New SS braid/copper manifold suction design

[Sparty-On]

My MLT (60 quart rectangle Coleman) currently uses a SS braid that makes a full loop from a T joint coming out of my bulkhead. I'm going to start fly sparging and I've noticed my SS braid floating to the top during my mash. The fact that it is floating up is one of my concerns. Recently I've started to realize that the majority of the wort I pull off to my BK is just coming through the SS braid right at its connection to the bulkhead. I really think the SS braid does a great job of filtering out particles but its lack of ability to draw wort from the entirety of the bottom of my mash is concerning. I've decided to switch to a copper manifold but the same issue of only pulling wort from the pipes closest to the bulkhead connection is bothersome.

Here's my question: I'm going to connect my draw pipe running up to my bulk head in the center of my manifold to help promote an even draw from the center of my MLT. I'm also going to run the parts of the copper manifold through an SS braid to increase the filtering. Has anyone thought to drill larger holes around the perimeter of the manifold and just a few small holes around the draw pipe that connects to the bulkhead? I'm thinking I could increase suction from the outer parts of the manifold by drilling large holes around the perimeter. I would drill a few small holes closest to the draw/bulkhead pipe. My thinking is that I can evenly draw just as much wort from the perimeter of the manifold as from the parts closest to the draw/bulkhead pipe. Holes closest to the draw/bulkhead pipe will have the most pulling suction so I will limit the number and size of those holes. By threading the entire copper manifold through an SS braid I will be able to drill penny sized holes in the manifold perimeter to help increase outer suction while still being able to achieve an efficient filter. I want to reach an equilibrium of suction from all parts of the manifold no matter how far it is from the bulkhead pipe. The jest of this design is numerous large holes on the perimeter and just a few (exactly how many I haven't determined) pen tip sized holes near the draw/bulkhead pipe. I hope I've explained this clearly enough to follow along.

Has anyone ever tried to build something like this either by testing different sized holes in the manifold for suction equilibrium, or by running the copper pipe through an SS braid?

Any input before I start the build would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

[Homercidal]

From what I understand from Palmer's brief fluid dynamic examples, placing the drawpoint at the center of the manifold won't necessarily equalize the draw on the whole manifold.

In his example, having the drawpoint at one end of long parallel runs would cause the most equal draw.

This might be important for fly sparging, if that is what you plan do to.

As far as the copper inside the braid, I don't see how that is going to affect your filtering. The filtering is going to be done by the grainbed, not the manifold design. The manifold only has to do a good job of not clogging up.

After the sparge has started for a minute or two, the grainbed will as as a fantastic filter and your wort will start to run very clear. This is why most people VORLAUF, meaning they collect the first part of the sparge and return it to the top of the grainbed so that it can be filtered.

That said, a copper pipe inside the braid will most likely help keep it from being squashed by the weight of the grain, which is a good thing.

I simply went with a copper manifold. It was easy enough for me to build and I could drill only the BOTTOM side, which means the siphon won't break until the wort gets down to the very bottom. This makes for less dead space in the Mash Tun.

A braid may be easier to build in general, but if you are already going to use copper, then I don't see the advantage in adding a braid over it. Slits or drilled holes will do the job nicely.

 

[Homercidal]

Here is the page from Palmer's website showing his examples:

http://howtobrew.com/appendices/appendixD-1.html

In my opinion, the placement of the drawpoint is probably a very small thing, compared to making sure the runs aren't too close to the edges causing channeling. I wouldn't sweat it.

 

[Bobby_M]

I'd just abandon the braid and go with a slitted manifold for fly sparging.

 

[helibrewer]

I have slitted copper tubing inside of SS braid in the circle configuration (10g Igloo MLT). I also recirculate. This setup seems to work fine for me but I have only batch sparged to this point.

 

[Sparty-On]

From what I understand from Palmer's brief fluid dynamic examples, placing the drawpoint at the center of the manifold won't necessarily equalize the draw on the whole manifold.

In his example, having the drawpoint at one end of long parallel runs would cause the most equal draw.

This might be important for fly sparging, if that is what you plan do to.

As far as the copper inside the braid, I don't see how that is going to affect your filtering. The filtering is going to be done by the grainbed, not the manifold design. The manifold only has to do a good job of not clogging up.

I haven't read much of Palmer's literature and I certainly should. I understand his concept of pulling to the bulkhead from the end of a long parallel manifold. This essentially limits the turns the wort has to make before reaching the bulkhead and therefore giving it a direct pull. However, the same issue still exists of pulling a higher percent of wort from the area closest to the bulkhead/draw pipe (I certainly do agree a long parallel manifold has a more effective draw). There is simply less suction the farther you get from the bulkhead due to the holes/slits in the manifold. I'm really interested in finding and equilibrium of suction throughout the entire manifold. I think I can achieve this by creating very large holes or even very large cuts out of the pipe on the far side of the manifold (away from the draw pipe), combined with a very few small holes in the proximity of the draw pipe. That's where the SS braid comes into play. I'm thinking of literally shaving off the bottom 1/4 of the manifold on the far side. Obviously this creates major grain filtering problems but not if I thread it through the SS braid.

I currently use a SS braid and consistently achieve a brewhouse efficiency in the mid 70's despite the fact that it floats all over the place. In theory I'm achieving this efficiency by pulling most of my wort from the first few inches of braid leading into the bulkhead. I just feel if I can find a design to utilize all that sugary goodness from other areas of the MLT floor I can greatly improve my yield. It may be a minuscule improvement but understandably I want to built the most efficient manifold as possible. I've yet to find anyone else who has toyed with manifold hole/slit sizes in relation to the distance from the bulkhead/draw pipe.

And yes I do realize the grain bed is my filter. I guess by particles I meant pieces of grain that would easily pass through the large holes I intend to cut if not for the SS braid. I vorlauf (although by hand) and have never really had clarity issues.

Thanks for the input. I would really like to find a build that has addressed this equilibrium of suction idea. I'm pretty set with my plans so far but it would be great to cross reference this with someone or other builds. I want to make certain there is nothing I'm overlooking.

 

[Sparty-On]

I'd just abandon the braid and go with a slitted manifold for fly sparging.

Is this thee Bobby M from youtube?

 

[wilserbrewer]

Is this thee Bobby M from youtube?

We like to refer to him as thee Bobby M from HBT...but yes you are correct

 

[bradpoff]

go to the other extreme and use a conical MLT with a small, single point of exit for the wort? Would this just compact into cement and stop flowing? If not, there couldn't be dead spots in the grain bed. Thoughts?