Home Brew Forums

Home Brew Forums (http://www.homebrewtalk.com/forum.php)
-   Equipment/Sanitation (http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f11/)
-   -   RIMS System plans (http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f11/rims-system-plans-119969/)

blackheart 05-18-2009 09:19 PM

RIMS System plans
 
I have been working on a 10 gallon brewing system design and I want to plan everything out before I start buying parts etc.

Here is what I want to end up with. 10 gallon output, all grain, electronically controlled, as simple and efficient as possible.

I am looking at building a RIMS system using only two pots. Only 1 pot needs to be heated (gas or electricity, havent decided)

Here is what I laid out as the step by step process to try to see if I had things connected right and the process laid out the right way.

http://www.blackheartbrewery.com/pictures/RIMS.jpg

So with this in mind I have a few questions.

1. Am I missing something?
2. Can this be made more simple that it is (without removing the key pieces like electronic control)?
3. Recommendations on heating the HLT/kettle, only one pot needs to be heated in this case, and much of the system is already electric. Natural Gas is the only other option available.
4. Can anyone make part recommendations for the electronic valves and some kind of flow meter that can handle the high beer temps?

Please feel free to leave any comments or suggestions. (yes I know I can do all grain easier than RIMS etc but I am looking to build complete automated control and therefor need as few hose changes, part swapping etc as possible. )

Boerderij_Kabouter 05-18-2009 09:28 PM

The way I see your system you will be doing a no-sparge style lauter. This will likely effect your efficiency quite significantly, although some people believe it produces a higher quality wort. Just making sure you have considered this.

The Pol 05-18-2009 09:34 PM

This reminds me of the Brutus 20...

The no sparge thing will affect the eff. to a pretty large degree.

blackheart 05-18-2009 10:14 PM

So what your both saying is that by having all the water in the grains at one time then dumping it out in one batch back into the kettle I will not get as much sugars etc as if I have a 3 vessel system which continues to add fresh hot water to the top of the grain bed while "sparging out" into the kettle. Does this have to do with the amount of water or is there another reason?

The Pol 05-18-2009 10:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackheart (Post 1331628)
So what your both saying is that by having all the water in the grains at one time then dumping it out in one batch back into the kettle I will not get as much sugars etc as if I have a 3 vessel system which continues to add fresh hot water to the top of the grain bed while "sparging out" into the kettle. Does this have to do with the amount of water or is there another reason?

Nope, it is the dirty laundry theory.

If you soak your clothes in soapy water, then just drain the water out... isnt there still a lot of soap in the clothing? Yes, so you rinse it.

This is the same thing with grain... you can drain it, but there is still a lot of sugars that need to be rinsed from the grain bed.

This is a core component of all-grain brewing. The sparge and lauter. You can get great conversion efficiency, but the lauter efficiency will hurt you if you do not do it effectively. If you are going for an "efficient" system, Id look for a way to at least batch sparge.

Otherwise on a typical 10 gallon batch, you will be using about 5 to 7 POUNDS more malt to hit the same OG that you would if you did an effective sparge... that is A LOT

You can expect to get about 60-65% eff. Whereas I get about 82% eff., as do many others, with an effective sparge.

HomebrewJeff 05-18-2009 10:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blackheart (Post 1331628)
So what your both saying is that by having all the water in the grains at one time then dumping it out in one batch back into the kettle I will not get as much sugars etc as if I have a 3 vessel system which continues to add fresh hot water to the top of the grain bed while "sparging out" into the kettle. Does this have to do with the amount of water or is there another reason?

The "sparge" helps to rinse the remaining sugars from the grain. If you add all of the water at once during the mash, you will have a very thin mash. You can keep a normal mash ratio, but you'll need to greatly increase the amount of grains, which isn't really efficient.

I suspect you may run into grain compaction issues as well, if you have 10-11 gallons of water above the top of the grain bed, but I'm not sure on that. You'll also need to have a mashtun big enough to hold everything, probably 15 or so gallons of water + the grain.

Is there a purpose for only using 2 vessels, or were you trying to do this with the least amount of equipment?

The Pol 05-18-2009 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HomebrewJeff (Post 1331695)
The "sparge" helps to rinse the remaining sugars from the grain. If you add all of the water at once during the mash, you will have a very thin mash. You can keep a normal mash ratio, but you'll need to greatly increase the amount of grains, which isn't really efficient.

I suspect you may run into grain compaction issues as well, if you have 10-11 gallons of water above the top of the grain bed, but I'm not sure on that. You'll also need to have a mashtun big enough to hold everything, probably 15 or so gallons of water + the grain.

Is there a purpose for only using 2 vessels, or were you trying to do this with the least amount of equipment?

Awesome point...
I ran this through ProMash... even if you have NO fluid loss in your system, which is unlikely... but lets just say no fluid loss, and a 1.5 gallon boil off...

Your MLT will have to hold 17.5 gallons of MASH and WATER for a 1.053 beer to get 10 gallons into the fermentor.

So not only will you have bad eff. but you will need a MINIMUM of a 20 gallon MLT to hold the grain and water.

In the above scenario you are using 25.6 pounds of grain, 15.4 gallons of water, total mash volume of 17.5 gallons. There will be 3 gallons lost to grain absorption, 1.5 gallons boiled off over 60 minutes, and wort shrinkage of about .4 gallons of volume when the wort cools. This only gets you an OG of 1.053 too...

The Pol 05-18-2009 11:23 PM

IF you used 15.5 gallon keggles for the vessels on this thing, here is what youd be able to do.

MAX grain bill 17.6 pounds
MAX water 14 gallons
MLT Volume for this brew is 15.5 gallons

Grain absorption of 2.0 gallons
Boil off of 1.50 gallons
Wort shrinkage of .4 gallons
10 gallons to the fermentor.

Assuming 65% eff. (which Id think is pretty generous in a no sparge system) you will get a MAX OG of 1.039 on a 10 gallon brew

IF you wanted to be able to get up to a 1.075 (not often, but it would be nice) beer you would need to have at LEAST a 20 gallon MLT to hold the grain and all of the water at 65% eff.

But, FWIW, if you are making a RIMS, you might as well heat your HLT with electric... it is easy and clean and quiet and easy to control.

Lonnie Mac 05-19-2009 01:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Pol (Post 1331688)
Nope, it is the dirty laundry theory.
The above is based on what I have heard about the Brutus 20 which is no sparge, and it gets about 60-65% eff. Whereas I get about 82% eff., as do many others, with an effective sparge.

I have written about this somewhere here before...

Brutus 20 is not a no sparge system. It is a cross continuos re-sparge heated mash gadget system... How's that for words! Brutus 20 has (had) a normal mash with a set ratio (- absorption), and a set ratio of fresh sparge water (= boil volume). It worked (works) very cool on lighter beers, not so much for the big beers as it goes beyond the dirty laundry theory...

Although it will not achieve my dead-locked 87% I get on the Ten, it can and usually does exceed 65... It is a matter of what you are brewing. Although the dirty laundry theory is in play, there is also a matter of total saturation to deal with. What is designed above is a no sparge system for sure, and to go that route would indeed require dang near twice the malt and space as our normal get-ups... At todays prices, as least I can't afford to be doubling up on my malt bill!

:)

The Pol 05-19-2009 01:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lonnie Mac (Post 1331896)
I have written about this somewhere here before...

Brutus 20 is not a no sparge system. It is a cross continuos re-sparge heated mash gadget system... How's that for words! Brutus 20 has (had) a normal mash with a set ratio (- absorption), and a set ratio of fresh sparge water (= boil volume). It worked (works) very cool on lighter beers, not so much for the big beers as it goes beyond the dirty laundry theory...

Although it will not achieve my dead-locked 87% I get on the Ten, it can and usually does exceed 65... It is a matter of what you are brewing. Although the dirty laundry theory is in play, there is also a matter of total saturation to deal with. What is designed above is a no sparge system for sure, and to go that route would indeed require dang near twice the malt and space as our normal get-ups... At todays prices, as least I can't afford to be doubling up on my malt bill!

:)

True true... I know this, it reminds me of the Brutus 20.... not the same, no, but reminds me of it. The size of the MLT will have to be huge, and using 5-7 more pounds of malt (OR MORE) to compensate for the lack of a sparge seems counter productive.

I am all for trying new things, but I dont see the gain.


All times are GMT. The time now is 09:40 PM.

Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.