New to chillers. Could use some advice!

[txstars15]

I have a 25' immersion chiller but have read that a counterflow unit cools significantly faster. If I am also using a whirlpool add-on with my immersion chiller, would there be much more benefit to switching to a counterflow?

Also, I understand that the wort just gravity drains through a counterflow and then right into the fermentor. How would one monitor the temp. using that process? What if it wasn't cool enough coming out of the counterflow? With an immersion chiller, I just use a thermo in the wort until it gets to a temp I want.

 

[damnitbeavis]

The speed of chilling is roughly proportional to the area of your copper and flow rate, as far as I understand. If you use a 25 foot immersion chiller and a 25 foot counterflow chiller, they will chill the whole volume of beer at the same rate. With the immersion chiller, you will be chilling the entire volume simultaneously, which some suggests leads to lower DMS production and better hop aroma. A counterflow chiller, however, chills the small volume of beer that flows through it completely in a short period of time, but leaves the major portion of your beer at boiling. I have used both, but I prefer the immersion chiller because in my experience it is easier to sanitize, and works well enough for my purposes. I have two immersion chillers, a 50' one and a 60' one, each made from 5/8" copper, and I chilled 27 gallons from boiling to 70 in about 19 minutes last time I made a batch that big, using both at the same time.

 

[lumpher]

i use a 50' 1/2" immersion chiller, and it works great. easy to clean, easy to empty, easy to sterilize

 

[mrk305]

Like beavis said, I don't like the cleaning aspects of a counterflow chiller or a plate chiller. I made a 25 ft and it was not adequate. Later I made a 50 ft and it works fine in the winter time. In the summer my groundwater is 80 degrees, so I have to use both. I use the 25 foot as a prechiller in a pot of ice water. I don't add the ice until I get below 100.

 

[OneHoppyGuy]

I have used all 3 (Plate, CFC and Immersion) styles. CFC's and Plate Chillers can be expensive but cool much faster.
They do however need a pump.
As for cleaning, I pump StarSan through everything before and after brewing.

 

[txstars15]

Thanks for all the great responses to my question. My confidence is up for just using my trusty IC. I will pass on a CFC for now as I don't want to over-engineer the process, just cool wort!

I did get a whirlpool wand today but am unsure as to where to locate the return end. Should it be inside the IC coil or outside near the brew kettle wall? Seems like pointing the return around the kettle wall would create more of a whirlpool than confining it to inside the chiller. Anyone using a whirlpool?

 

[P-J]

Thanks for all the great responses to my question. My confidence is up for just using my trusty IC. I will pass on a CFC for now as I don't want to over-engineer the process, just cool wort!

I did get a whirlpool wand today but am unsure as to where to locate the return end. Should it be inside the IC coil or outside near the brew kettle wall? Seems like pointing the return around the kettle wall would create more of a whirlpool than confining it to inside the chiller. Anyone using a whirlpool?

It really does not matter as long as the fluid flows fast enough to provide a 'shear' effect next to the chiller tube. There is a whole lot of info about this on the net.

 

[damnitbeavis]

Thanks for all the great responses to my question. My confidence is up for just using my trusty IC. I will pass on a CFC for now as I don't want to over-engineer the process, just cool wort!

I did get a whirlpool wand today but am unsure as to where to locate the return end. Should it be inside the IC coil or outside near the brew kettle wall? Seems like pointing the return around the kettle wall would create more of a whirlpool than confining it to inside the chiller. Anyone using a whirlpool?

I put mine on the inside of the inner chiller (two nested chillers, or just one on smaller batches in a smaller pot.) I agree with P-J that it probably doesn't matter, as long as the return causes the wort to circulate effectively. You could always move it if you don't like the position, mine is held in place with zip ties that don't contact the wort.

I'm thinking about brewing some lagers soon, and will use both chillers to chill down below the tap water temperature (68f here now) by using an immersible pump that pumps icewater through both chillers after the wort reaches 90 or so.

 

[damnitbeavis]

I have used all 3 (Plate, CFC and Immersion) styles. CFC's and Plate Chillers can be expensive but cool much faster.
They do however need a pump.
As for cleaning, I pump StarSan through everything before and after brewing.

I would argue that the cooling power of a chiller is based on the volume of area of copper it has in contact with the wort, the temperature differential, and the flow rate. A blanket statement that says cfc and plate chillers cool much faster is oversimplifying the truth. A cfc or plate chiller of good quality will have greater cooling power than a cheap immersion chiller, but a high quality immersion chiller that has a larger surface area can outcool both, given enough copper. I think most breweries use plate chillers, but theirs are a different design AFAIK that can be disassembled and throroughly cleaned after each brew session. Most homebrew plate chillers are one piece.


I will admit I haven't ever used a plate chiller.

 

[Homercidal]

You *could* recirc your CFC and eliminate the problem of only chilling a bit at a time...

I built a CFC and have never used an IC. It will chill my 5 gallons in about 10-15 minutes right to pitching temp. (YMMV).

You could debate which one chills faster, but the big question is, How fast is fast enough?

Say it takes 20 minutes to get to 65 with an IC and 10 minutes with a CFC. So what? Is there a problem with 20 minutes? Could you notice a difference in the beer by chilling 10 minutes slower?

What is the amount of time that is critical to chill your beer in?

I will probably continue to use my CFC. But it's impossible to see inside of and you never really know what's in there. An IC is very easy to keep clean.

Bottom line is that an IC, a CFC, and a Plate chiller all work and I doubt that chilling in 10 minutes or chilling in 20 minutes makes a noticeable difference in the beer.

 

[damnitbeavis]

You *could* recirc your CFC and eliminate the problem of only chilling a bit at a time...

I built a CFC and have never used an IC. It will chill my 5 gallons in about 10-15 minutes right to pitching temp. (YMMV).

You could debate which one chills faster, but the big question is, How fast is fast enough?

Say it takes 20 minutes to get to 65 with an IC and 10 minutes with a CFC. So what? Is there a problem with 20 minutes? Could you notice a difference in the beer by chilling 10 minutes slower?

What is the amount of time that is critical to chill your beer in?

I will probably continue to use my CFC. But it's impossible to see inside of and you never really know what's in there. An IC is very easy to keep clean.

Bottom line is that an IC, a CFC, and a Plate chiller all work and I doubt that chilling in 10 minutes or chilling in 20 minutes makes a noticeable difference in the beer.

I agree, it probably makes little difference in the final product. I would bet, but have no evidence that a counterflow or plate chiller will achieve a better cold break if it is able to chill below 70 on the first pass (assuming there is only one pass). But then the issue is that all this cold break is in your fermenter, unless you rack again.

 

[Homercidal]

I agree, it probably makes little difference in the final product. I would bet, but have no evidence that a counterflow or plate chiller will achieve a better cold break if it is able to chill below 70 on the first pass (assuming there is only one pass). But then the issue is that all this cold break is in your fermenter, unless you rack again.

There is that fact, however, I would also opine that a little cold break is not a big deal in the fermenter. If you ferment most beers for 3 weeks or less, there is certainly not a problem. If you ferment for a long time, then it might make sense to rack to a secondary, but I a common trend is to primary for 2-3 months with no noticeable problems.

I have thought about going to an IC for the ease of cleaning. But then I could also recirc my CFC for 10 minutes to clean and sanitize before turning on the water and the same thing is accomplished and I could then leave the cold break in the kettle in a perfect world.

In reality I'd probably still siphon a bit of break material. I don't think it's a big deal all things considered.

Bottom line for me is that any of the systems work and there are a few ways to use each one, depending on your preference and $$ ability. When I get my pump up and running I'll be recirculating my chiller. Until then, my CFC still works very well.

 

[JayB240]

More than just another plate chiller. Custom made Heat Exchangers
I've had mine for the last 8 batches...

I clean with Star San and PBW (Powered Brewers Wash).

I am teaching myself why I need a pump.....
If I could recirculate I could watch the Keggle Thermometer go down....

http://www.carlsonhx.com/ All Stainless - Tig Welded Heat Exchangers

Jay

 

[OneHoppyGuy]

Using the calculator from the above mentioned site:
http://www.carlsonhx.com/index.php?...h=1&sgh=1.080&tci=65&tco=&gpmc=20&shc=1&sgc=1

The results shows the Heat Transfer Capacity "Out of Range" What does this mean?

 

[carlsonhx_ryan]

So out of range on the heat transfer capacity section means the exchanger is too small to meet the given the conditions.
100% heat transfer capacity means it will take all available heat transfer area to meet requirements.
We like to see heat transfer capacity in the 80th percentile.

So, given your requirements, you are asking for your hot fluid to enter the exchanger at 220 and leave the exchanger at 70.
Your conditions with 6 pgm hot and 20 gpm cold will transfer 486703.96 BTUs.

Now, we can also adjust flow rates, lets say we reduce flow rate on the hot side to get our required temperature drop:
http://www.carlsonhx.com/index.php?...h=1&sgh=1.080&tci=65&tco=&gpmc=20&shc=1&sgc=1

A 20.0 will handle this load, but we'll only be transferring 121675.99 BTUs

Let's look at it from another angle:
Looking at our online Volume calculator:
http://www.carlsonhx.com/index.php?item=calc&view=vol
Specific Gravity 1.08, Delta T 150, Gals 220 (assuming 220 gallon tank) requires 297430 BTU

So it will take the 297430 BTU to cool the 220 gallons in an hour.
(BTU being the amount of heat required to raise 1 gallon of water 1 degree in one hour).

Let adjust our requirements:
http://www.carlsonhx.com/index.php?...h=1&sgh=1.080&tci=65&tco=&gpmc=20&shc=1&sgc=1

A 20.0 will handle this. Now, we're not getting 70 degrees directly out of the exchanger, but we are cooling the tank in an hour.

Additionally, if we increase the hot flow rate to even just 10 gpm instead of 6, we can get by with a smaller exchanger:
http://www.carlsonhx.com/index.php?...h=1&sgh=1.080&tci=65&tco=&gpmc=20&shc=1&sgc=1

This is a fully welded industrial unit built to last. Made of entirely food grade 316L Stainless, the unit itself will not be susceptible to biological attack or galvanic corrosion as other units where dissimilar metals are used. It will work well in a brew environment. We can also make modifications such as custom fittings and brackets to the product as well.