Nice! Looking forward to seeing it come together!
Second note: I needed to turn the boil power down. I mean way down. I mean half!! Thats a nice power savings, though it wouldnt really translate to much $.
Third note: Boil off rate is greatly reduced. As in half also. I expected to boil off a gallon and ended up boiling off... well, you know the math.
Fourth note: With the above results, we might conclude that the dms and other volatiles were not appropriately carried away.
Assuming that you boiled an hour, its likely that all the DMS was volatilized, but I'm not sure if it made it out of the 'sealed' kettle. That's why I'm opening my kettle for the final minutes to assure that DMS is expelled.
But the condenser causes a pressure drop, so the DMS should be more easily evaporated. Some breweries that have installed condensers have been able to shorten their boil. It's mentioned in the LBNL "Energy Efficiency Improvement and Cost Saving Opportunities for Breweries" report.
This result is odd since DMS boils at 99F. A reduction in pressure within a kettle would only serve to evaporate water more effectively, not DMS. In addition, unless the kettle is sealed, its not going to be under a vacuum.
...
What's special about DMS that it wouldn't boil at lower temps at reduced pressure?
Brew on
I think this just implies that since the boiling temperature of DMS is so much lower than wort, the additional bonus due to pressure isnt going to make a difference.
This result is odd since DMS boils at 99F. A reduction in pressure within a kettle would only serve to evaporate water more effectively, not DMS. In addition, unless the kettle is sealed, its not going to be under a vacuum.
This information doesn't seem to be accurate, at first glance.
...
The more significant effect of lower pressure systems is that the rate of decomposition of SMM will decrease rapidly with a drop in boil temperature - more than halved at 95C and reduced 96% at 80C (0.85bar).
...
Valid points. But do you want to break the news to the brewers in Denver? They think they are the craft capital of the world - this could devastate them! Haha, I am just having fun!! 🤣
Interestingly, for those super water conscious, you could automate the water flow rate with a proportional valve (very small Cv range), using the flush exit temperature for guidance. I am probably going to upgrade to the 9 gph and call it a day, but its an option.
Another alternative might be to just capture the water and let it cool off in between brew days; at 9 gph, you will only need to store about 10 gallons. Run it through the condenser, collect the water, let it cool off for a few days, then repeat.
You are wasting the heat that way though. I think the greenest solution is to reuse the hot water for cleanup. That way, you are making use of both the water and heat.
Any reason at a homebrew scale we couldn't just make a port in the kettle top, and run the steam through something like an aluminum transmission cooler with a PC fan attached, and basically air-cool it, and not deal with water-cooling the steam? The little waterwise water purifiers are kinda like that and they are pretty effective at eliminating steam.
I think you can use a radiator but it will need to be sized to draw away enough heat. There is a lot of latent heat that needs be pulled out to convert steam to liquid. I would think the airflow restriction of an air-air heat exchanger might require a fan or air pump to pull the air/steam through also.
Thank you for doing this experiment. I hope that it works out well with a pale lager. I would think that if the condenser created enough air flow then it would suck the DMS out before it could condensate on the lid.
However, it is not just cooling of the steam that is creating the airflow. I used to be a firefighter and we sometimes used hydraulic ventilation. We would set our fog nozzle to a 45 degree pattern and put it outside of an open window. The water flow would such the smoke out of the room. Your water spray pattern in the picture looks right on target. Well done sir.
The liquid running out of the drain is very hot. That heat comes from the steam. So yes, the steam and volatiles in are are being drawn out. The percentage is likely fairly high, because the kettle lid cannot transfer off enough heat to condense large volumes of the steam. You could insulate the lid if that were a real concern.
As far as the hydraulic ventilation - there is probably some function of it occurring, though the drain is a fairly small diameter. A larger one would be better in this regard. Might be worthwhile to upgrade to a bigger nipple and tube.
I can't take credit for that... That goes to whomever invented condensate hoods for use in restaurants (usually over dish washer sinks) or even just simple stove hoods.Electric brewing pioneers like Kal came up with an overhead ventilation system consisting of a hood and fan which generally work well.
Sorry I'm sure you're getting bombarded with questions since this came out in that newsletter but any reason why you don't just use a normal lid? Was it to just see inside for the experiment?
I can't take credit for that... That goes to whomever invented condensate hoods for use in restaurants (usually over dish washer sinks) or even just simple stove hoods.
Kal
I only used plastic wrap for the test so that I could "see" the steam escaping (it didn't work). A lid would be normally used.
Enter your email address to join: