Ultransonic Cleaning Element for Mash Agitation

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

paddyfunk

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2009
Messages
66
Reaction score
0
Location
DC Metro - Metro Blows Even Without Catoe
I was wondering if anyone has ever tried using an ultrasonic transducer to agitate their mash. I was thinking that something like (55-Watt ULTRASONIC TRANSDUCER for CLEANER (ultrasound)) (albeit from a reputable dealer) could possibly increase mash efficiency while lowering the time necessary to achieve reasonable efficiencies. When I worked in a machine shop we used a number of ultrasonic cleaners with a rheostat to fine tune the agitation. Any thoughts?
 
Im not a chemist but I remember reading something about shear forces denaturing enzymes. I dont know if it could be as issue with those frequencies but maybe someone with a better grasp on enzyme chem/physics will chime in.
 
Found this, biofuel related but interesting:

"Dry grind corn milling does not reach full efficiency of starch conversion to sugars and subsequently to ethanol because of limitations in the milling process. This paper examines the use of high-power ultrasonics to enhance the release of fermentable sugars from milled dry corn. In this work, 20 kHz ultrasonic energy was used to pretreat corn mash prior to enzymatic conversion of corn starch to glucose in a batch-mode. The ultrasonic amplitude was varied from 0, 191 to 320 µmpp. The corn mash was sonicated for 0 (control), 20 and 40 seconds. Other experimental variables that were studied included the effect of temperature and pretreatment sequencing, e.g., ultrasonic pretreatment before and after enzyme addition. It was found that the reaction rate kinetics of the enzymatic reactions increased threefold for sonicated samples. Energy balance (efficiency) analysis indicated that ultrasound pretreatment released twice as much energy (as sugar) when introduced during pretreatment. Based on scanning electron microscopy examination and particle size analysis, the enhancement of the conversion was primarily attributed to particle size reduction, resulting in an increase in the surface area to volume ratio, which in turn increased the available enzymatic reaction sites. One of the most striking findings was that enzymes were not degraded by low level ultrasonication. In addition, the most significant increase in sugar yield was seen when the enzymes were added before ultrasonic pretreatment. Ultrasound has the potential to enhance the ethanol yield from cornstarch and reduce the production cost significantly in commercial dry corn milling ethanol plants."

So basically it ended up creating more particulate matter in the mash which led to a greater total efficiency. My idea would be something more along the lines of agitating the mash without producing significant particulate matter. Rather, just increasing efficiency, which goes back to the effect of ultrasound on enzymatic reactions. Better ask my chem eng friend!
 
well it sounds like a great experiment. I wonder if it could be used during fermentation to increase attenuation?
 
I ran it by my chem/eng friend, looks like a go. She said that it shouldn't be a problem if it is done after about 10 minutes into the sparge. I'm going to do a 3 gallon batch of a simple IPA (lots of 2 row = predictable) and try 20 watts for 30 seconds or so, already got the transducer off of ebay.
 
She said that it shouldn't be a problem if it is done after about 10 minutes into the sparge.

Did she say why it would be better to wait until ten minutes into the sparge? Seems to me that the biggest benefit would be during the mash and especially at the start, not at the end. Conversion should be complete at ten minutes into the sparge. Maybe the ultrasonic treatment could improve the extraction at that point, but I don't think it will have any effect on the conversion efficiency.
 
She was concerned about how exactly the addition hi-freq energy would impact the conversion process. More likely than not there would be little negative impact (except the potential creation of excess particulate matter). Basically she suggested that I try a prolonged lower energy application of the transducer during the sparge to improve extraction, which sounds pretty reasonable to me (shake it for a bit and you are likely to get more out). Drawing on my own background there is a LOT of physics at work here (the resonant frequency of the MT, variable density of the grain bed, etc...). Also, I'm not quite sure how I am going to mount/drive the transducer in my current setup (10 gallon Igloo). This would be a bit easier with stainless steel, but poverty has kept me from taking that plunge!
 
Here is another approach, used by the Germans.

Vibration during mashing improves brewing process

Shaken, not stirred: in order to achieve better extract yields in conjunction with shorter mashing times, Krones has adopted an entirely fresh approach for its Shakesbeer mashing system. Shakesbeer has proven its worth during numerous applications. A mashing time of less than two hours, uniformly heated mash and considerably reduced energy consumption are the most important features.
Vibration units integrated in the mash tun are a further improvement with a positive effect on the brewing process. The vibration units are installed in the mash tun, and function as a kind of agitator bottle. They are driven by an electric unbalance motor, surrounded by a metal cylinder. The motor is linked up with a programmable logic control system and is automatically switched on and off in the respective phases of the mashing process. Different frequencies can be generated as well.
Following more than a year of field experience with the vibration units, the following results have been verified:
* Increased yield
* Improved lauterability of the wort
* Improved filtering characteristics of the beers
* Reduced oxygen loading in the mash:D

Krones AG - Home - Branches - Beer - Process Technology - Brewhouse - Mash Tun

Cheers,
ClaudiusB
 
from: Brew-Monkey's Brewer Interview of Vinnie Cilurzo
from Russian River Brewing Company


Do you perform the legendary "20 minute" mashes? If not, how long do you mash?

I didn't know it was legendary, but, yes I do only mash for 20 minutes. I've gone as short as 15 minutes, but, I've got 20 minutes of work to do between the last malt going into the mash tun and the next step in the brew process so 20 minutes works great. We couldn't see a difference in flavor with beers done with a longer mash.


Makes me wonder why I (we) (many of us) bother with 1 hour?
Agitate the mash? Why make things complex?
 
Cool find! Wish they gave a little more info on exactly WHEN in the mash they trigger their gigantic cellphone motors! As for the driver, I am going to do a little research on those cheapo jewelry cleaners. Alternately, I have a 30 watt mono around here somewhere!
 
A vibrating mash rake might be a really cool accessory. I'l be working on building a prototype. I've already thought of a way to easily build one powered by compressed air.
 
I just got back from a business trip and have gotten back to this project.

Over the weekend I designed a driver circuit to run through an amp (which I have yet to design). The circuit is pretty simple, just a 555 astable.

Astable 555 Square Wave Calculator


I used the following values:

C = .022 uf
R1 = 1k ohm
R2 = 680 ohm

Which gives me about 28khz, I added a potentiometer in line to tweak the resonance frequency. The transducer has a mounting hole at the bottom which I am going to attach to a plate in my mashtun.

I to boost the voltage I need an amplifier that has a frequency response up to 28khz and can put out 3+ watts. I'm still looking for a single chip solution.

To boost the voltage I'm going to need a inductor around 8.6 mh or so.
 
Some thing to consider is that, in the biofuel article you posted, It said the there was little enzymatic degradation from sonication, but I think you should consider that in their process, they are adding enzyme, most likely a purified and concentrated enzyme used in industrial processing, where there can be 1 - 5 fold excess of enzyme added to their process. But in your mash you will have the enzymes from the grain, so your concentration of enzymes will be much lower. Therefor any loss of enzymatic activity due to sonication will be much more evident in the mash, than in a Industrial process.


If the enzyme they are using is in excess, then the loss of enzyme not be reducing the enzyme below a threshold of activity, that would result in a observable difference in their process, so even with sonication they still reach the enzymatic steady state, of 3 fold higher efficiency.

In other words, if you need 100 units to process 300 grams of starch, and you are adding 500 units, but the sonication reduces your viable enzyme by 80% you will still have 100 units to process the 300 grams, so you might not see the degradation unless you are looking for it, in a change of rate.

My suggestion would be to try short to long periods of sonication, and measure your efficiency, but also be aware of off flavors that might get released due to sonication.

I use sonication in the lab quite a bit, and it is usually to shear DNA and proteins, but the frequencies are much higher and the volumes are much smaller. Sounds like an interesting experiment though.
 
Any more on this? I was curious about using it during the first 30 seconds of vorlauf and came upon this thread. If you have done a batch using this equipment please let us know.
 
What may be simpler is to get an inexpensive tweeter speaker and somehow fasten it to your keggle. Drive it with a cheap audio amp (only a couple of watts) using a test CD or your NE-555 square wave generator.
 
I have been having a hard time trying to figure out what to drive this thing with. The upper frequency response of most home hi-fi setups (at least the ones I have access to) is around 22khz. Since my Piezo is designed to be run at 28khz, this presents a problem. However, I think I may try Sawdustguy's idea of just running at a lower frequency through an old 5 watt amp I have lying around, it Might just work. I'll be brewing up an Imperial Brown this weekend and will let you know how it goes, with some pics to boot.
 
I was thinking of a wand type massager hanging on the side of the tun and touching it. Should vibrate the sidewalls and start something moving.
 
I would be careful with the power you crank into that thing. I think you'd be liable to pulverize the grains and get yourself a lot of small grain particles, and possibly tannin extraction. I would do some tests on how the grain will handle the sonication first before you go all out on a mash.

Oh, and wear ear protection and never start it outside of the liquid.
 
Interesting idea. After watching the presentation at Krones AG, most of the benefits seem negligible for homebrewers (e.g., 0.5% extraction improvement, 4% better head retention). They did say conversion happens more quickly, but didn't give a number.

Could I throw this in the mash - New Waterproof Vibrating Body Bath Massager Rubber Duck?

Jun23-05.jpg
 
Well the India Brown is brewed up and I have some observations about my transducer arrangement.

First let me go through my setup last night (I brew late!). I connected the square wave generator to the left channel of a cheap set of pc speakers. Just ramping up the volume on my dining room table produced SIGNIFICANT vibrations, something between gigantic hornets nest and light rail. Based on my ohmmeter, the speaker amp was crapping out somewhere around 19khz, which was disappointing to say the least. Nevertheless I figured I would go ahead and try it out during start of the vorlauf as suggested above.

I ran the speaker wire over the cpvc sparge arm of my MT and let the transducer sit about 3/4 inch into the mash. I think I am going to find a steel rod that will screw into the bottom of the transducer so I can attach a plate or something along those lines. Even at the lowest volume level there was a good amount of vibration between the transducer and MT wall, I was a little concerned about it cracking the wall.

Since I only had once batch to work with, I figured I would test to see how much sediment the transducer would produce. I began the vorlauf and pulled off about 2 quarts or so achieving nice clear runnings. I then ran the transducer at full power at approximately 18khz (any higher and there was a weird clipping problem) for 30 seconds. I then pulled off another quart of runnings with no discernible difference in terms of sedimentation. I then ran the transducer for a full minute and pulled off a final quart, this time with slightly more sedimentation.

Without a side-by-side comparison I think it is going to be tough to determine the value of this setup. However, I would find it hard to believe that this wouldn't improve efficiency. My SG was 1.073, slightly higher than my 1.068. Again not enough to definitively say that the transducer helped. I will let you know how the tasting turns out.

How do I attach pictures to this thread?
 
Well the India Brown is brewed up and I have some observations about my transducer arrangement.

First let me go through my setup last night (I brew late!). I connected the square wave generator to the left channel of a cheap set of pc speakers. Just ramping up the volume on my dining room table produced SIGNIFICANT vibrations, something between gigantic hornets nest and light rail. Based on my ohmmeter, the speaker amp was crapping out somewhere around 19khz, which was disappointing to say the least. Nevertheless I figured I would go ahead and try it out during start of the vorlauf as suggested above.

I ran the speaker wire over the cpvc sparge arm of my MT and let the transducer sit about 3/4 inch into the mash. I think I am going to find a steel rod that will screw into the bottom of the transducer so I can attach a plate or something along those lines. Even at the lowest volume level there was a good amount of vibration between the transducer and MT wall, I was a little concerned about it cracking the wall.

Since I only had once batch to work with, I figured I would test to see how much sediment the transducer would produce. I began the vorlauf and pulled off about 2 quarts or so achieving nice clear runnings. I then ran the transducer at full power at approximately 18khz (any higher and there was a weird clipping problem) for 30 seconds. I then pulled off another quart of runnings with no discernible difference in terms of sedimentation. I then ran the transducer for a full minute and pulled off a final quart, this time with slightly more sedimentation.

Without a side-by-side comparison I think it is going to be tough to determine the value of this setup. However, I would find it hard to believe that this wouldn't improve efficiency. My SG was 1.073, slightly higher than my 1.068. Again not enough to definitively say that the transducer helped. I will let you know how the tasting turns out.

How do I attach pictures to this thread?

I think it was a great experiment and it looks as if you may have had some improvement. Hey, if you didn't try it, we would all still be speculating. It would be cool to do a controlled experiment.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top