Coldbreak Brewing Giveaway - Open to All!

Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > DIY Projects > Other > Crazy idea: constant flow brewing
Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 08-04-2009, 05:41 PM   #1
dantose
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: location
Posts: 198
Liked 9 Times on 6 Posts

Default Crazy idea: constant flow brewing

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?


dantose is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 05:47 PM   #2
Chosenwon
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 105
Liked 2 Times on 2 Posts

Default

I take it you are not a fan of KISS?


Chosenwon is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 05:54 PM   #3
FlyingHorse
Formerly Bike N Brew
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
 
FlyingHorse's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Evanston IL
Posts: 1,864
Liked 11 Times on 10 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dantose View Post
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.

This is a problem...primary fermentation is pretty violent, and the wort tends to homogenize pretty rapidly once the yeasties start doing their dance. I doubt you'll be able o count on a difference in SG to keep the fermented wort separated from the unfermented.
__________________
No signature required.
FlyingHorse is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 06:08 PM   #4
dantose
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: location
Posts: 198
Liked 9 Times on 6 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingHorse View Post
This is a problem...primary fermentation is pretty violent, and the wort tends to homogenize pretty rapidly once the yeasties start doing their dance. I doubt you'll be able o count on a difference in SG to keep the fermented wort separated from the unfermented.
This would only be an issue with the first pass. After that it would be a slow add and not a "hey, here's 5 whole gallons of unfermented wort, go at it yeasties!" Basically, the system would be introducing 24-36 oz of new wort per day as it's drawn off the secondary.

ETA: Also, reducing mixing would help tighten up the distribution of the residence time, but wouldn't change the average.

dantose is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 06:09 PM   #5
camiller
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: Omaha, NE
Posts: 1,888
Liked 29 Times on 29 Posts
Likes Given: 9

Default

Carling expiremented with this in the 60's

The History Of Carling Black Label Beer In The USA
Quote:
...In a huge mistake which almost ruins the company, Carling experiments with a "continuous brewing process " at a newly built brewery in Ft. Worth, Texas.The idea was to speed up the brewing process, and in short, to brew more beer more often. The experiment is a complete failure. ...
http://nzic.org.nz/ChemProcesses/food/6A.pdf
camiller is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 06:13 PM   #6
mmb
FFS, really?
HBT_LIFETIMESUPPORTER.png
Feedback Score: 1 reviews
 
mmb's Avatar
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: WBMI
Posts: 26,323
Liked 3370 Times on 3251 Posts
Likes Given: 217

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyingHorse View Post
This is a problem...primary fermentation is pretty violent, and the wort tends to homogenize pretty rapidly once the yeasties start doing their dance. I doubt you'll be able o count on a difference in SG to keep the fermented wort separated from the unfermented.
This

You can drain and repitch a yeast slury but draining possibly unfermented "green" beer would lead to bottle bombs and overcarbonation.

Instead of standing column carbing, if that would even work, I'd look more for inline carb during transfer.
__________________
White Dog Aleworks and Drafthouse
mmb is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2009, 06:35 PM   #7
dantose
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: location
Posts: 198
Liked 9 Times on 6 Posts

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by camiller View Post
Link was short on details, but gave me some better search terms. Looks like the main issue is the necessity of an oxygenated stage for yeast reproduction. This is rather complicated in a continuous brewing process.

Ah well. It was a cool idea anyway.


dantose is offline
 
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Maybe a crazy idea but xxdcmast Beginners Beer Brewing Forum 6 12-30-2008 10:13 PM
Prechiller / counter-flow idea.... Duckfoot Chillers and Stir Plates 5 09-24-2008 09:16 PM
DIY Idea/Theory - Counter Flow Double IMMERSION Chiller jezter6 Chillers and Stir Plates 38 11-24-2007 09:36 AM
adjusting propane flow? easy, or Crazy Talk? EvilTOJ Equipment/Sanitation 3 05-14-2007 08:44 PM
Crazy CFC idea PseudoChef Equipment/Sanitation 3 04-23-2007 10:15 PM


Forum Jump

Newest Threads

LATEST SPONSOR DEALS