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

Re: [new_distillers]I'm cooking, well almost

Expand Messages
  • Bposs112@aol.com
    OK.i hope my input didnt confuse you . let me try to explain. in warm weather say sixty degrees or above i do the low tube. anything below this i go thru the
    Message 1 of 15 , Jan 12, 2001
      OK.i hope my input didnt confuse you . let me try to explain. in warm weather
      say sixty degrees or above i do the low tube. anything below this i go thru
      the top. like the rabbi said there is no perfectway to do this. it is by
      trial and error. i do this for fun and a hobby. if  i t ever gets to be a
      burden i will quit.
    • Bposs112@aol.com
      her again i say. i do a ten gallon wash out side different times of the year. depends on the temperature/humidity/barometer etc. dont get flustrated just
      Message 2 of 15 , Jan 12, 2001
        her again i say. i do a ten gallon wash out side different times of the year.
        depends on the temperature/humidity/barometer etc.  dont get flustrated just
        enjoy.
      • Mike Seaney
        Oh wow, looks like I opened a minor can of worms with the tube stuff, but thanks to you all for your comments and input. I obviously did not do my research
        Message 3 of 15 , Jan 13, 2001
          Oh wow, looks like I opened a minor can of worms with the tube stuff,
          but thanks to you all for your comments and input. I obviously did not
          do my research properly. I got most of the plan via a book (Gert Strand)
          and it illustrates the still master. ( Ididnt come across this group
          until after I had actually done the drill work!! ) Fortunately though, I
          reckon I can run a batch or two with things as they are and then start
          on version 1.1 -( as the song says " things can only get better" ) or
          maybe I can just not use the lower tubes at all and run some through at
          the top without effecting it too much, we shall see. I'll let you know
          how its goes Thanks again...
          Regards, Mike
        • greeneyr@rocketmail.com
          Matt, The only reason I can see for using lower cooling is to return some of the liquid to the pot and reduce the amount of vapour going up the column. You
          Message 4 of 15 , Jan 13, 2001
            Matt,

            The only reason I can see for using lower cooling is to return some
            of the liquid to the pot and reduce the amount of vapour going up the
            column. You could achieve the same by reducing the heat (and it would
            be more effective). If too much vapour tries to fight its way up
            through the packing then it pushes the decending liquid back up and
            you no longer have a pure fractionating column but something half way
            between a pot still and a column. (You get the same effect with too
            much packing). In both cases you normally get around 75-80% and the
            output often surges.

            So I suspect those who find the bottom cooling more effective (purer
            product) are trying to push too much up the column ---- the bottom
            tube is returning some back to the pot which leaves just enough to
            flow up the column and mix with the decending fluid from the top
            cooling --- so the bit between the bottom and top cooling does all
            the work. Just had an idea-- you probably could put a cooling coil in
            the pot and it would be as effective!!!!!!

            Most small commercial stills are electric and don't have any way of
            reducing the heat, so this might be their only way to reduce the
            volume of vapour.

            That's my best guess why they use bottom cooling, I'd turn down the
            heat and use only top cooling if you want to get near 95% --- and
            save some money by not using as much gas or electricity to heat the
            cooling water!. ;-) ;-)

            Rabbi


            --- In new_distillers@egroups.com, Matt <spore@p...> wrote:
            > On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 05:44:44AM -0800, Robin Greeney wrote:
            > > Hi Matt,
            > > As far as I can recall it has always been the way to
            > > go. It provides a smooth temperature gradient along
            > > the column which is what you need. The column height
            > > effectively ends when it hits the first cooling
            > > tube..... all after that is ineffective!
            > >
            > > So why have a metre column and only use the first 20
            > > cm. ?????
            > >
            > > Just because the commercial world does something, it
            > > ain't necessarily right!
            > >
            > > Rabbi
            >
            > no no i was wondering ... why the use of lower cooling tubes? :-)
            >
            > --
            > --------------------------------------------------------------------
            -------
            > Matthew @
            psibercom
            > psibercom.org: doing pretty much nothing for the net since
            1994!
          • Bposs112@aol.com
            thats the SPIRIT mike
            Message 5 of 15 , Jan 13, 2001
              thats the  SPIRIT mike
            • ebarker@eoncc.com
              Yup, Get rid of the bottom cooling and reduce the heat. save some money on energy and get the same results. But you gotta have heat control. ... the ... would
              Message 6 of 15 , Jan 13, 2001
                Yup,

                Get rid of the bottom cooling and reduce the heat.
                save some money on energy and get the same results.
                But you gotta have heat control.




                --- In new_distillers@egroups.com, greeneyr@r... wrote:
                > Matt,
                >
                > The only reason I can see for using lower cooling is to return some
                > of the liquid to the pot and reduce the amount of vapour going up
                the
                > column. You could achieve the same by reducing the heat (and it
                would
                > be more effective). If too much vapour tries to fight its way up
                > through the packing then it pushes the decending liquid back up and
                > you no longer have a pure fractionating column but something half
                way
                > between a pot still and a column. (You get the same effect with too
                > much packing). In both cases you normally get around 75-80% and the
                > output often surges.
                >
                > So I suspect those who find the bottom cooling more effective (purer
                > product) are trying to push too much up the column ---- the bottom
                > tube is returning some back to the pot which leaves just enough to
                > flow up the column and mix with the decending fluid from the top
                > cooling --- so the bit between the bottom and top cooling does all
                > the work. Just had an idea-- you probably could put a cooling coil
                in
                > the pot and it would be as effective!!!!!!
                >
                > Most small commercial stills are electric and don't have any way of
                > reducing the heat, so this might be their only way to reduce the
                > volume of vapour.
                >
                > That's my best guess why they use bottom cooling, I'd turn down the
                > heat and use only top cooling if you want to get near 95% --- and
                > save some money by not using as much gas or electricity to heat the
                > cooling water!. ;-) ;-)
                >
                > Rabbi
                >
                >
                > --- In new_distillers@egroups.com, Matt <spore@p...> wrote:
                > > On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 05:44:44AM -0800, Robin Greeney wrote:
                > > > Hi Matt,
                > > > As far as I can recall it has always been the way to
                > > > go. It provides a smooth temperature gradient along
                > > > the column which is what you need. The column height
                > > > effectively ends when it hits the first cooling
                > > > tube..... all after that is ineffective!
                > > >
                > > > So why have a metre column and only use the first 20
                > > > cm. ?????
                > > >
                > > > Just because the commercial world does something, it
                > > > ain't necessarily right!
                > > >
                > > > Rabbi
                > >
                > > no no i was wondering ... why the use of lower cooling tubes? :-)
                > >
                > > --
                > >
                --------------------------------------------------------------------
                > -------
                > > Matthew @
                > psibercom
                > > psibercom.org: doing pretty much nothing for the net since
                > 1994!
              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.