mike11b82
Well-Known Member
SO while I was cooling today i got the idea of using my plate chiller to recirculate the mash. I'm think with two pumps it would be possible, what's every one else think?
I recirculate through a chillzilla, works great but i do not currently have a temperature controler controling my pump so i have to keep a close eye the temperature. I have done about 20 10gal batches this way and have had no problems with clogging once i have a chance to install my temp controler im sure it will be much easier to control.
I do currently still use my cfc as a herms, I have never had any problems with clogs or anything gumming up on me. I still have not added a temperature controller to the system because it looks like I will be upgrading my entire brewery to all ele tric in the near future and don't want to spend the $ to upgrade my old brewery. Since my last post on this topic I did change my process a little though. I originally kept the water in the hlt at sparge temp and use the valve on the output to control the flow of the hot water to keep the temp correct, doing it this way was fine in the warm months but I was getting too many drastic temp swings doing it this way so now I just kelp the temperature in my hlt at about 4 deg higher than my mash temp and it works much better this way. I can't remember when but since I posted to this topic last I found another thread where the cfc herms was discussed in great length you might want to look for that thread as well think it was titled something like modified herms, hope this helps if you have anymore questions let me know I will be glad to help.
I do not advise using a Plate chiller for recirculating wort through. Too many problems. A counter flow chiller works wonderful for this situation. I like my CFC much better than my plate chiller overall for it flexibility and ease of cleaning compared to a Plate Chiller. Plate Chillers in my opinion are over rated for homebrewing. And yes I have and use both regularly.
YESPLEATE CHILLER + IN-LINE FILTER PROS FOR MASH RECIRCULATION (VERUS CFC):
-very compact (highest ration of heat transfer surface to volume)
Easily overcome by using gravity, you can drain just as much out when done.-minimum volume means highest responsiveness and minimum dead volume in heat exchange
Get a GOOD CFC, all copper!-all metal so no concerns handling temperature on either chilling water or wort paths (no possibility of chemical leakage, even at boiling temperatures)
this will not get the permanently stuck crap out of it. You will have to sanitize in oven or pressure cooker just before brewing. Chemicals are not as effective at sanitizing these.-can be baked in oven to 'bake off' any materials caught in the chiller (this sounds like a PITA, but at least it is an option, where with CFC it is not).
Is this part of our concern?-price performance ($/m^2 of heat exchange surface area) - plate chillers seem to leave all competing technologies in the dust in this department...
Your pre-filter will clog regularly. This is also a real PITAPLEATE CHILLER + IN-LINE FILTER CONS FOR MASH RECIRCULATION (VERUS CFC):
-trouble / complexity of cleaning (though this needs to be considered when a good filter in in place before the plate chiller - less clear there is a significant difference in this case)
More efficient, less effective for practical brewing IMHO.-possibility to get clogged (this seems to be the big negative versus CFC, but if a good filter can take the possibility of clogging off of the table, it seems like the plate chiller would be the better option).
All of these statements are my opinion take it for what it is. I'm not here to make universal statements about how to brew. What I have learned, and I have bought and tried almost every piece of home brew equipment you can imagine, is make the brew day a simple and effective process and you will love brewing. Don't over complicate it! Great beer is made from simple recipes on simple equipment more times than visa-verse. Don't sweat small details. Its more about sanitizing than exacting temperature control down to a 10th of a degree or cooling your wort in 10 minutes or having e-stop buttons and flashing lights on your controller. You give me a stove and a big pot and some barley and I will make you beer. I have run the full gambit of starting simple to full electric build with bells and buzzers and back again.
Easily overcome by using gravity, you can drain just as much out when done.
Get a GOOD CFC, all copper!
this will not get the permanently stuck crap out of it. You will have to sanitize in oven or pressure cooker just before brewing. Chemicals are not as effective at sanitizing these.
Is this part of our concern?
Your pre-filter will clog regularly. This is also a real PITA
More efficient, less effective for practical brewing IMHO.
The inside of a plate chiller is COPPER, same corrosion issue.
My nano brewery uses an over sized plate chiller the same has home brewers, but it is a constant battle to keep the pre filter from clogging because we will never put wort through it that is not filtered because we know that is worse.
Just don't want everyone thinking the plate chiller is the clear winner.
The inside of a plate chiller is COPPER, same corrosion issue.
I stopped brewing for a couple reasons - the others included the time involved (dawn to dusk) and the stress of temperature control (wanting it to come out right after all of that effort).
My goals for getting back into brewing now are to experiment with step mashes
And the other main goal will be to reduce the total time needed to devote to a brew session. Compared to the 'old days', I have a family now and do not want to take control of the entire kitchen for a full day whenever I decide to brew.
So as close as I can come to 'set-it-and-forget-it' when it comes to mash temperatures, etc... and time efficiency are my two goals.
Since I am putting the new rig together from the ground up, I have complete freedom in equipment choices and configuration.
Your opinion on HERMS coil versus CFC versus plate chiller is helpful to me, so I will comment below on your feedback:
For my own beer-brewing style (sporadic), I am concerned that copper is not the right solution for me and would want to go stainless.
If I can make a system work well with a single heat-exchange solution (rather than a HERMS coil + a CFC or IC for wort chilling), it is one less thing to clean and for the same $s, I can invest in one higher-performance heat exchange solution rather than two of lesser performance.
fafrd,
You seem to be limiting your choices of available solutions that might fit your requirements better. I don't know if it's because of an unhealthy fascination with plate chillers, some equally disturbing obsession with price/performance/meter maximization, or with thinking the only other solution is to hard plumb a HERMS coils into your HLT. There are other options.
Just to lay out some basics:
You don't have to hard plumb the HERMS coil into the pot. You can leave it loose, or plumb it into the lid. Either way, they can double as an IC, and are clean by the time you are done chilling. Maximize that! Also, using the hard plumbed HERMS for ice bath chillers, like some tout, is a less than ideal chilling method, even if you have access to unlimited ice.
IC vs. CFC vs. PC- if your water isn't cold enough for an IC, chances are it isn't cold enough for the others either, at least with any meaningful flow. If you have to add ice to perform a chill, it's a lot easier to hit temps with an IC, especially if you don't recirc back to the kettle when using the CFC or PC. The IC is also a no brainer to sanitize- just stick it in the boil; and to clean- just spray it off.
Stainless tubing used for ICs (or a CFC) is much thinner (.002") than the copper tubing used/appropriate for either ICs or CFCs. The performance of .002" wall SS is at least as good as the thicker copper tubing of equal ID, even though copper is a better conductor. Check out nybrewsupply. Their SS ICs are cheaper than the equivalent in copper, and he will make any size, shape, or tubing ID for about the cost of the raw tubing.
The mash IS the liquid that is being recirculated in a HERMS/RIMS. As you mentioned, you do not want to have the heat bath temps much higher (a few degrees) than your desired mash temp, or step temp when stepping. This was the impetus behind the HERMS. Many thought there was localized heating (much greater than mash temps) with the RIMS tube/element, especially when stepping.
With that out of the way, and since you seem to want to minimize your brew day length and variables, there are also whole new brewing methods, like Brew In A Bag (BIAB), and Mash In A Bag (MIAB). These simplify the mashing process, especially compared to fly sparging. There is a small loss of efficiency, but nothing a $2 worth of grain won't fix for the average 5 gal batch. The efficiencies can approach/equal batch sparging, and like batch sparging, your numbers are much more predictable, since the sparge process if a fixed game.
With BIAB, the HERMS system can be thrown on its head, and the HEX coil submerged into the mash, since it is a very thin mash. The residual wort lost is only limited by how long you want to wait for the last drip, same goes for when chilling. The main advantages of BIAB/MIAB are simplicity, predictability, less total time, and less equipment (which also means less to cleaning time). Adding either style of HERMS to BIAB does mean an extra pot, but it can be a small one, even electric with only a 110V element.
You might start a new thread seeking input for your new system. I am sure if you lay down some basic requirements/goals you will get plenty of responses. There are a lot of recent innovations, and more all the time, to lessen brew day hassles.
From these selected requirements from just one of your posts, it seems like in practice that ease of use, reduced brew day length, versatility, and predictability are your most important goals, regardless how painful your unrequited love for the fair chill-zilla may be.
So it isn't true beauty you are attracted to, but shiny, sparkly, overly complicated things. I'm an engineer, too, and have the same disease.cwi,
thanks for your thoughtful post (which also cracked me up )
You raise a number of valid points and I think I am going to take you up on your suggestion to start a dedicated thread seeking input for my new system...
-fafrd
p.s. I have no unrequited love for the fair chill-zilla, but I am an engineer and do admit to a certain weakness for determining and acquiring the 'best' solution (where the devil is then in the details of 'best for what'?).
cuart682, thanks for coming back to life on this thread
Looking at my original post, I guess I was confused and thought that a Chillzilla was a plate chiller, not a counterflow chiller. Glad to hear your CFC works well as an external heat exchange coil - are you going to continue to use that set-up in your new rig?
And yeah, I don't have any experience with HERMS/mash recirculation yet, but from what I understand, it ought to be much easier to control if the HLT temp is at or slightly above the desired mash liquor temp. Someone else had suggested a technique similar to your old one (HLT temp at mashout temp and controlling HLT flow rate) but I was concerned about how difficult it would be to control and potential large temperature swings (especially during any steps).
I'm looking at keeping the heat-exchange external to the HLT, like you, but am considering using a plate chiller rather than a CFC. A CFC has the advantage that clogging is not a concern but I would want stainless rather than copper which means it would have to be very long (probably 50', like the HERMS coils folks use inside their HLTs).
If a good filter is used to keep any grain particles out of the CFC, it seems like an attractive alternative.
I am interested in the chilling performance of the chillzilla - do you use it to chill boiling wort at the end of the brew cycle? If so, can you estimate chilling performance (tap in temp, tap flow rate, wort flow rate (pumped or gravity), cool wort out temp and total batch size)?
thanks,
-fafrd
The question about Brewers Hardware filter. I do have one and I do use it and it will clog even on a 10 gallon batch when recirculating. I've done it. It is a good filter but it clogs. On my 45 Gallon batches we have a bypass from the chiller to whirlpool with a pump, then settle for 10 minutes. Start chilling running wort through that exact filter. We have a dip tube in the bottom of BK that is left up off the bottom until wort level is down to it, then at the end push dip tub down towards the bottom. Once you get down to the trub level and it picks up some, the flow rate drops down significantly. I think their holes in the filter are actually too small.
Please don't think I am discouraging the purchase of your plate chiller. Just know how it's going to need to be set up to do what you want. At least your smart enough to ask here. I always had to run head on into these issues then read on how to fix them.
I agree 100% on setting up a brewing system that makes brew day quick and simple!!!! My homebrew setup is streamlined so that I can be done quickly, or if I have all day I can make 2,3 or yes 4 batches in a day.
The question about Brewers Hardware filter. I do have one and I do use it and it will clog even on a 10 gallon batch when recirculating. I've done it. It is a good filter but it clogs. Start chilling running wort through that exact filter. Once you get down to the trub level and it picks up some, the flow rate drops down significantly. I think their holes in the filter are actually too small.
And you said weren't infatuated with plate chillers, hah.Also, what do you believe would be the ideal mesh size to filter out the particles that could clog a plate chiller without slowing down the flow too much from particles that could have made it through the plate chiller without problem?
-fafrd
The size of the mesh isn't/shouldn't be a factor for flow, at least with the filters your are looking at. The real concern with mesh size is clogging the filter by going to fine. It seems like even a coarse filter, like the false bottom you would need anyway, would be suitable for preventing too much grain from getting into the PC. A PC should be able to handle a few bits here and there. Just blast them out after the mash.
That said, I still don't see the appeal of the PC. You seem to go by just the hard numbers- size, captive volume, thermal efficiency, price/btu, etc. If you were to add some soft variables into the equation- uncertainty, hassle, complexity, failure modes, etc., you might choose differently.
Of course, there are some things that don't have to satisfy some cost/peformance/benefit analysis- you simply want to have it to play with. If that is the case here, it would be simpler to justify it that way. Personally, I go with usability/simplicity when there are alternate solutions; and save the complexity for devices that solve problems without simple alternative solutions, or for add-ons that could actually impact the final product.
You seem like you are sorting out a bunch of questions that are all over the map. Some of your questions aren't really relevant, or practical. Take pumps- there is no way to 'suck' up anything with a handheld wand with the available pumps, since they are not self-priming.
Similarly, your question about using a siphon to 'hand follow' the wort to deal with trub is a PITA. I only do this when I have a failure due to clogging. I do ~15 gal batches, so time is the big issue, but starting/restarting the siphon is a close second, and would first if I was doing 5 gals. It isn't easy no matter how you do it, and even harder if you are alone.
If you haven't actually started brewing (again) yet, you might try getting a very simple brewing setup just to try things out. I am biased, but I would suggest starting out with a gravity BIAB system using a SS pot and boiling basket. Concord on Ebay has combos for ~$100, and there are many other choices for not much more. All you need to complete your hot side is to add a $5-10 voile bag, which are available pre-made, or DIY with fabric. Add a SS chiller (they are .020" wall, not .002" as I stated earlier) for ~$70 and a KAB6 banjo burner, and you are only into your rig for ~$300. Most of it you could unload for not much loss, if you upgrade and have no further use for it.
On the fermentation/serving side, you can go as cheap or as nice as you want. There aren't a lot of tough decisions (at least not for me) to make on the cold side, since it is almost strictly a money issue- conical, better bottle, or bucket; freezer/fridge, water bath, or hall closet; kegs or bottles, keezer or beater fridge; Perlick 545SS, generic chrome faucets, plastic cobra tap, church key.
Some 'soft' things to consider when designing your system are:
complexity (how much can you tolerate, for more than one batch)
simplicity (how much can you tolerate, for more than one batch)
batch size (a functional dual batch size is a myth)
failure modes (how many things can go wrong)
failure recovery (what is worst/typical case scenario to recover)
storage size (how much will the wife tolerate)
A lot of this is outside the scope of this thread, since the viability of using a PC as a HEX has been made clear to most. There is also so much going on/up in the air, its hard to find a place to start, other than to ask if you took your ADD meds today. Here goes- I think it's tough to do a clean-sheet build when you don't have much, if any, experience with the methods you are designing for, and some of the techniques you are counting on are your own new ideas. After a few brews trying out various things, you will have a better idea. Many things can be tested using simple tools- like whirlpooling with a spoon. Try it with a heavily hop-bursted IPA with either pellets and/or cones loose in the boil, and you will likely see it fail miserably, and not because of the spoon.cwi - you've raised a slew of valid points (as usual). I appreciate your challenge on many of the concepts I have raised (which probably appear to be 'all over the map' because I have the luxury of a clean-sheet build and can reconsider/re-architect virtually any part of the system).
Clogging either is a PITA. Having to deal with that mid-brew, as has been posted, is not fun.I'd much rather have problems clogging my filter than clogging the chiller.
including bypass plumbing so that I can recirculate the mash with no filter+chiller in the loop until the wort is running clear
Your thoughts on what mesh size is 'too fine' would be appreciated.
Once you have a bunch of gear and fittings, converting to any style system isn't that difficult. Some things are repurposed more easily than others, PCs not being one of them, but the upcharge for a few pieces to try a new method usually won't be that great.For sure. I am not taking the most conservative and least complex avenue. On the other hand, the time to take risks is at the beginning - once the system is working well, it is unlikely I will ever make significant changes and by taking risk in the initial concept, I have the 'tried and true' solutions available as my fall back. In fact, I am architecting the system to fall back to a standard HERMS or RIMS rig with only minor changes.
You will likely see little difference in performance between a well designed coil HEX vs. a PC hex, especially for equivalent price. The flows are so slow through the HEX, it doesn't really matter unless you are restricted to some maximum weight and size so that it will fit in the nose cone for the manned mission to Mars you are hoping to pilot. It just isn't an issue.The appeal of a plate chiller is that for the ~$200 I want to spend on heat exchange, plate chillers are significantly faster than even the all-copper CFC chillers. This ends up translating into the speed of any steps in the mash schedule (including mashout).
I think most people are just trying to save you some hassle. If you prefer to learn through experience, or just really can't live without a shiny .1GigaHz/uLambda plate chiller in your system, there is not much help to be offered that hasn't been given, since everyone who has responded so far has abandoned their attempts. The carnage has been listed. In trying, you will learn more than just that PCs aren't a good choice for a HEX (or chiller IMO). Fighting with it will give you a lot of experience with other issues as well, which may come in handy at other times. So it won't be a total loss if you abandon it.I'll probably end up feeling like a fool when I have tried all of this out and it has failed, but hopefully we will all learn something from that experience, and so on that basis alone it is worth the effort to me.
Many plate chiller users don't know that there is a growing wad of smegma in their chiller that is the cause of the contamination in their last 3 batches. This doesn't mean that all PC users fail to understand proper care and usage. Similarly, overtemping the HEX bath and output is a bad approach that I know some use, but it is rarely due to inefficiency of the HERMS. It is usually because they don't insulate their tun, and need more heat to get the dial thermometer sticking 4" into their mash bed up to temp. What they usually don't understand is they are overheating their mash, which is the liquid, and not the spent grain that is really little more than a sponge shortly after dough-in. Temps for HERMS are usually measured entering and exiting the HEX, and a third at the tun exit if wanted. A dial thermo mid mash might be a good backup, but is only good as a sanity check, not a reliable measurement. Personally I don't like a bunch of crap sticking into the tun, because I stir, even after dough in. The lid is where that stuff belongs.-Many HERMS set-ups compensate for lack of efficiency in the HERMS coil by overheating the HLT liquor.
The benefits of a PC for chilling wort a routinely exaggerated. And we have yet another metric where PCs are the undisputed king- water conservation. PCs and CFCs have an advantage when doing direct/single pass chilling to the ferm vessel. To do this they need a supply of water cold enough to get adequate wort flow at pitching temp. If pre-chillers are needed, some of their advantage is lost due to complexity and introduced temperature control issues. If the tap water is not significantly colder than pitching temp, they will likely use MORE water in single pass mode than an immersion chiller doing kettle chills which can be done at a slower feed rate as temp deltas decrease (if water conservation is desired). This is especially true if the IC is switched to a recirc ice bath for the final temp drop- something not practical with single pass PCs. And really, the amount of water used isn't all that great- save it for cleaning, water the yard, don't take a shower on brew day, pee in the bushes while brewing instead of going inside, etc.-The benefit of plate chillers for wort chilling is clear (faster, less tap water consumed, more compact) but they are avoided because of the potential for clogging and the more complex cleaning procedures. If I can find a practical way to keep a plate chiller clean by using a few filters so that cleaning a plate chiller is really no more difficult than cleaning a CFC, hopefully that would be a valuable datapoint for the brewing community.
In terms of being all over the map, guilty as charged. In terms of vacuuming up trub by using a pump to 'suck', I beg to differ. There are at least three ways to establish a wand as a primed BK output (suction hose):
Not going to happen with hoppy beers and kettle chilling. At least not without a hop bag/spider of some sort. If you allow cold break and finer trub through the filter, then maybe. With single pass chilling, it is possible with moderate hops, and no issue if a spider/bag is used. For reference, I have a 26G kettle doing BIAB for ~18G post boil. The last IPA I did with ~1.5 lbs of hops had a solid 5G/4" of slurry. I let the trub settle over night as a test, and was only able to get ~.75G/.5" off the top. My grind was a bit tight, and I had some extra flour, but it wasn't that different from similar brews, or even brews done with fly sparging. There is no way that amount of crap was going to make a trub cone, and my kettle is even oversized (diameter wise) for the batch size.I really appreciate this comment - without having tried it yet, I have no idea how much of a PITA this semi-manual process would be. As I stated in the earlier post, my hope is that whirl pooling is successful enough that I can chill without clogging my ILF.
Here are the reasons I have decided to build a mash+lauter system rather than BIAB:
- lifting the grain bag is not something that appeals to me. For 5 gallon batches with 10-12 lbs of grain, it's probably not a big deal (should weigh something like 20-24 lbs wet, right?), but for 10 gallon batches, it seems like a PITA.
-lost mash efficiency is not a big deal to me, but variability in outcome is, and from what others who have tried both standard lauter+sparge and BIAB have written, it seems like repeatability with BIAB is harder to achieve.
Not sure how using a small basket in a big pot would work for either a 5G or 10G. The water depth needs to submerge the grain, but not overtop the basket/bag. Rule of thumb for BIAB, is ~twice the kettle volume for final post boil volume. You can cheat it a little by doing a dunk or pour sparge, or sacrificing some efficiency. You could easily do a ~6G batch in the 42Qt pot. That is close to the ideal size, and you could one hand the basket.On the other hand, you've made me think about trying a BIAB or two with the parts I have already purchased. I have a 42qt Concord pot+basket for my MLT on the way along with a 80qt Concord for the BK. I was going to toss the basket but am now thinking I might be able to use it to try BIAB in the BK.
Now you are also going to add a RIMS tube? A RIMS tube will blow your .5F mash tolerance out of the water. The localized heating around the element is a widely held drawback to RIMS. I think you just went off the map entirely. Although, I think you may be talking about a closed circuit e-HERMS. Still, don't expect miracles from PID control in that scenario. It's not magic.I need to get a bag, a pump and complete my RIMS tube.
The cornies are still usable, but the glass carboys should go in the dumpster. Refer to the broken carboy horror stories thread. Not very kid friendly, either.Not concerned about the cold side for now - I have all my old carboys and corney set-up.
That is a lot of balls to have in the air on brew day. If one beer is a simple house beer you can abandon at times, maybe. What happens when SHTF? I would guess that a second brew would add at least three hours without essentially having two systems, and even a simultaneous BIAB would add about that much. There is only so much multi-tasking that can happen. Maybe if you brewed barefoot, and had good toe-eye coordination, I could see snipping a packet of yeast open, and sprinkling it in the rehydrating bottle, while doughing in your second brew with a free foot/hand. For me, there is enough going on with one brew to keep me entertained, and any more action/panic would just make things less enjoyable.Back to batch size. I've planned the system for 5 and 10-gallon batches and if there are reasons this is impractical, I would appreciate knowing them. I'm also starting to get interested in the idea of dual 5+5 gallon brewing sessions (possibly using HERMS for the first and BIAB for the second).
Enter your email address to join: