Fishies to Fermenting; aquarium chiller fermenter

[cwi]

Not trying save electrical costs--trying to make sure the chiller lasts. Again, its only running about 3 hours a day (so far). Maybe a bit more today as fermentation ramped up, but I don't think so.

I was just joking because earlier you said energy costs weren't important, and they really aren't much no matter what one uses for chilling.

And it is not cycling often. My bet is it is designed to handle frequent cycling anyway--it's an aquarium chiller... from my experience with reef fish tanks and hot metal halides hanging above them (to grow coral) that's what these chillers do--cycle frequently! To maintain a precise temperature (a sudden drop of even just 2-3 degrees can bleach or kill stony coral).

There no easy way to make an AC compressor handle frequent cycling, so I doubt it has anything to mitigate cycling. Running for longer times, with fewer cycles, is what they like. I don't know how factual it is, but I have read that a fridge is the longest lasting of all household appliances. They can last a very long time as long as they aren't short cycled, or cycled too frequently. The general consensus is that total run time is a much smaller contributor to failure than cycle count is.

The temp differential setting is what has to biggest impact on cycling freq. That would be one downside to not using the bath, as I commented earlier. To maintain ~1F variance with no buffer may cause excessive cycling. This is what the bath provides, as does the air when using a fridge and controlling to actual beer temps.

there is no reason for the bath

1. How would I control two different fermenters independently.
Convince another relative give up their reef tank hobby!
Seriously- A solenoid valve for each fermenter tied to the temp controller. Almost what you are doing now, I assume, just with 2 pumps, instead of 2 solenoids and one pump. You do lose your reserve capacity and cycle smoothing of the buffer/battery that the bath provides.

2. The chiller came from a fish tank.... My beer is not going through it...
I was referring to hooking the chiller up directly to the chiller, with the pump inline of course. I wasn't referring to cycling you beer through the chiller, although it does appear to have titanium piping. Serious bragging rights if you did do it. Stainless, please. Haven't you heard- titanium is the new SS. I don't even like CF chillers, so not for me though.

1/10 hp = ~100W

The chiller runs at 2.6 amps and is 115 volt... I think your calculation is off.

I already answered this one.

This weekend there will be 22 gallons going... Again--the chiller isn't struggling with 12 gallons. It's barely running. Maybe 4 hours a day and that being generous.

That is about 20% run time which is close to freezer run times also. A freezers performance does degrade when heat extraction demands increase due to the colder temps needed to compensate for the lower conductivity/transfer rates from using air. The aq chiller should have a much more linear increase as demand increases since the evap temps stay relatively constant, not going to -10F like a freezer.

That 80 cents per 10 days in Jacksonville.

You guys are at ~$0.08/kWh? Cheap. I think I am ~$.014.

If the chiller jumps to running 12 hours a day (3X more) that will be $2.28 per 10 days in Jacksonville.

It may be even less. The 2.8 is probably peak/start current. Chilling is cheap.

In contrast, once again, nothing is wrong with chest freezers. However, if they have 20-30 gallons of fermenting beer--they run near or totally constantly.

however, you have failed to convince me (or likely anyone) that the chest freezer is more efficient to use for that volume of beer.

I was talking, and still am, about the size of chiller needed to do that. If a freezer with a 4 amp motor can't keep up, even given its issues at high loads, it is doubtful that an aq chiller at ~1/4 the energy input, even with its advantages, could keep up either, and the coil to beer bit is not relevant here. This assumes both can keep up. It would need to have a COP 4X the freezer. It could be possible, but it is not a clear cut case that doesn't need some experimental verification.


That said, the my secondary fermentation will be in chest freezers. It has nothing do with efficiency. My secondaries/serving vessels are corny kegs and I can fit butt load of them in the chest freezers. The chest freezers do not run all the time to maintain non-fermenting beer at any temperature. Chest freezers, IMO, for that purpose, are ideal.

This is why your lager issue confuses me. Ferming a lager at ~50F should be so low power to be almost equivalent to maintaining finished beer at 50F. If you put them in there hot, and tried to ramp to 50F, I could see issues with a runaway ferm the freezer would have trouble with dropping.

Chest freezers also work well for primary fermenting--the compressor just runs more than this chiller set up and the temperature control does not respond as quickly.

It is different than my experience, but I also don't have a 1.8A plate rating. Fans help a lot with transfer rates, and why fridges 'as built' are probably a better choice for high volumes. For crashing, the aq chiller, especially with the bath/battery is for sure better down to some beer-chill fluid temp diff. Going past that temp, or as the glycol system nears the temp, the fridge based setup will start to outperform it due to its -10F temp floor.

 

[cwi]

In theory...yes. In practice, the heat transfer rate between fluids drops way off once you get inside 10 degrees delta T, enough that for me, it's not worth running the pump that long.

It was more of a commentary on the dynamics in play- that as glycol/beer delta decreases, and ambient/beer temp increases, insulation becomes more important. 'Theory', as you say. The ~200btu loss isn't that large, but neither is the amount of heat being extracted as the glycol/beer delta gets small. As long as 45F works as a crash temp for you, it is a moot point. Insulating the tanks, unless they were then clad in SS or the like, would introduce a nightmare cleaning situation. That is something the OP should keep in mind regarding his insulation options.

The guys with jacketed conicals can get their rigs down to ~32F, at least that is what they claimed when I asked a few of them during tours.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

My original suggestion is now even more pertinent since you now seem to think insulating would be a good idea. If you feel that dealing with directly insulating the fermenter or building your own chamber, is easier than putting it in a fridge, that is a personal preference. Something I already mentioned.

You have missed the entire point. Insulating the fermenter is not necessary for ales because the room temperature isn't much different than my desired fermenting temperature.

It takes a couple hours for the fermenter to warm up a single degree. What would insulating it do? Make it take fours hours? That difference is negligible.

I don't know about lagers with the chiller--that is why I asked on this forum. Based on the comments--I think insulating the fermenter for a lager, at say 52F, I think would be desirable. (1) condensation (2) chiller would run longer and wear out more quickly. The cost in electricity, again, I don't care about. We a talking about 50 cents.

If the plate rating is 1.6A, you have a wimpy freezer

Get use to it. It's called the EPA. And they strangle manufacturers with unreasonable mandates. That is an area I have expertise in.

Personally, I buy old toilets that actually hold water and flush (on one try)--and (when I think of it) I am buying appliances up ARE NOT "energy star"--a few years old usually means better functioning appliance. Apparently I failed with this freezer.

As to my expertise:

The EPA is Malthusian. I have no respect for that Agency. Their very goal is drive up energy and appliance costs. It is harmful to every person, business, and employer in America. What they propose via administrative dictate is especially hard on the poor. It is also harmful to the environment. No economy = no clean environment. In short, they are nuts. They spend just as much time and money fighting "green" energy projects as they do traditional sources of energy. Their goal is not efficiency or clean energy or a better world. Their goal is simply--NO ENERGY and rationing via high costs--suffering for suffering's sake. AND of course to guarantee themselves jobs and pensions forever.

You guys are at ~$0.08/kWh? Cheap. I think I am ~$.014.

None of us will have "cheap" electricity for long if people keep buying Sierra Club calendars and supporting EPA mandates. (see above)

This is why your lager issue confuses me. Ferm a lager at ~50F should be so low power to be almost equivalent to maintaining finished beer at 50F. If you put them in there hot, and tried to ramp to 50F, I could see issues with a runaway ferm the freezer would have trouble with dropping.

The wort went into the freezer at about 75F. I allow the freezer to drop the to 45 (takes awhile). I oxygenate well and then pitch the yeast and ferment at about 50F (allow the temperature to ramp up to 50-52F). The yeast being pitched is a large, active, slurry, (always for lagers) at 45F--so it starts within minutes typically.

One thing--I don't really agree that lagers are not vigorous fermenters. They may not be as active as ales, for sure, but they do not compare to finished beer. They certainly go we bit crazy ramping from 45F to 52F--until the freezer kicks on. IME, they steadily crank for a week or so.

Again-- I think the volume of beer has a lot to do with it. The freezer was totally full. And apparently the freezer is some greeny's cruel joke at keeping food warm--and screwing with my homebrewing.

I'll let you know how this weekend affects the chillers performance. Your's and others comments have convinced me not to both bother with a lager unless I insulate the conical to some degree. Again, not for costs, mostly the condensation issue--I saw what the lines did on the ale--until I wrapped them.

I will make another ale this weekend, and then perhaps, next weekend a lager once I figure out an easy/cheap insulator. Perhaps "Project Manager's" (dog) blanket.

Question:

Right now the chiller kicks on to keep the bath at temperature more often than the pump in the bath kicks on to cool the ferment...

The bath raises about 2F every hour-and-half (without the fermenter pump kicking on). The R/V pump is constantly on to the chiller. Although it is outside the bath--I assume the moving of the water constantly--speeds the heating of the bath water.

The r/v pump move water at 600gph and chiller only requires a 250gph. Would slowing the water down--slow the warming of the bath water?

Alternatively, is it possible to just have the pump come on right before the chiller comes on?

 

[Shockerengr]

Question:

Right now the chiller kicks on to keep the bath at temperature more often than the pump in the bath kicks on to cool the ferment...

The bath raises about 2F every hour-and-half (without the fermenter pump kicking on). The R/V pump is constantly on to the chiller. Although it is outside the bath--I assume the moving of the water constantly--speeds the heating of the bath water.

The r/v pump move water at 600gph and chiller only requires a 250gph. Would slowing the water down--slow the warming of the bath water?

Alternatively, is it possible to just have the pump come on right before the chiller comes on?

having the rv pump constantly on and moving water will definitely cause heat loss. Also, that style of pump (diaphragm) isn't really designed for continuous operation like that. with no load, it's easier on them, but they will wear out. A small fountain pump would help, but then you're adding a heat source to the bath. For reference, I don't like to run my diaphragm pump for more than 4-8hrs at a shot. (and also why I don't try to get as cold as possible.)

Given that you have to circulate through the chiller, you're limited to a degree about what you can do about, other than to minimize the amount of water that's moving and make sure everything in that loop is well insulated.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

having the rv pump constantly on and moving water will definitely cause heat loss. Also, that style of pump (diaphragm) isn't really designed for continuous operation like that. with no load, it's easier on them, but they will wear out. A small fountain pump would help, but then you're adding a heat source to the bath. For reference, I don't like to run my diaphragm pump for more than 4-8hrs at a shot. (and also why I don't try to get as cold as possible.)

Given that you have to circulate through the chiller, you're limited to a degree about what you can do about, other than to minimize the amount of water that's moving and make sure everything in that loop is well insulated.

Okay, thanks. How about a small fish pump that run outside the bath? Just prime it and let it go? I can't see how it would lose its prime?

I have some "Maxi-Jet 1200's" (from the family fish stuff box). They say rated for 290 GPH. With about 4 or 5 feet of 3/8 tubing attached to them--plus whatever resistance the chiller provides--> Do you think one of those would hit the 240gph (not 250 gph, my mistake) that the chiller's manual requires?

I don't know the how to calculate that resistance off-hand.

 

[Shockerengr]

an easy way to check is to hook it up and pump into a bucket and measure it. it should pump a gallon in 15 seconds. If it works, great, hook it up and insulate the bits as best you can.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

an easy way to check is to hook it up and pump into a bucket and measure it. it should pump a gallon in 15 seconds. If it works, great, hook it up and insulate the bits as best you can.

I like simple solutions.

Alternatively, any harm in just overriding the thermostat on the chiller. Kind of like keezer set up. Have the pump and chiller come on at the same time at the desired bath temperature?

There is a 3 minute delay, always (programed into the chiller), before the compressor comes on. (i.e. the target temp is hit and then three minutes later the compressor turns on. )

Would that harm the chiller in anyway? Less cycling I would think. Just would have to put a temp probe into the bath water.

 

[cwi]

You have missed the entire point. Insulating the fermenter is not necessary for ales because the room temperature isn't much different than my desired fermenting temperature.

It takes a couple hours for the fermenter to warm up a single degree. What would insulating it do? Make it take fours hours? That difference is negligible.

Well, wouldn't that cut your running time for your chiller in half? You have mentioned that is one of your concerns.
You are a conundrum. Frequently you will play both sides to suit your needs.
Insulation could increase performance, temp stability, equipment longevity, etc. Cost savings are just a side effect, and one I have never mentioned, except in jest. Maybe you are interpreting some of my terminology as referring to cost, when it is just system related.

I don't know about lagers with the chiller--that is why I asked on this forum. Based on the comments--I think insulating the fermenter for a lager, at say 52F, I think would be desirable. (1) condensation (2) chiller would run longer and wear out more quickly. The cost in electricity, again, I don't care about. We a talking about 50 cents.

I don't know where this is coming from. I plainly stated I was joking about the energy cost, and have numerous times stated my only concerns are system performance, energy costs be damned.

Get use to it. It's called the EPA. And they strangle manufacturers with unreasonable mandates.

Have your heard about the conspiracy theory that the R-12 'hole in the ozone' and subsequent ban was nothing more than a ploy by DuPont to keep its market share since the patent was running out? Actually seems plausible, but haven't researched it any.

R-12 is a less effective refrigerant than the newer stuff, so the increased energy usage is just a bonus, I guess.

One thing--I don't really agree that lagers are not vigorous fermenters. They may not be as active as ales, for sure, but they do not compare to finished beer. They certainly go we bit crazy ramping from 45F to 52F--until the freezer kicks on. IME, they steadily crank for a week or so.

Hence why I used 'power'. energy/time. Ales at 68F, 3-4 days, or less for Shockerengr.

Again, not for costs

Please, I beg of you, no more with the costs.

Question:

Right now the chiller kicks on to keep the bath at temperature more often than the pump in the bath kicks on to cool the ferment...

The bath raises about 2F every hour-and-half (without the fermenter pump kicking on). The R/V pump is constantly on to the chiller. Although it is outside the bath--I assume the moving of the water constantly--speeds the heating of the bath water.

The r/v pump move water at 600gph and chiller only requires a 250gph. Would slowing the water down--slow the warming of the bath water?

Alternatively, is it possible to just have the pump come on right before the chiller comes on?

Much more important than having the pump come on before the chiller, is to have the pump run for a few minutes after the chiller shuts off. You don't want the water to freeze in the chiller heat exchanger. Most chillers of this type specifically prevent temp settings below 32F, or have icing sensors if low temp fluid is used.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Much more important than having the pump come on before the chiller, is to have the pump run for a few minutes after the chiller shuts off. You don't want the water to freeze in the chiller heat exchanger. Most chillers of this type specifically prevent temp settings below 32F, or have icing sensors if low temp fluid is used

This chiller cannot be set below 32F. Any risk of freeze up? What if I add salt to the bath water? (came from salt water fish tank).

Well, wouldn't that cut your running time for your chiller in half? You have mentioned that is one of your concerns.

Not really. Because the chiller is turning on to control the bath water's rise in temp (which is occurring much less b/c of the fermentation and more because of cooler's perhaps poor insulation and the r/v pump running constantly).

Stated another way, if the chiller came on only when the pump to the fermenter turned on--that would be hardly at all--without insulation... So adding insulation won't do much.

p.s. And because I don't care about costs! haha

 

[cwi]

This chiller cannot be set below 32F. Any risk of freeze up? What if I add salt to the bath water? (came from salt water fish tank).

You can do whatever you want to lower the fluid freezing point. You would still want to run the pump for a bit after chiller shutdown for safety, though. Parts of the hex are more than likely capable of temps around ~0F, or lower. Well below the freeze point of whatever liquid you use. The reason glycol is used is so in case there is an unseen leak that results in some getting into the product, it is less likely to poison someone, or ruin the product. Also why many use vodka or starsan for airlocks.

Not really. Because the chiller is turning on to control the bath water's rise in temp (which is occurring much less b/c of the fermentation and more because of cooler's perhaps poor insulation and the r/v pump running constantly).

With you current setup, true. I think I had the bathless system in mind when I said that. Using a smaller bath, higher temp bath, etc. would all reduce 'on time'. You only need a temp low enough to meet your desired fermenter temp variance. Lots to balance though, with peak load, cycling, recovery, etc. Shouldn't be too difficult dial in a temp that is a good balance and still meets your needs.

Stated another way, if the chiller came on only when the pump to the fermenter turned on--that would be hardly at all--without insulation... So adding insulation won't do much.

Except, according to your numbers, cut your chiller run time in half, and therefore extend the life of it.

p.s. And because I don't care about costs! haha

Forgot, it would also lower your electric bill, thereby starving all those conspiratorial agencies out of their pensions.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

okay good advice.

I will be looking to hook up a different pump when I have time (there is box of coraline algae covered fish stuff) to help with the heat....

Yesterday--> I dropped the temp of the bath to 45F. It took about a few minutes to get there. Then I just shut the chiller and chiller pump off for the whole day.

Left until this morning. The beer stayed at the right temp (bath pump kicked on when needed) and chiller only ran less than an hour for 24 hours! The temperature of the bath increased 56F (from 45f).

That is with no insulation on an ale.

For now, I think I will continue like that--to further reduce cycling on the chiller. Maybe for two batches set the bath at like 35F and then shut the thing down for the rest of the day. The bath can do the work. perhaps a timer on the chiller and its pump is the solution.

Forgot, it would also lower your electric bill, thereby starving all those conspiratorial agencies out of their pensions.

No conspiracy.... You can have the case law if you want it. Just search "CERCLA," "NEPA," "Clean Water/Air Act," "Ozone", "NSPS," "BADT," "LAER," "Arranger," "Transporter," "U.S. v. Mass," etc, etc, etc, in Google Scholar (that should be free way to find a lot of that stuff).

Like reading the back of credit card agreement, though, I warn you.

Its called regulatory capture and crony capitalism. Old as the sky is blue.
Only its on steroids with the EPA and businesses buying cartels/monopoly from the gov't via regulation.

Don't get me wrong--attorneys make a pretty penny litigating all this...

But I am objective enough to realize it is nothing but that--make work. Doesn't help anyone or the environment--the opposite is roughly true. Our air and water and environment has ever never been cleaner.

Arbitrarily increasing air and water quality standards--as well as energy efficient mandates--are done to feather regulator's (and related industries) nest. Not to protect anyone or the environment.

The EPA may have had a purpose 40 years ago.... But today, I think we can say "mission accomplished" and disband the agency. States have the equivalent, and the massive, wasteful, federal bureaucracy--is not needed.

There is a reason relatively unregulated products prices go down over time--> and regulated products--> prices increase. Regulators.

 

[cwi]

For now, I think I will continue like that--to further reduce cycling on the chiller. Maybe for two batches set the bath at like 35F and then shut the thing down for the rest of the day. The bath can do the work. perhaps a timer on the chiller and its pump is the solution.

You should be able to set the diff to a large difference to accomplish the same thing, without the danger of forgetting to activate it one day, or a timer that may activate more, or less, than needed. The bath only needs to be cold enough to effectively maintain the ferm temp. For ex., if a 56F bath is able to keep your ferm at 65F, you could set the bath at 36F with a 20F diff, although most thermo controllers have limits on how large the diff can be. That way, the chiller would only come when needed (56F), and run for a long time to charge the 'battery'. This would result in less cycling, but a longer total 'on time' due to losses from maintaining the colder bath. But, like I mentioned, the overriding factor for wear is cycling. You can also increase the size of the 'battery' to accomplish the same thing without the increased inefficiency of the lower bath temp.

Controllers are screwy in how the setpoint and 'diff' are used and interact, so you would need to see what method your chiller uses.

Its called regulatory capture and crony capitalism. Old as the sky is blue.
Only its on steroids with the EPA and businesses buying cartels/monopoly from the gov't via regulation.

I wasn't saying you weren't correct about how US capitalism works, and that the conspiracy wasn't real. Did you see my comment about Freon and the ozone? Seems like it was a case of Dow getting the govt to ban its product just as the patent was running out, and then only approve a new Dow product, when there were several other products that can't be patented that were more efficient, safer, cheaper, etc.

There is a reason relatively unregulated products prices go down over time--> and regulated products--> prices increase. Regulators.

Yes, in general, regulators aren't needed. The ketchup inspector's duties will be taken care of by market forces. I was even raised on money from the deregulation of telecom/AT&T.

Other things like insurance/financial/stock market regulations and political QPQ, though, are necessary, even though the regulators/politicians are frequently in cahoots with the very businesses the regs were meant to control. Even Greenspan has admitted the folly of 'self-regulation' for Wall street. Most guys on Wall street have criminal minds/tendencies, they just apply their intellect to gaming the system within the limits of the law. Except for the blatantly illegal scams, that is. I have worked with energy guys, and they all were either trying to manipulate the market, or steal a little bit of money from a whole lot of people (the public).

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Okay, my chiller doesn't seem to allow me to adjust the temperature differential... any solutions? Just overriding it still creates the problem of turning on and off the pump to bath--unless I use two seperate controllers.

hmm thought--the aquarium has "Neptune Aqua controller jr." that may be a solution--although as easy to program as the Ranco unit.

Other things like insurance/financial/stock market regulations and political QPQ, though, are necessary, even though the regulators/politicians are frequently in cahoots with the very businesses the regs were meant to control. Even Greenspan

Completely disagree. Two words: Moral Hazard. Regulations--especially in the financial sector are the very cause of this our problems. And Greenspan's opinions continue to evolve. However, he is not very good reference for anything if you ask me.

 

[cwi]

Okay, my chiller doesn't seem to allow me to adjust the temperature differential... any solutions? Just overriding it still creates the problem of turning on and off the pump to bath--unless I use two seperate controllers.

hmm thought--the aquarium has "Neptune Aqua controller jr." that may be a solution--although as easy to program as the Ranco unit.

You can use any of the popular controllers, even the ~$20 dual stage ebay aquarium controller.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f51/ebay-aquarium-temp-controller-build-163849/
Just make sure you order the 110V and dual stage (just to have heat if you need it). The ebay pics all look the same for various models.

You will just max (min) out the temp on the aq chiller, and let the other one do the controlling. The built in 3 minute delay on your chiller will prevent immediate activation, but a 3 minute delay won't affect anything since you have a heat battery. Having the pump stay on for a few minutes after the chiller stops is a trickier situation that is best solved with a separate timer set to run for 2-3 minutes after power is shut off. These are very common in industry, but I am not sure of a source for a cheap one.

Completely disagree. Two words: Moral Hazard. Regulations--especially in the financial sector are the very cause of this our problems. And Greenspan's opinions continue to evolve. However, he is not very good reference for anything if you ask me.

Aren't regulations in place to protect the 'uninformed' from the moral hazard? (in the sense of regs protecting the little guy, not the little guys behavior affecting the big guy like in insurance) Although, the regs are frequently flawed, on purpose.
I suppose in an ideal market, the consumer would be informed and move his money away from those who take risks he does not want to take. While good in "theory", self-regulation has been been shown not to work, for various reasons. How does the shoe fit?

Markets have a history of boom and bust, with the general public picking up the tab on the way up, and the way down. The big money guys have frequently abused loose/no regs to create volatility, which they love, and make out like bandits on both sides. S&L crisis?

Take the latest CDO debacle- CDS were supposed to be used to offset risk by the buyer of the CDO, like insurance, but CDSs turned into a speculative instrument, because it was purposely not brought under insurance regulations. It would be like me taking out 1000 automobile insurance policies on the teenager down the street driving a Corvette, and getting paid out $10,000,000 when they have a $10,000 wreck.

This is essentially what happened, and was part of the screwy bailout that tried, and was successful to some extent, to let the CDOs fail, CDSs be paid out, even though many of the CDSs were not even held by the owner of the CDO, or multiple CDSs were held for the same owned CDO. They knew what was happening, and the CDSs were cheap, since no one even knew the risk, and there didn't have to be any capital reserves backing the CDS, since they prevented them from being considered "insurance".

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

I'll work on the chiller... for now the turn it on once a day manual method seems to work well.

moral hazard: In insurance, this is an important concept because without counter incentives--insurance products will incentivize the vary behavior being insured against.

S&L crisis

Perfect example. Federal insurance means that both bankers and investors are not careful with their money. Regulation did not prevent the S&L crisis because the regulators were "captured" by the industry (as stated before--> regulatory capture).

The best--most strict regulation--are market forces. I would argue market regulation is also the most just. No bailouts and no special favors and cartels. Courts have a role to stomp out actual fraud and crime. Courts presently are bogged down by enforcing needless regulation and therefore--many times--actual crime and fraud goes unaddressed.

Further, boom and busts in the economy, are caused by market dislocations and mal-investment. The more free then market, the smaller the corrections and therefore the smaller the boom and bust. Goverment investment is largest source of mal-investement and thus boom and bust cycles.

Regulation is one way how government invests. Politicians care less about helping the little guy--they just pander to whomever they are speaking to get reelected.

That means they invest tax dollars and create regulations for political returns--> not market returns. This creates massive mal-investment and eventually massive booms and busts when the market finally tries to clear.

The housing crisis is prime example of this boom and bust--gov't created asset bubble.

Stated another way--> people spend their own money wisely when they know it is at risk and not "guaranteed." If they invest in something that doesn't work--they go bankrupt or stop investing and cut their losses. The government in contrast, never does that. I am sure typewritter makers are still getting subsidies somewhere.

Gov't continually throws good money after bad--until the market finally demands a clearing of the mal-investment (recession).

Take the latest CDO debacle- CDS

There are plenty of people who would agree with you. That more regulation of securities will somehow solve catch and solve the problems before they occur. I would point to history and say that regulation is always reactionary, solves few problems, and regulators are easily influenced to look the other way (S&L comes to mind)...

We have several hundred thousand pages of regs on the books--> how much more do you think we need?

The problem is more fundamental. Investing is risky. Especially in a fractional reserve system. Reducing the moral hazard by not bailing out speculative bankers and investors would create far more certainty long run.

A lot of these instruments only had value because gov't implicitly or explicitly guaranteed the original debt they were made of... that's the other problem..

 

[cwi]

S&L Crisis
Perfect example. Federal insurance means that both bankers and investors are not careful with their money. Regulation did not prevent the S&L crisis because the regulators were "captured" by the industry (as stated before--> regulatory capture).

The S&L crisis was brought about by financial players who were attracted to the more lax regulations of S&Ls vs. banks. It was common for bankers to purchase S&Ls solely to use as instruments with regulations favorable to increased leveraging and market pumping and manipulation.
​

The best--most strict regulation--are market forces. I would argue market regulation is also the most just. No bailouts and no special favors and cartels. Courts have a role to stomp out actual fraud and crime. Courts presently are bogged down by enforcing needless regulation and therefore--many times--actual crime and fraud goes unaddressed.

Yes, most regulations currently in place do no good to prevent unethical behavior, and creating ones that do is very difficult. Mainly because the very entities being regulated are able to neuter regs before, or circumvent them after they are put in place using preconfigured 'outs'. That, and they are constantly trying to look for ways to get around the 'spirit' of the regulations.
​

The housing crisis is prime example of this boom and bust--gov't created asset bubble.

Helped by financiers prodding the politicos to loosen policy.
​

There are plenty of people who would agree with you. That more regulation of securities will somehow solve catch and solve the problems before they occur. I would point to history and say that regulation is always reactionary, solves few problems, and regulators are easily influenced to look the other way (S&L comes to mind)...

I think the S&L regulators, and legit S&Ls themselves, tried to stop the malfeasance, but were hobbled by the weak regs, and political pressures (ultimately derived from QPQ).
​

We have several hundred thousand pages of regs on the books--> how much more do you think we need?

More simple broad ones where needed, and less where they are not. And no special exclusions added on continually, which is where a big part of where the problem and bloat resides.
​

The problem is more fundamental. Investing is risky. Especially in a fractional reserve system. Reducing the moral hazard by not bailing out speculative bankers and investors would create far more certainty long run.

Yes. It has created a history that certain types count on. I believe they even teach it in some famous institutions. Whose creed is it that goes: "The reason for the masses, is to lose their asses."?
​

A lot of these instruments only had value because gov't implicitly or explicitly guaranteed the original debt they were made of... that's the other problem..

Yes, but it was even more funny than that. They let the assets drop by forcing mark to market after the crisis started, triggering CDS payouts, then stepped in to guarantee the assets, which were not as bad as they are rated if held until maturation. They just can't be unloaded due to a bad perceived reputation.

It looks as though someone orchestrated the whole thing, and played every side to maximum advantage.

That is the crux of the matter. There are devious people out there that will try to circumvent any regulations that are put out there, and historically there has been no penalty for doing it, or they devise ways to avoid trace-ability.

If there weren't fancy lawyers to get the guilty crooks off, and lynch mobs were allowed to take care of matters, maybe they would think twice about it first. That would make a good argument for no laws either. Let market forces take care of the rules and enforcement.​

 

[phoenixs4r]

Isn't there a politics/debate forum?

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Isn't there a politics/debate forum?

yeah sorry... this is what I do for a living... Beer brewing forum should be a (much needed) break from that ...

Brewing tomorrow.... Will test chillers chilling capacity by weeks end.

 

[cwi]

Meh. As long it stays mostly on topic, and the active participants, and especially the OP, don't care, no worries.

The issue had been completely played out, and mostly resolved, with plenty of good info in the first 50 or so posts for the person stumbling upon the thread seeking tech info about aq chillers.

I was just trying to finally steer it to a point that I could make fun of lawyers to get even for the OP wisecrackin' about engineers. I am still disappointed the modified Socratic teaching method and Chewbacca Defense comments didn't generate anything.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

made a pale ale 12 gallons. Beer went in fermenter at 76F. Bath water at 40F. less then 20 minutes and wort at 60F in fermenter. Bath got up to 47F. Set bath at 45F. Hit that, and then shut the thing down for the night.

One beer--pretty much done at 64F, other at 60F. Room temp at 72F. about 24-25 gallons total.

works for me.... will check bath in morning and turn on chiller. Hopefully will only need to do once a day.

 

[EarthBound]

Meh. As long it stays mostly on topic, and the active participants, and especially the OP, don't care, no worries.

The issue had been completely played out, and mostly resolved, with plenty of good info in the first 50 or so posts for the person stumbling upon the thread seeking tech info about aq chillers.

I was just trying to finally steer it to a point that I could make fun of lawyers to get even for the OP wisecrackin' about engineers. I am still disappointed the modified Socratic teaching method and Chewbacca Defense comments didn't generate anything.

That cracked me up.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

forgot to watch the chewbacca video... probably a good one. I assume bashing some ambulance chaser or the like.

I appreciate distasteful slandering of world's most repulsive profession as much as the next guy. I've heard most all of it though, and I find so many of my colleagues so utterly deserving of that slander--it isn't all that funny to me anymore.

Lots of my family are engineers--and they are good people. The same cannot be said for so many attorneys--that the jokes and stereotypes are well deserved.

The socratic joke, I don't think I got.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Pics from racking wit. I love the kettle as a fermenter. More burly than than the conical when moving around, easier to clean, no tri-clamp fittings, way less to take apart and put back together, easy yeast collection, better sanitation--> can put on burner to steam sanitize.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Conical set up with a pale ale--> looks like something from a Frankenstein film... At 60F. Chiller running about an hour a day.

Yeast collect from kettle fermenter:

 

[EarthBound]

Wow, good job!

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Okay so the two ale batches have been successful. Got a lager in the kettle fermenter (kermenter?) at 50F. No problems.

I would like to insulate it. The wife likes lagers and I got okay for some added expenses.

Purchased this for insulation: (It got here quick!)

Gymnastic Rubber - Rubber flooring, closed-cell foam exercise mat

And here (ignore the lawyer in the background screeching on my computer in the background...)

Insulation - YouTube

I think the stuff is pretty good. Say "high R" rating and is very flexible--but has good form as well.

My thought was to cut the insulation nicely to fit around the conical. Maybe end up with a couple pieces that wrap around and velcro together.

Anyone have any idea how to go about this? I have time, and I would like a nice looking fit. The conical is an odd shape to work with.

 

[Shockerengr]

use multiple pieces, and for the conical portion, use newsprint or similar paper to play with patterns. it'll look pie shaped, and I think there are calculators online that can help with the cone shape to flat material patterns

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

think there are calculators online that can help with the cone shape to flat material patterns

Thanks again! Found this: [ame=http://download.cnet.com/Cone-Layout/3000-6677_4-10551691.html]Cone Layout - Free software downloads and software reviews - CNET Download.com[/ame]

The program even prints the pattern in standard printer paper--> multiple pages that are marked to line up and create the larger pattern = slick.

Edit: Picture of the printout for insulation pattern--> anyone who wants to insulate a conical--> this free software (for 21 days) appears to be a must..

Like being a little kid again!

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

conical insulation just about done... pretty happy with it.

 

[Shockerengr]

what's the black material in the third pic (with the red tile background) a backing material?

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

1/8" thick of the same material... A whole roll was only $10. It has a textured front and gives a nice finished look.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Do you think insulating the top is necessary?

 

[Shockerengr]

Probably not, there'll be an airgap below the lid that will supply some insulation.

It looks like you put velcro on the edges of all the foam too, Was that 1" for the main body?

I just looked and the 1/8" was $15 for a 48x48 or 24x96 sheet. was there another option that i'm not seeing?

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Probably not, there'll be an airgap below the lid that will supply some insulation.

It looks like you put velcro on the edges of all the foam too, Was that 1" for the main body?

3/4 inch on the body. 1" would have been more expensive and harder to fit around the tri-clamps

I just looked and the 1/8" was $15 for a 48x48 or 24x96 sheet. was there another option that i'm not seeing?

Edit: it's the "high quality" 1/16" but the actual measurement is no less than 1/8" thick... Receipt says $13

Note: anyone using the "cone software"--> height is the actual height of the cone--> not the length along the angle of the cone (had to make a second pattern)

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Had enough insulating material for the kettle fermenter--and compared to the conical--it was super simple to insulate. One piece with a couple holes for the handles and the 1/8" textured piece of the top for looks and little extra insulation.

Edit: Finished up. About day's worth of worth doing both fermenters--minus a run at the beach with the dog and a few beers (of course). All and all pretty enjoyable project. The wife didn't think I could do it. But she helped a bit too.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Lagering with the insulated kettle fermenter 49-51F:

Even with the the conical fermenting a pale and now an IPA at 60-62F and the room temperature from 65 to 75F, the chiller is running once in the morning and once in the evening, each for little over an hour--give or take. That's to keep about 24 gallons of beer at two seperate temperatures (one ale and one lager).

The bath water, which the the chiller maintains, is set a 40F. When it hits 50F the chiller kicks back on to bring back down to 40F. This takes about 12 hours--give or take.

Interestingly, even bath water, a single degree below the set temperature on the lager--will cool the lager down to the same degree as the bath water. It just takes a bit longer than when the differential is greater.

 

[weirdboy]

Hey this thread inspired me to look on craigslist, and wouldn't you know it, I picked up a 1/4 HP aquarium chiller for a song. I plan to set up a similar system, as I really like the independent temperature controls for each fermentation.

Even if I end up just getting rid of the stuff, I can resell that chiller and recoup all my costs, so thanks!

 

[pagrider]

using an aquarium chiller and cooler with ss brew bucket and it works great. much better than the fridge method IMO.

 

[brew-in]

subscribed

 

[pagrider]

I use the cool zone jacket on two ported big mouth bubblers and a glass carboy. Everything can be kept at seperate temperatures. Works terrific. Similar results except my garage is 85 degrees and my chiller still only runs about 2-3 hours total a day once the fermentation temp is reached. This weekend took 5 gallons of wort from 82 degrees to 65 in less than an hour.