Re: A zillion more questions!
- Indeed, but perhaps you overlooked my "appreciable" quantities. I
thought we were talking about reflux stilling which really doesn't
work that well with room temp evaporation rates.
--- In firstname.lastname@example.org, Gregory Bloom <gjbloom@...> wrote:
> Actually, you can distill quite effectively at temperatures lower
than boiling point. Each component of the solution has a vapor
pressure, even below boiling. The "Amazing Still" works by heating
the wash to increase the vapor pressure of the more volatile
components without actually taking the wash up to boiling. Of course,
the "Amazing Still" takes perhaps a full day to do a run, but it does
> I once did an experiment where I enclosed an aquarium aerator in a
tupperware container and ran a sealed cycle of CO2 through the wash
and through a condensing jug in my freezer. It was slow, but it did
work. (I was hoping that by removing the alcohol as it formed in the
wash, I might keep the yeast continuously fermenting by adding sugar
every once in a while. By continuously cycling the CO2, I maintained
anaerobic fermentation. Bottom line - It worked, kinda, but was too
slow and not worth the trouble).
> Lindsay Williams <lindsay.nz@...> wrote:
> One for you, Sam!!!
> Read the first para from the previous post very carefully.
> Indeed, you are missing something very basic. (To let you in on the
> joke, we had to beat Sam around a bit (actually, quite a lot!!) to get
> him away from the differential boiling "theory" of distillation! At
> the serious risk of repetition, believe us when we say a liquid, even
> one with several alcohols in it, will only ever have ONE boiling
> point. If you heat it below this point, how will you get vapour coming
> off it? It must boil to give off vapour in any appreciable quantities.
> Go to www.homedistiller.org/theory and read Mike Nixon's treatise on
> distillation theory.
> --- In email@example.com, "Michael Eyre" <meyre@> wrote:
> > >To my knowledge, Bob the Borg is the only one here who has
> > >successfully controled boiler temp. (Sorry, Sam, couldn't resist).
> > >Actually, the temp of the wash is determined by the alchohol
> > >of the wash. The higher the alchohol content, the lower the boiling
> > >point. As the more and more of the alchohol evaporates, the temp of
> > >the wash goes up. Adding more heat, however, does not raise the
> > >temp, but does increase the boiling rate. Each still has it's own
> > >level of performance/verses vapor rate.
> > Hmmm...Ok, I'm a little mystified by that. I was thinking about
> > an electric heater element hooked to a controller with a high
> > a low point setting. I was going to set the low poit for 175 and the
> > high to 180 or thereabout and run it till the thing didn't run
> > and then jack the temp up a bit more to go to the next stage. If
> > saying the evap occurs whenever it occurs because the evap is
> > a higher alcohol content (which I totally get!), then what would
> > if you put a huge direct fire or element into service and just
> > the thing right up to 212+ degrees? Wouldn't' you get evap of
> > in the pot, including what you wanted to distill as well as the stuff
> > you *didn't* want to distill? Doesn't' it make more sense to
> > temp up, collecting only that which you want to collect in the lower
> > evaporation realm before you get to distilling just water at neat
> > boiling temps?
> > As an aside, I do temp steps in beer all the time and temp is
> > fairly easy to control with a burner and a watchful eye.. why do
> > that's only one fellow has successfully controlled the boiler
temp? Am I
> > missing something basic here? Seriously! :-)
> New Distillers group archives are at http://archive.nnytech.net/
> FAQ and other information available at http://homedistiller.org
> SPONSORED LINKS
> Food and drink
> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> Visit your group "new_distillers" on the web.
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Do You Yahoo!?
> Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]