OK, in bio labs, there is a technique for holding bacteria at exponential growth where you basically have a constant flow of a nutrient solution into a population while removing an equal volume out the other end. I'm wondering if something like that could be made for brewing.
I'm thinking of a 3 phase design. The first would be a small brew pot which would either need to be cycled up to temp or held hot. Being held hot would introduce some potential problems with hopping which I'm not sure how to resolve. so I'm thinking 1 gallon batches once a week should be fine. I'd probably set it up with a pascal inspired gooseneck steam vent for the boil. This should be enough to keep it sterile between boils.
From here the wort would travel through tubing into the bottom of the primary fermenter. The unfermented wort should be heavier and stick near the bottom keeping better control of residence time. A 5 gallon fermenter should hold wort for an average of about 21 days if 2 12 oz beers are drawn from it per day. However, fermenting times will be longer since from here we will be going to a secondary.
A tube will draw from the upper portion of the primary to the secondary. Another 5 gallon fermenter would provide another 21 days of brew time. Another possibility would be to carbonate using the pressure of the water column. If the secondary is placed 10 feet below the primary and kept at 40 degrees should yield about 1.8 parts CO2. Low, but acceptable. If you can bump up the column height a bit this could be increased. This could mean that all you need to do is tap it at the end and not bottle at all.
Potential issues:
Infection- This would be effectively a closed system except for the wort in and beer out. All gasses could be vented upstream. The point of entry would of course be the brew pot right up top. while the goose neck vent should keep the nasties out, there still would be sterile wort sitting for significant periods of time.
Trub cleanout- multiple brews bretween cleanouts will build up quite a yeast cake. The system would either have to be cleaned out by hand periodiacally or there would have to be some sort of trub drain off that may be a route of infection. Could a conical fermenter be adequate here?
I'm thinking of a 3 phase design. The first would be a small brew pot which would either need to be cycled up to temp or held hot. Being held hot would introduce some potential problems with hopping which I'm not sure how to resolve. so I'm thinking 1 gallon batches once a week should be fine. I'd probably set it up with a pascal inspired gooseneck steam vent for the boil. This should be enough to keep it sterile between boils.
From here the wort would travel through tubing into the bottom of the primary fermenter. The unfermented wort should be heavier and stick near the bottom keeping better control of residence time. A 5 gallon fermenter should hold wort for an average of about 21 days if 2 12 oz beers are drawn from it per day. However, fermenting times will be longer since from here we will be going to a secondary.
A tube will draw from the upper portion of the primary to the secondary. Another 5 gallon fermenter would provide another 21 days of brew time. Another possibility would be to carbonate using the pressure of the water column. If the secondary is placed 10 feet below the primary and kept at 40 degrees should yield about 1.8 parts CO2. Low, but acceptable. If you can bump up the column height a bit this could be increased. This could mean that all you need to do is tap it at the end and not bottle at all.
Potential issues:
Infection- This would be effectively a closed system except for the wort in and beer out. All gasses could be vented upstream. The point of entry would of course be the brew pot right up top. while the goose neck vent should keep the nasties out, there still would be sterile wort sitting for significant periods of time.
Trub cleanout- multiple brews bretween cleanouts will build up quite a yeast cake. The system would either have to be cleaned out by hand periodiacally or there would have to be some sort of trub drain off that may be a route of infection. Could a conical fermenter be adequate here?
