Budget 2 vessel e-herms build. What controller?

Been thinking recently of taking my setup to the next level. There's so much about stovetop/turkey fryer brewing that is a hassle in my situation, and I'm lusting after a greater level of control over the process.

So anyway, I was thinking I could easily get away with a 2 vessel system with most of my brews, and I already have a large cooler for the MLT, and a keggle for the boiler/HLT. To go e-herms, I'd just need a coil, an element, a pump, some fittings, and some way of controlling it all.

I'm trying to stay budget on this, and as MLT temp control is my biggest issue, I think it should be possible. Thus far the pricey-est part is the march 809.

this is basically the plan: (not my drawing)


the only deviation would be that for certain brews i'd pump sparge water from the boiler/HLT to a separate cooler for a second sparge.

So with all that explaining, what is the most economical way to control this setup?

thanks!

Look at JKarp's Countertop Brutus 20. It's divine and I wish I had the spare money right now to do one as well. Good luck.

And checkout the Chugger pumps. I haven't done too much research since I don't want to be tempted to buy them, but they've got stainless heads and they're cheaper than the March as well. http://farmhousebrewingsupply.com/Scripts/prodView.asp?idproduct=259

There are lots of ways of handling your brewery. The first step is the controller which is your base question. A fairly simple controller can be built using Auber Instruments: SYL-2352 PID, SSR and some other components that they have. They also have a project box the you could easily use for your rig. You really only need a single pump as well.

Looks like it'll be close to $300 for a decent controller setup. (Plus the cost of a pump) My estimate includes the expense of having GFCI protection.

What power do you have available? I hope it is 240V with at least a 30A setup available. A typical dryer outlet will do it for you.

Let us know.

P-J

iijakii, i've seen that brutus 20. that was part of my inspiration, but i don't have near that budget. the only thing i want to automate is temp control via herms. that pump looks great. saves me $50!

p-j, thanks for the input. that controller looks nice. i'd need 2 yes? also, what kind of GFCI device should i use?

killsurfcity said:

iijakii, i've seen that brutus 20. that was part of my inspiration, but i don't have near that budget. the only thing i want to automate is temp control via herms. that pump looks great. saves me $50!

p-j, thanks for the input. that controller looks nice. i'd need 2 yes? also, what kind of GFCI device should i use?

Click to expand...

You only need a single PID. The GFCI device is a GE Spa Panel from HomeDepot. It is in the spread sheet to follow and also its wiring is illustrated as well.

Ok. I finished a diagram for you.

Click on the image to see a full-scale diagram that is printable on Tabloid paper 11" x 17"




Now on to the parts I suggest you use for your build. This is an Excel sheet that shows the parts I have checked off. I shows pricing, the vendor, and a clickable link to take you to the actual web page for the parts. Click on the image to get the spread sheet. Just save it to your system and then you are good to go. BTW there is a second page on it that shows various wiring configurations for the SPA Panel for the GFCI protection.




I've included some parts for protecting the heating element connection the way Kai does it with his brewery build.

I hope this helps you.

P-J

thanks p-j! that saves me a LOT of work.

i'll get that sheet and let you know if i have any questions.

one for now tho... will that pid allow me to see the temps on both the mlt and the hlt at the same time?

thanks again!

killsurfcity said:

thanks p-j! that saves me a LOT of work.

i'll get that sheet and let you know if i have any questions.

one for now tho... will that pid allow me to see the temps on both the mlt and the hlt at the same time?

thanks again!

Click to expand...

The PID will only monitor one temperature. You could rig it with a second probe to measure another temp but the probes would have to be switched. Question - why would you need to monitor the MLT temp? It is an insulated cooler after all.

P-J

p-j, well, i want to do a herms setup to better maintain mash temps. i tend to experience a bit of a decrease over time in normal mashes anyway, this would hopefully help that. also, herms gives me the ability to do step mashes, and raise to mashout temp much easier. i assumed i needed a controller of all those functions, unless i'm wrong.

my concept was that one controller would be maintaining the temp of the liquid in the hlt, a couple degrees above mash, so that the herms coil can do it's job of warming mash liquor. the other controller would be watching the temp of the mash so it can cycle mash liquor through the herms when it needs to raise temp.

that's the typical configuration, no?

IMHO you can do it either way. For me, even with a step mash, only one controller and temp probe is needed. With your first brew (test setup) you will know the temperature differential between the HLT water temp and the temp required to maintain proper mash temps (you determine the losses in connectors, pump and hoses). Using constant recirculation during the enire mash will maintain the mash temp you want very accurately. For step mashing, all that is needed is to reset the PID temp to the next temp setting. So on and again for each step.

If you really want a second probe, I believe you will need a second PID to handle it in your situation.. Placing a temp probe directly in the mash, howerver, might provide temperature readings that could be inaccurate. There is a hugh depends with that sort of setup. (Depends on where the probe is placed, length of the probe, + +.)

If you want to go with a second temp probe and PID, I'd be glad to change the wiring plan for you.

Just let me know.

P-J

p-j, intersting ideas. i'm still really new to all of this, so forgive my noobie questions.

during mash, constant recirculation, would just be going through the pump, not herms, correct? so is it typical to have it switch to herms when needed?

you are right that if you recirculate continuously, temp can be maintained more accurately, because you can put the probe at the liquor-out point. i didn't think of that.

if you do this though, don't you need an automated switch to go between straight recirculation and recirculation via herms?

if the hlt heat is maintained manually, i assume i need some kind of rheostat or something to dial in temperature, monitoring it via a built in thermometer?

sounds doable, though i'd have to watch it more closely. (although the pid running herms would compensate some, by recirculating less, or more if my heat drifts.

part of why i'm doing this sort of setup using a cooler, is that at some point, i'd like to replace it with something else, like another keggle, or a wood-clad hdpe drum.

i also realize that drawing shows 2 pumps, which is 1 more than i'd like to use.

bumping for unanswered questions.

thanks!

I think P-J is saying that you would continuously recirculate through the HERMS coil. Since your HLT is always set to your mash temp this will keep a near constant temp in the MLT.

This is also why there is no need for a second temp probe. The first batch you do you will want to manually check the temp of in the MLT a couple of times to check to see if there is any heat loss in the system between the HLT temp and the MLT. If there is then you would want to set the HLT temp a little higher to compensate. From then on you can just assume that your mash will always be at the right temp since you are constantly heating it to the right temp.

ok, i think i'm getting it now. correct me if i'm wrong here...

the probe is in the HLT, and the PID reads it and regulates the temp. the MLT has a separate probe and some kind of thermometer readout of my choosing. MLT liquor is constantly recirculating through the HLT. so if i want to raise temp in the MLT, i just input a new temp on the HLT PID. i just have to know the temperature loss i'll get through the pump and hoses between the two vessels. so if my new temp is 156, i'll need to input 158 on the PID if my differential is 2º, for instance.

right?

thanks for the help, all this is very new to me obviously.

Almost, not quite...

First, I would put your probe inside the output plumbing of your herms coil so that you are measuring the temperature of your wort as it exits the HLT. This way, your PID is actually directly controlling the temperature of your WORT, not the water in the HLT. Yes, the water in the HLT may be a different temperature depending on how fast you're recirculating and how much cooler the wort is as it enters the HERMS coil, but the controller will be basing its adjustments on the actual temperature of your wort. This way you simply set the PID to your desired mash temp and voila!

You are right about the MLT except I would again place that temperature probe, inside the plumbing as it exits your MLT so that you know the actual temperature of your wort before it goes back to the HERMS coil.

I am putting my herms system together now and have given a lot of thought to probe placement. I think you want it in the hlt, not in direct contact with the wort in the coil.

The reason for this is the pid is heating the water in the hlt, set it at the target temp (adjusting for losses in transfer) and the mash temp will get there eventually even if the entire volume of the mash must pass through the coil two or three times.

If you were to put the probe in the coil then the pid will heat the hlt based on what temp it sees the wort at as it exits the coil. This will be a function of how long the coil is and how fast you are pumping in addition to the temp in the hlt. Temps in the hlt could exceed mash temp if you pump quickly. Then if you slow the flow you end up over heating the mash. Plus the pid has to deal with the confusion this generates and from what I've read they don't do well with oscillations and on the fly variations in the system.

Keep it simple and put the probe in the liquid that is actually being heated by the element.

Lost said:

I am putting my herms system together now and have given a lot of thought to probe placement. I think you want it in the hlt, not in direct contact with the wort in the coil.

The reason for this is the pid is heating the water in the hlt, set it at the target temp (adjusting for losses in transfer) and the mash temp will get there eventually even if the entire volume of the mash must pass through the coil two or three times.

If you were to put the probe in the coil then the pid will heat the hlt based on what temp it sees the wort at as it exits the coil. This will be a function of how long the coil is and how fast you are pumping in addition to the temp in the hlt. Temps in the hlt could exceed mash temp if you pump quickly. Then if you slow the flow you end up over heating the mash. Plus the pid has to deal with the confusion this generates and from what I've read they don't do well with oscillations and on the fly variations in the system.

Keep it simple and put the probe in the liquid that is actually being heated by the element.

Click to expand...

Recirc speed should be a constant during mash, set the pump and forget it, thus knowing and regulating outflow temp is important, not regulating temp in the HLT. Though monitoring HLT temps will prevent an overshoot, really the cycling of the element in the HLT will create a response in the liquid flowing through the coil quite rapidly thus overheating is sort of a non issue. Also you will likely find yourself losing heat as the wort flows from the exchanger back to the input to the top of the grain bed, by measuring the temp as close to grainbed contact as possible you allow your system to account for this loss of heat. my .02, though when it comes down to it it's 6 one way and a half dozen the other, but i think probe mounting has its benefits in either place and refitting it to a new location is pretty easy.

Lost said:

I am putting my herms system together now and have given a lot of thought to probe placement. I think you want it in the hlt, not in direct contact with the wort in the coil.

The reason for this is the pid is heating the water in the hlt, set it at the target temp (adjusting for losses in transfer) and the mash temp will get there eventually even if the entire volume of the mash must pass through the coil two or three times.

If you were to put the probe in the coil then the pid will heat the hlt based on what temp it sees the wort at as it exits the coil. This will be a function of how long the coil is and how fast you are pumping in addition to the temp in the hlt. Temps in the hlt could exceed mash temp if you pump quickly. Then if you slow the flow you end up over heating the mash. Plus the pid has to deal with the confusion this generates and from what I've read they don't do well with oscillations and on the fly variations in the system.

Keep it simple and put the probe in the liquid that is actually being heated by the element.

Click to expand...

You are absolutely right on the money with your thought process.!

The only concern would be stratification of temps in the HLT. That can be solved with a recirc pump for the HLT to break the thermal layer around the coil.

I'll chime in and agree with P-J and Lost. Hatfieldenator's suggestion is probably a little more accurate but I think it his solution adds a large amount of complexity for only a small improvement in the system. As P-J says just make sure to stir or recirc your HLT to prevent stratification and you should be fine.

A Stir Motor set up like this:






Works really well and is a lot less than the cost of a pump.

hatfieldenator said:

Almost, not quite...

First, I would put your probe inside the output plumbing of your herms coil so that you are measuring the temperature of your wort as it exits the HLT. This way, your PID is actually directly controlling
the temperature of your WORT, not the water in the HLT. Yes, the water in the HLT may be a different temperature depending on how fast you're recirculating and how much cooler the wort is as it enters the HERMS coil, but the controller will be basing its adjustments on the actual temperature of your wort. This way you simply set the PID to your desired mash temp and voila!

You are right about the MLT except I would again place that temperature probe, inside the plumbing as it exits your MLT so that you know the actual temperature of your wort before it goes back to the HERMS coil.

Click to expand...

I’m in the same boat. I’m trying to figure out the probe placement on the Brew Magic system I’m converting from RIMS to HERMS. My first thought was to measure the temp of the wort as it pours out return line/hose onto the top of the mash. Without measuring the temp of the wort, how do you have positive control over the temperature of the mash if you’re trying to be accurate to within +/- 1 degree or so. The whole concept of the recirculation is temperature control, right? Well, not just temperature control, accurate temperature control. My thought was if you monitor the temp of the wort as it goes back onto the top of the mash, and have that PID control the element in the HLT, it will make the necessary adjustments to the water temp to automagically (stolen from Nationwide) make the adjustments for temp loss in the plumbing from the exit of the coil to the return point at the top of the mash. During the recirculation of the mash, I don’t particularly care what the temp of the water is in the HLT, so long as I’m hitting my mash temp exactly where I want it.

If you’re going to use the water in the HLT that was maintaining mash temp for sparge water, without changing your plumbing, then you have to figure out how to set the temperature of your sparge water without having the probe there.

What if you pull the sparge water from the HLT through the pump, into the supply of the HERMS coil and as it exits the HERMS coil, measure the temp as normal with the PID/probe, and have it dump right back into the HLT while you’re draining the mash tun (if you batch sparge)? Once the temp is right on the HLT and you’re ready to sparge, rather than dump into the HLT, have the sparge water flow onto the top of the grain bed…

Isn’t this just as simple as measuring the temp of the water in the HLT and hoping your mash temp is where you want it?

Disclaimer, I’m new to this as well, have no experience using pumps/grain beds/false bottoms/etc. I just want something that works accurately and I can set it and forget it for both the temps and the pumps. I don’t want to have to tweak things for flow rates or Kentucky windage the temperature for loss if I can avoid it without an overly complex solution. If someone can explain the advantage of monitoring the HLT water temp as a means of controling the mash temp over measuring the wort temp directly with a constant flow rate through the coil, I'd appreciate it. Again, not trying to turn this into a debate or argument, I'm just looking for clarification.

jtkratzer said:

I’m in the same boat. I’m trying to figure out the probe placement on the Brew Magic system I’m converting from RIMS to HERMS. My first thought was to measure the temp of the wort as it pours out return line/hose onto the top of the mash. Without measuring the temp of the wort, how do you have positive control over the temperature of the mash if you’re trying to be accurate to within +/- 1 degree or so. The whole concept of the recirculation is temperature control, right? Well, not just temperature control, accurate temperature control. My thought was if you monitor the temp of the wort as it goes back onto the top of the mash, and have that PID control the element in the HLT, it will make the necessary adjustments to the water temp to automagically (stolen from Nationwide) make the adjustments for temp loss in the plumbing from the exit of the coil to the return point at the top of the mash. During the recirculation of the mash, I don’t particularly care what the temp of the water is in the HLT, so long as I’m hitting my mash temp exactly where I want it.

If you’re going to use the water in the HLT that was maintaining mash temp for sparge water, without changing your plumbing, then you have to figure out how to set the temperature of your sparge water without having the probe there.

What if you pull the sparge water from the HLT through the pump, into the supply of the HERMS coil and as it exits the HERMS coil, measure the temp as normal with the PID/probe, and have it dump right back into the HLT while you’re draining the mash tun (if you batch sparge)? Once the temp is right on the HLT and you’re ready to sparge, rather than dump into the HLT, have the sparge water flow onto the top of the grain bed…

Isn’t this just as simple as measuring the temp of the water in the HLT and hoping your mash temp is where you want it?

Disclaimer, I’m new to this as well, have no experience using pumps/grain beds/false bottoms/etc. I just want something that works accurately and I can set it and forget it for both the temps and the pumps. I don’t want to have to tweak things for flow rates or Kentucky windage the temperature for loss if I can avoid it without an overly complex solution. If someone can explain the advantage of monitoring the HLT water temp as a means of controling the mash temp over measuring the wort temp directly with a constant flow rate through the coil, I'd appreciate it. Again, not trying to turn this into a debate or argument, I'm just looking for clarification.

Click to expand...

What you are suggesting (monitor temp of wort entering grainbed) introduces precisely the complexities you seek to avoid. Monitoring sparge temps becomes more complex as does the herms process. You end up heating one vessel based on observations of another point further down the system where readings are a function of more than just temp in the hlt (yet temp in the hlt is the only thing the pid has control over).

The temp loss from hlt to mlt is a constant (for our purposes). It is a function of tubing length and type which do not change during the brew day and ambient temp relative to hlt temp which is close enough to static to not matter.

The point is, the temp in the mash WILL be static, it will just be a degree our two lower than what the probe in the hlt reads. Take 1 minute to check the temp in the mash with a pocket thermometer and you can figure out the differential and adjust the hlt temp upwards as necessary.

Honestly, either way will probably work fine. You ask which way I think is better and I told you. I am not a smart individual and prefer to KISS. Only add complexities when the value added is sure and obvious, in this case it is neither.

Edit: BTW P-J I am working from one of your diagrams and could not do this with out it. Many thanks for your excellent contributions to this forum.

I see what you mean, I guess it's 6 of one half of a dozen the other. Probably easier to do it your way for sparging. It'd be pretty easy to put a thermometer in a t-fitting either at the return from the HERMS coil going into the mash or at the dip tube as the liquid leaves the mash on its way to the coil to monitor the MLT temp.

For those of us who are brewing somewhere that doesn't have HVAC (garage, etc), the ambient air temp will be the biggest variable on heat loss from season to season and that adjustment on the HLT temp to get the mash temp right will require adjustment every brewing session. That's the inconsistency I'm trying to avoid. Is there a way to avoid the "learning process" for the temp loss on every brew day?

I brew in the garage. I expect the temp loss across vessels will vary at most 1-2 degrees. So maybe a 1 degree loss in the summer and 3 in the winter. I am in FL where winters are mild. It is inconsequential and, for me, not something I care one way or the other about.

Honestly, after brewing in coolers where my mash temp would drop noticeably and I would consistently miss my target strike temp by several degrees I think this system will be plenty precise. I don't think you would be able to tell a difference between two identical batches, one mashed at 154 and the other at 151. I think you are over thinking this and looking for greater precision than is necessary. But I'm the type who uses ugly and cheap equipment willingly if it gets the job done. A herms system, any way it's done, is way super fancy for a brewer like me

P-J said:

A Stir Motor set up like this:

Works really well and is a lot less than the cost of a pump.

Click to expand...

That's pretty cool. Is there a build thread you got going for that? I see the link for the motor but where'd you get the blade?

I'd planned on just stirring the HLT occasionally with a paddle but that's definitely cool. I may go that route if I end up having to stir too frequently to avoid stratification problems.

You know, I wonder if I could put a stir plate under the kettle and stir it that way? (obviously you'd have to have a flat bottomed vessel, not a keg to try a stir plate). I have a high speed motor from an electric blower laying around, I wonder if I could jbweld a magnet on that and make a monster stir plate... I guess I could regulate the speed of the motor with a rheostat or something.

Lost said:

I brew in the garage. I expect the temp loss across vessels will vary at most 1-2 degrees. So maybe a 1 degree loss in the summer and 3 in the winter. I am in FL where winters are mild. It is inconsequential and, for me, not something I care one way or the other about.

Honestly, after brewing in coolers where my mash temp would drop noticeably and I would consistently miss my target strike temp by several degrees I think this system will be plenty precise. I don't think you would be able to tell a difference between two identical batches, one mashed at 154 and the other at 151. I think you are over thinking this and looking for greater precision than is necessary. But I'm the type who uses ugly and cheap equipment willingly if it gets the job done. A herms system, any way it's done, is way super fancy for a brewer like me

Click to expand...

I'm just going to shut up and do what those who have been doing this far longer than I have are saying to do and if I want to change something later, I'll experiment then. For now, I'm back in my box.

Lost said:

That's pretty cool. Is there a build thread you got going for that? I see the link for the motor but where'd you get the blade?

I'd planned on just stirring the HLT occasionally with a paddle but that's definitely cool. I may go that route if I end up having to stir too frequently to avoid stratification problems.

You know, I wonder if I could put a stir plate under the kettle and stir it that way? (obviously you'd have to have a flat bottomed vessel, not a keg to try a stir plate). I have a high speed motor from an electric blower laying around, I wonder if I could jbweld a magnet on that and make a monster stir plate... I guess I could regulate the speed of the motor with a rheostat or something.

Click to expand...

I hand made the prop from brass sheet that I bought from Ace Hardware and fittings from Lowe's. I cut and formed the brass sheet and then silver soldered it together.

You could make a decent stirrer using one of those paint mixers the you put in a drill for 5 gallon paint or 'mud' mixing. It'll work very well. Just use a coupling from the motor shaft to the mixer shaft.

nothing much to add at the moment, just thanks for the great info guys. i'm beginning to get a handle on how all this works, and it's damned cool!

hey all, so it's been a while. i still don't have the system up due to indecision and other random life factors. however, i am talking to a friend about partnering up on a 1-1.5 bbl system using 55g stainless barrels. we'd probably have to use electric heating in the space we'd be occupying. so that means 1-2 elements more right? any other considerations i might be missing? would a regular march pump still hack it?

I think that motor is brilliant, I use my HLT to chill with. I run a recirc pump but it doesn't seem to move the ice bath at all. I have found that if I take a paddle and stir the ice bath while pumping hot wort thru it I can chill my hot wort at nearly full throttle vs 10 to 20% open. If I stop for even a few seconds the temp rises really fast. Having a motor would be a huge help as there are so many other tasks to deal with at that stage of the brew besides stirring ice.

grandequeso said:

I think that motor is brilliant, I use my HLT to chill with. I run a recirc pump but it doesn't seem to move the ice bath at all. I have found that if I take a paddle and stir the ice bath while pumping hot wort thru it I can chill my hot wort at nearly full throttle vs 10 to 20% open. If I stop for even a few seconds the temp rises really fast. Having a motor would be a huge help as there are so many other tasks to deal with at that stage of the brew besides stirring ice.

Click to expand...

The motor is still available & if you are handy soldering copper you can make the prop easily. Go for it...

Hey PJ, hope you are feeling better. You are a asset. Hey, I have had the same motor for a couple of years now. My intended use was to stir the Mash Tun while the grain is mashing....didnt do it.
How did you wire that motor up?

Hogcrewer said:

Hey PJ, hope you are feeling better. You are a asset. Hey, I have had the same motor for a couple of years now. My intended use was to stir the Mash Tun while the grain is mashing....didnt do it.
How did you wire that motor up?

Click to expand...

Here is a wiring diagram for the stir motor. Hope it helps:

Check out Greatbreweh.com for a pump. So far I'm pretty happy with mine and a lot cheaper than a march pump.

Also I just completed my setup that is a two vessel, one pump, electric kettle and cooler mash tun.
Here's a link to my "build" thread.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f170/different-e-brewery-380514/

Edit: just realized the date on the first post. Forget what I said. It's old news now. Sorry