Feedback on brew stand design

Hey guys,

I've roughed up my initial thoughts for my brew stand.
I will be building this out of 1.5" square stock, 16 ga.

Does the concept of lowering the MLT make sense? This way I can fly or batch sparge with one pump. The MLT is a Igloo 10 gallon cooler. I'll then pump back up to the boil kettle. I'll also install some heat shield to protect the cooler.

I plan on using natrual gas. BK and HLT are keggles.

What is the best way to build supports/braces between the top and bottom level?

Other thoughts?
Thanks.

I'm not a fan of pumping from the mash tun. Too many stuck sparges on my old RIMS system. What about reversing your layout? Put the tun high, and the kettles low. Then you could fly sparge by pumping from the HLT to the tun, and use gravity to drain to the kettle.

If the height of the tun is a problem, consider a rectangular cooler.

HearthstoneBrewery said:

I'm not a fan of pumping from the mash tun...

Click to expand...

Even in single tier, two pump setups?
Thanks for the input, it will give me something to think about while at work tomorrow.

There is no need for additional support braces. You can span 50" with 1.5 x .065 square tube.

OneHoppyGuy said:

There is no need for additional support braces. You can span 50" with 1.5 x .065 square tube.

Click to expand...

I was hoping you would come in here and respond.

Any thoughts on pumping from the MLT?
That's got me thinking.

Because your pump is essentially at the same height as your MLT, you're going have a heck of a time priming it. Note: you'll also want to rotate the pump so your inlet is down, outlet is up to help with priming. Save yourself the trouble, spend another $150, and make it a one-tier. Alternatively, you could raise the height of your top tier, but this would mean ladder work . . .

Just my two cents . . .

another $0.02...
The HLT needs no attention so it can go higher or lower. Either way, you need to have a 12" drop to your pump like PLOVE stated and rotated like he mentioned also.

If you're a semi-DIYer, check out the BadAss2 link below, we have a frame only version.

Agree with above, pumping will be tough in that setup. I use a pump from my MLT and never had any stuck sparge issues. I'd also tell you to make up your mind before building that you want to be a batch sparger, fly sparger or dare I say BIAB'er. I built before nailing it down and decided after the fact that it wasn't what I really wanted or needed.

Thanks.
The pump mode was just to demonstrate placement, not orientation. Sorry for the confusion.

I found a cheap march 809 I can add and just go single tier. Will I be ok by using the 809 and my bigger little giant together?

Back to the drawing board. Looks like its it's going to be single tier with a cooler MLT.

Well, don't completely rule out a two-tier with your mash on the upper... Shouldn't be a big deal to pump up to your mt for strike and sparge and grav feed from mt to boil. That would keep your rig simple, only need one pump, and keep your lifting to a minimum...

socalboomer said:

Well, don't completely rule out a two-tier with your mash on the upper... Shouldn't be a big deal to pump up to your mt for strike and sparge and grav feed from mt to boil. That would keep your rig simple, only need one pump, and keep your lifting to a minimum...

Click to expand...

I'll keep I in mind, the only issues then would be the extra height on the end cap for MT (harder to store), and having to lower the BK/HLT. Lowering them might cause issues with the distance required for my CFC. Ugh, maybe I need a plate chiller instead.

I'm in agreement that in a two-tier system, the mash tun should be on top.

You can fly sparge with a single pump in a two tier system with the mash tun on top. The whole purpose of a two tier system is to eliminate the need of two pumps.

On second thought, I could hook the CFC up after the pump... Duh

i don't see your chiller in the drawing. mine's just stashed underneath. quick disconnects make pretty easy work of the single pump system. and yeah, pump definitely before the chiller inlet. How else would you get it primed?

In fixing to build mine. Hlt on top. Mt, bk on bottom... One pump..

Czm said:

In fixing to build mine. Hlt on top. Mt, bk on bottom... One pump..

Click to expand...

I'm waffling on this setup myself. Do you have any reason why you chose HLT to be on top vs the MT? What kind of recirculating mash are you running?

mightynintendo said:

i don't see your chiller in the drawing. mine's just stashed underneath. quick disconnects make pretty easy work of the single pump system. and yeah, pump definitely before the chiller inlet. How else would you get it primed?

Click to expand...

Original idea that I guess I never revisited was to use gravity from my BK through the CFC into the carboy.

well if you're pumping it through the CFC, you have another option for speeding up or restricting the flow to help hone in on the temperature you want. Also, pumping it out of the BK gives you the option of enlisting a hopback which really goes a long way towards giving beer a more refined hop character.

I did so so I can easily get to the mt. I'm a short fella and I don't want to step on a ladder. If I fly sparge I could control the output on hlt from the valve and control the output from the pump pumping from mt to bk.. Or any one else have a better way? I posted a drawing on my planned setup.

So after looking at some two tier designs, it seems that most people raise the HLT. Why is this?
If I'm using a cooler, wouldnt it be easier to raise my MLT? Isn't it better not to have to pump out of the MLT? Seems like that could pack the grain bed.

evandena said:

So after looking at some two tier designs, it seems that most people raise the HLT. Why is this?
If I'm using a cooler, wouldnt it be easier to raise my MLT? Isn't it better not to have to pump out of the MLT? Seems like that could pack the grain bed.

Click to expand...

Because the HLT is a hot water tank and needs no attention, where as the MT and BK require access. I've never experienced grain compaction with a pump, but I've always used a false bottom.

OneHoppyGuy said:

Because the HLT is a hot water tank and needs no attention, where as the MT and BK require access. I've never experienced grain compaction with a pump, but I've always used a false bottom.

Click to expand...

At least in my system the HLT requires more attention than the MLT. The HLT is the heart of the whole system doubling as a heat exchanger for a recirculating mash and a HLT. I heat every drop of water that goes through the system initially in the HLT. Since it's all manual, I have to monitor the temperature pretty closely in the HLT, turn on and off the burner when needed, and need easy visual access to the site glass. Actually this last bit would probably be easier if the HLT was higher as the site glass would be at eye level...

I am seriously considering moving it up to the top. I could put a wye valve at the output of the pump and when it comes time to switch from mashing to sparging, it would just be a matter of redirecting the flow to the mash tun to the boil kettle, and then opening the valve to let the hlt water drain into the mash tun. this would eliminate my need for moving the input to the pump from the mash tun to the HLT during the sparge. the difference is gravity will be driving my sparge instead of a pump. I think i'm ok with that... this is probably a better setup than what i've got. yeah!

Ok, after giving it some thought I think I am going to go with a two tier with the HLT and MLT raised, and the BK lowered.

Question: what is the minimum amount of head space I will want to build between the BK valve and the pump head to allow for easy priming?