, and with a condenser of sufficient capacity would, I expect, already be cool enough without a liebig.

                    Regards,

                    The Baker
                    --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Rasputin Paracelsus <rasputin@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Hello Baker,
                    >
                    > Thanks for the comments. Yes, longer is not a big deal, is it.
                    >
                    > As far as I can see, the liebig is needed because all the X-flow does is
                    > ensure reflux. Still need a condenser to deal with the vapours taken
                    > off, right?
                    >
                    > (Someone correct me if I'm out to lunch. Actually, at the moment, I'm
                    > out doing a stripping run on one of my MUM washes. Started it May 21st.
                    > Last night, it was very slow, today quiet and down to 0.990. The other
                    > one, with the slow BK-1, is still going at a reasonable rate)
                    >
                    > R
                    >
                    > gff_stwrt wrote:
                    > > Hi, Rasputin,
                    > >
                    > > A couple of thoughts from someone with no expertise at all in this.
                    > >
                    > > If you're not sure it will have enough capacity, make the tubes a bit longer. So long as the maximum water flow is not too small (small diameter of the tubes/low capacity of the pump) you will have the benefit of increased area of cooling surfaces, WITH NO EXTRA WORK (same number of tubes).
                    > >
                    > > And would you need a liebig at all if you have a cross-flow condenser of sufficient capacity with a bit in reserve?
                    > >
                    > > Regards,
                    > >
                    > > The Baker
                    > >
                    > > PS I want one of those condensers one day. B
                    > >
                    >
                  • Rasputin Paracelsus
                    Hi Baker, Yes, VM set-up--maybe I should have been clearer. I don t know much about LM as that s not what I ve been trying to learn about lately. Could be
                    Message 9 of 19 , Jun 3, 2009
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Hi Baker,

                      Yes, VM set-up--maybe I should have been clearer. I don't know much
                      about LM as that's not what I've been trying to learn about lately.
                      Could be you're right for that kind of system... I honestly don't know :(

                      R

                      gff_stwrt wrote:
                      > Hi, Rasputin,
                      >
                      > Thanks for that, I only use a pot still and I'm still learning about the different classes of reflux still.
                      > I guess you are talking about vapour management and I was probably thinking of liquid management (?) where a part of the cooled liquid in the dam at the bottom of the condenser is drawn off, and with a condenser of sufficient capacity would, I expect, already be cool enough without a liebig.
                      >
                      > Regards,
                      >
                      > The Baker
                      > --- In Distillers@yahoogroups.com, Rasputin Paracelsus <rasputin@...> wrote:
                      >
                      >> Hello Baker,
                      >>
                      >> Thanks for the comments. Yes, longer is not a big deal, is it.
                      >>
                      >> As far as I can see, the liebig is needed because all the X-flow does is
                      >> ensure reflux. Still need a condenser to deal with the vapours taken
                      >> off, right?
                      >>
                      >> (Someone correct me if I'm out to lunch. Actually, at the moment, I'm
                      >> out doing a stripping run on one of my MUM washes. Started it May 21st.
                      >> Last night, it was very slow, today quiet and down to 0.990. The other
                      >> one, with the slow BK-1, is still going at a reasonable rate)
                      >>
                      >> R
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.