Wort chiller efficiency idea. Crude drawing.

[CliftIndy]

I do my brewing mostly at night or in the early morning when there aren't children running around throwing rocks in the kettle or trying to scorch their little flesh on the burner. The last time I brewed I was using my immersion chiller and watching all of that cold water running out into the yard and I got to thinking. Why not get a large plastic bucket, 55 gallon perhaps, and cut it in half or so and let the chiller water fill into this vessel?
You could simply cut an exit port about an inch or two below the top of your brew kettle (or at least below the level of your wort in the kettle so you don't float or tip over) so that the drum would fill with the cold runoff water from the chiller and cool the outside of the kettle before exiting into the lawn or wherever.
When I'm chilling, the outside of my kettle stays pretty warm, certainly warmer than the water that's coming out of the chiller. I can't help but think that this would help reduce my chill time or at least be a more efficient use of my chiller water.

Any ideas?
Thoughts?

 

[Nerosync]

Seems like a good way to increase the bang for your buck as far as water usage. I have seen guys use pumps that just recirculate water from an ice bath through the chiller, I've seen guys run the exit hose into their washing machine to fill it up for a load of wash, plenty of ways to re-use the water to increase efficiency. Like you though the water that exits my '50 stainless steel chiller is almost as ice cold as when it went in so to circulate it around the outside of the kettle like you propose only seems logical.

 

[geouy0523]

If you want to improve this further throw a bag (or 2) of ice in the outside bucket. That's what I do, also the first water that comes off the chiller is still pretty warm so I would waste that before adding it to the outer bucket.

 

[kombat]

I'd be worried about submerging the external parts (thermometer, ball valve) of my kettle in water, but if you're just doing BIAB, this would probably improve your efficiency and speed up chilling, at least a little bit.

I use a plate chiller and collect the "waste" water to use in cleaning my equipment afterwards. I usually end up filling 5-6 Home Depot buckets with water before my wort has cooled to 65° F. The first bucket I fill gets a scoop of Oxyclean, the next is just plain (still pretty hot) water, the next is tepid, and the last 2-3 are usually pretty cool, and good for rinsing or initial flushing of the chiller and hoses. If it's taking longer than normal to chill the wort, then any subsequent buckets of waste water just get dumped down my driveway.

 

[TallDan]

I'm a little confused here guys, i use a 50' SS immersion chiller and the water that comes out of it is within a few degrees of wort temperature. Are you stirring or moving the wort chiller while chilling? Pretty sure that if I did this plan, the water on the outside bucket would actually be heating the wort inside the kettle.

 

[Gavin C]

I see the same thing as @talldan

The water exiting the chiller is scalding hot. I fill up a 7 gallon bucket with it for cleaning afterward. The rest goes down the sink. I use a plate chiller but the premise is the same.

This idea points to you not using the chiller correctly if the exiting water is cold then heat is not being exchanged efficiently

 

[JohnSand]

Rocking or stirring helps a lot. But I think the cooling water out has to still be cooler than the wort. I put mine in an outside sink, and partly block the drain. This lets the outflow circulate around the pot for additional cooling. I have to watch it carefully, as once I stopped the drain and floated the pot. If your outer container was shorter than your pot, and lower than the wort level inside, it won't float.
Another thought might be to wrap the pot in a t-shirt, and place it in a shallow pan. That would keep it wet, and evaporation would speed your cooling.

 

[GrogNerd]

I was always under the impression if the water came out of the chiller cold, it wasn't doing its job. so I start off slow to check for leaks, then crank up the flow until it's coming out cold, back it down until the water is coming out slightly warm then just a little more

 

[NathPowe]

I'm a little confused here guys, i use a 50' SS immersion chiller and the water that comes out of it is within a few degrees of wort temperature. Are you stirring or moving the wort chiller while chilling? Pretty sure that if I did this plan, the water on the outside bucket would actually be heating the wort inside the kettle.

This. The water exiting my chiller (Jaded Hornet) is quite hot, especially at the beginning of chilling. Hot enough that you don't want to grab the copper output pipe with your bare hands. While the output water certainly does get cooler as chilling progresses, I just can't see it functioning as an effective or efficient medium for a cooling bath, especially after mixing with the initial scalding hot output. To the OP, I would think it may be worth evaluating your chilling process to see if things could be optimized. I say that with all due respect - not insinuating you don't know your system - but there should be significant heat exchange happening between the wort and the chiller water - especially when chilling begins. Stirring/agitating the wort while chilling really is critical to efficient heat transfer.

However, I'm in total agreement with getting additional use out of the chiller output water. I capture the first 15gal and use it for clean-up. In the winter, 15gal is about all I need to get to pitching temps. During the summer in NC though, I often need to use more than that. My solution was to rig up some simple plumbing in the brewery that allows me to route additional chilling water to a barrel with a spigot. I then use that water for random tasks - watering the hops/garden, cleaning fermenters & kegs, etc. Before I moved into my current home it more convenient to use the chiller output water to fill the washing machine, so I did that. Just another option.

Anyway, good luck with figuring out a solution that works for your needs. Props for keeping water conservation in mind.

Cheers.

 

[Gavin C]

Rocking or stirring helps a lot. But I think the cooling water out has to still be cooler than the wort. I put mine in an outside sink, and partly block the drain. This lets the outflow circulate around the pot for additional cooling. I have to watch it carefully, as once I stopped the drain and floated the pot. If your outer container was shorter than your pot, and lower than the wort level inside, it won't float.
Another thought might be to wrap the pot in a t-shirt, and place it in a shallow pan. That would keep it wet, and evaporation would speed your cooling.

The water will be almost the same temperature of the wort as it exits the chiller if you are using it corrrectly. Ive used an IC befor I had a plate chiller. Same deal. That water is coming out at near boiling temperatures. It will burn you at the start till the wort cools a bit. This water would not aid in cooling. The whole point of a heat exchanger is to remove the heat from one thing and put it into another.

It would be like turning on the A/C and pumping all the exiting hot air back into the room.

 

[kombat]

It would be like turning on the A/C and pumping all the exiting hot air back into the room.

OT: My wife is convinced that if you left the fridge door open, it would have a net cooling effect on the house. I've tried to explain to her that any cooling the fridge generates comes out the back as heat. Even if the fridge were 100% efficient, it would be a wash, and that since it is not, then it actually has a net heating effect, but I'm not well-versed enough in the physics to effectively articulate an explanation. Anyone have a good lay-person explanation of why it doesn't work that way?

 

[rekoob]

yup, what they said.
The only time cold water should be coming out of the IC is if it's not doing anything. I collect three buckets (5 gal ea) of HOT/kind of hot/warm water from my discharge hose for clean up. I also recirculate the wort to create a whirlpool and keep things moving in the Keggle so I don't have to stir.

 

[CliftIndy]

I'm using a 25 foot copper chiller. Since I either brew in the night or early morning, my water comes out fairly cold from the source. I don't have any leaks from the hose to the IC. Initial water comes out scalding, then cools with time as I stand and circulate the IC. My thinking was to fill the drum after the water exiting the chiller gets to a more steady temperature (90-80) to help knock the temp down.
Now that I see it mentioned here, I've always thought it took a long time to chill down to pitch and certainly a lot of water. I'd estimate...maybe 40 gallons for a standard 5 gallon batch of wort. So... am I running the water too quickly through my chiller?

 

[TallDan]

I'm using a 25 foot copper chiller. Since I either brew in the night or early morning, my water comes out fairly cold from the source. I don't have any leaks from the hose to the IC. Initial water comes out scalding, then cools with time as I stand and circulate the IC. My thinking was to fill the drum after the water exiting the chiller gets to a more steady temperature (90-80) to help knock the temp down.
Now that I see it mentioned here, I've always thought it took a long time to chill down to pitch and certainly a lot of water. I'd estimate...maybe 40 gallons for a standard 5 gallon batch of wort. So... am I running the water too quickly through my chiller?

If the water coming out of the immersion chiller isn't within a few degrees of wort temp, yes, slow down the water flow. I run my chiller off of a sink faucet, and I run with the faucet fully open. Typically an outdoor hose faucet will provide more flow than that, and with a 25' chiller i wouldn't be surprised that you'd have to throttle it back.

No matter what, the water that came out of your chiller 2 minutes ago should be warmer than your wort is now, so I can't see how you would ever have enough waste water that would be usable to cool the pot from the outside.

I haven't been keeping my waste chiller water for cleaning or other use, but i probably should start...

 

[JohnSand]

The a/c and refrigerator analogies do not apply. Those are closed systems into which electric energy is added, necessarily heating. The fridge adds net heat because the motor, wires and compressor are not perfectly efficient. The lost energy becomes heat. Wort cooling is an open system in which cool water is added, and heat is drained away. If your cooling efficiency were 100% (it isn't) water outflow would be the same as the wort temp. As the wort temp drops, so does cooling efficiency. The outgoing water is always cooler than the wort. It certainly cannot be warmer. If the outside of the pot is wet, evaporation will take place, further cooling.
I don't have a degree in thermodynamics. But I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express once.

OP, as for the pressure, try turning it up or down and testing the outflow temps. The water might flow through too fast for good heat exchange.

 

[Menhir]

To maximize efficiency, you might want to chill the water used by the immersion chiller. Buy a 30' chiller coil and add it in line prior to the brew kettle. Place this new chiller in a bucket of ice water and it will cool your tap water significantly before it reaches the coil in the brew kettle. This technique is especially helpful in the hot summer months when your tap water is much warmer.

 

[Gavin C]

OT: My wife is convinced that if you left the fridge door open, it would have a net cooling effect on the house. I've tried to explain to her that any cooling the fridge generates comes out the back as heat. Even if the fridge were 100% efficient, it would be a wash, and that since it is not, then it actually has a net heating effect, but I'm not well-versed enough in the physics to effectively articulate an explanation. Anyone have a good lay-person explanation of why it doesn't work that way?

Energy cannot be created or destroyed. Only changed from one form to another. No free lunch in other words. The laws of thermodynamics MUST be obeyed.

The fridge is a great example
No net loss of energy, heat (kinetic energy of the molecules in the air in the fridge) is transfered to heat (kinetic energy of the molecules in the coolant) and then heat to the air around the cooling fins at the back.

 

[TallDan]

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6vxHkAQRQUQ[/ame]

 

[blizz81]

I have seen guys use pumps that just recirculate water from an ice bath through the chiller

I think of all the ways people try to increase efficiency of their ICs, this is the one that makes simple sense.

 

[Gavin C]

The fridge is not a closed system. Electrical energy applied to move the coolant. That is not closed either. Chemical energy from coal most likely was transformed to get heat to get steam to turn a turbine to generate electricity. That is not closed. The chemical energy in the coal has its roots in photosynthesis of the plantlife that preceeded it, that energy was converted from the solar energy in the form of photons, again not closed.

The photons have the source.... yada yada yada an on it goes.

There is no closed system in the universe. The fridge and A/C are heat exchangers as is the wort chiller.

 

[NathPowe]

OT: My wife is convinced that if you left the fridge door open, it would have a net cooling effect on the house. I've tried to explain to her that any cooling the fridge generates comes out the back as heat. Even if the fridge were 100% efficient, it would be a wash, and that since it is not, then it actually has a net heating effect, but I'm not well-versed enough in the physics to effectively articulate an explanation. Anyone have a good lay-person explanation of why it doesn't work that way?

I would probably say something like this -

"The heat's gotta go somewhere babe."

Which may or may not work out that well for me.

Cheers.

 

[douglasbarbin]

No matter what, the water that came out of your chiller 2 minutes ago should be warmer than your wort is now

Regardless of all the talk about thermodynamics and open/closed systems, this is the most important point to take away from this. The net effect is that the waste water will be slightly cooler than the wort, but not enough to make any appreciable difference.

The waste water from cooling is probably best used for cleaning your equipment, but it can't really be used to remove heat from the wort a second time. It sounds like the OP's chiller is running at a very low efficiency if the waste water is much cooler than the wort.

 

[PlexVector]

The fridge is not a closed system. Electrical energy applied to move the coolant. That is not closed either. Chemical energy from coal most likely was transformed to get heat to get steam to turn a turbine to generate electricity. That is not closed. The chemical energy in the coal has its roots in photosynthesis of the plantlife that preceeded it, that energy was converted from the solar energy in the form of photons, again not closed.

The photons have the source.... yada yada yada an on it goes.

There is no closed system in the universe. The fridge and A/C are heat exchangers as is the wort chiller.

I contend the universe is a closed system. Expanding, but closed. Unless you're Dr. Who of course.

 

[Nerosync]

I think of all the ways people try to increase efficiency of their ICs, this is the one that makes simple sense.

Yep seems to work very well without pouring a bunch of water down the drain or into the yard.

 

[Gavin C]

Yep seems to work very well without pouring a bunch of water down the drain or into the yard.

The ice still has to be made. Energy is used.

Again, there is no free lunch.

I use a preciller in an ice bucket and a plate chiller for what its worth. Works great to chill a batch in less than 10 minutes starting with warm Texas ground water. Expenditure of energy is unavoidable

 

[Nerosync]

Agreed, although currently I can chill my 5gal brews in 10mins with my 50' immersion chiller so I have not had much of a concern. For me only the first couple mins of the initial cold water going through comes out warm verging on hot. After that the remainder is just as ice cold as the water going in. So in my scenario using something like the OP has drawn up makes a lot of sense after allowing the first minute or two worth of water to go down the drain as usual.

 

[kombat]

using something like the OP has drawn up makes a lot of sense after allowing the first minute or two worth of water to go down the drain as usual.

No, what a waste! Capture that initial "waste" water in a couple of buckets, and use it to clean your equipment afterwards.

 

[TallDan]

Agreed, although currently I can chill my 5gal brews in 10mins with my 50' immersion chiller so I have not had much of a concern. For me only the first couple mins of the initial cold water going through comes out warm verging on hot. After that the remainder is just as ice cold as the water going in. So in my scenario using something like the OP has drawn up makes a lot of sense after allowing the first minute or two worth of water to go down the drain as usual.

Sounds like after the first couple minutes you should slow down the water flow through the chiller...

 

[dyqik]

Way off topic...

I contend the universe is a closed system. Expanding, but closed. Unless you're Dr. Who of course.

That's a little complicated. The universe is infinite, and expanding. It may also be closed (by the definition of "universe", although that's far from clear), but for a particular observer, a radiating heat source at some distance is also radiating heat in the other direction that can never reach the observer, as that radiated energy will always remain beyond the observer's future event horizon. So while the universe may be closed, the observable universe isn't closed, and as far as any observer is concerned, his observable universe is an open system.

Expansion also does some funny things, as a larger universe has many more gravitational modes than a smaller one, which is why the universe now can have much larger temperature variations than it used to have, and why we have bright things in a dark sky within a universe which was once all same temperature.

 

[songe]

well... if you use a big bucket. cut two holes in it, one on top and one in the bottom. use a pump and fill the bucked with ice. And make it close loop. in this way you would not be wasting water.

 

[btbnl]

Way off topic...



That's a little complicated. The universe is infinite, and expanding. It may also be closed (by the definition of "universe", although that's far from clear), but for a particular observer, a radiating heat source at some distance is also radiating heat in the other direction that can never reach the observer, as that radiated energy will always remain beyond the observer's future event horizon. So while the universe may be closed, the observable universe isn't closed, and as far as any observer is concerned, his observable universe is an open system.

Expansion also does some funny things, as a larger universe has many more gravitational modes than a smaller one, which is why the universe now can have much larger temperature variations than it used to have, and why we have bright things in a dark sky within a universe which was once all same temperature.

Fellow cosmologist?

 

[Gavin C]

Way off topic...



That's a little complicated. The universe is infinite, and expanding. It may also be closed (by the definition of "universe", although that's far from clear), but for a particular observer, a radiating heat source at some distance is also radiating heat in the other direction that can never reach the observer, as that radiated energy will always remain beyond the observer's future event horizon. So while the universe may be closed, the observable universe isn't closed, and as far as any observer is concerned, his observable universe is an open system.

Expansion also does some funny things, as a larger universe has many more gravitational modes than a smaller one, which is why the universe now can have much larger temperature variations than it used to have, and why we have bright things in a dark sky within a universe which was once all same temperature.

Infinite, no. Without boundary, yes quite likely.

The rest is a mixing up of relativity and thermodynamics. Theories working on the very large scales of matter/ energy and modeled closed systems respectively.

The reasons behind the variation in matter/energy densities in the observed universe is still an area of ongoing exploration both by the theorists and experimentalists alike. Far from a consensus I would suggest.

For anyone following the thread and getting put off by the mere mention of things like thermodynamics, which we all obey on a daily basis and use constantly (whether we want to or not), a great read is to be had in "Fear of Physics" by Lawrence Krauss

Very enjoyable and approachable. Covers a lot of this kind of fundamental stuff. ( Energy and the like) The more you know....

 

[btbnl]

Infinite, no. Without boundary, yes quite likely.

The rest is a mixing up of relativity and thermodynamics. Theories working on the very large scales of matter/ energy and modeled closed systems respectively.

The reasons behind the variation in matter/energy densities in the observed universe is still an area of ongoing exploration both by the theorists and experimentalists alike. Far from a consensus I would suggest.

For anyone following the thread and getting put off by the mere mention of things like thermodynamics, which we all obey on a daily basis and use constantly (whether we want to or not), a great read is to be had in "Fear of Physics" by Lawrence Krauss

Very enjoyable and approachable. Covers a lot of this kind of fundamental stuff. The more you know....

Still

Infinite, maybe. No boundary, definitely.

Once you have any kind of seed density perturbations, gravity ensures that they will grow and grow and grow. The only real question is the origin of the seeds; our current theory for these is quantum fluctuations in the very early Universe amplified by a period of extremely rapid expansion during which the Universe grows in size by a factor of a billion billion billion. Both the quantum fluctuations and the period of inflation are on a pretty solid footing, theoretically and observationally.

 

[GrogNerd]

if Edison hadn't invented the lightbulb, we'd have to watch TV in the dark

 

[bu_gee]

The idea isn't a bad one but I think your order of operations is backwards. You generally want to provide your greatest delta-T to your least efficient heat exchanger. Then you can use the somewhat diminished delta-T on your more efficient exchanger.

In this case it means filling your "bucket" with the water and then pumping that water through your immersion chiller and to your heat rejection system (waste water in this case).

Pumping here may be a simple as siphoning the water from the bucket through the chiller into a collection bucket.

 

[TallDan]

The idea isn't a bad one but I think your order of operations is backwards. You generally want to provide your greatest delta-T to your least efficient heat exchanger. Then you can use the somewhat diminished delta-T on your more efficient exchanger.

In this case it means filling your "bucket" with the water and then pumping that water through your immersion chiller and to your heat rejection system (waste water in this case).

Pumping here may be a simple as siphoning the water from the bucket through the chiller into a collection bucket.

Well, that's perhaps an interesting thought, run cold water into the bath, use a pump to run that water through the chiller.

I still suspect it's not going to be worth it in mess/work vs decreased cooling time, however.

 

[JohnSand]

And the water wasn't being wasted after all, because it stayed in the universe! So really there's no point in chilling the wort.

 

[bu_gee]

I still suspect it's not going to be worth it in mess/work vs decreased cooling time, however.

Unlikely, but it might be worth the experiment especially if you have a spare bucket sitting around. It definitely won't save you time, but it may save a gallon or two of water which is eco-friendly if you're into that sort of thing or forced to in certain localities.

As a few other tips from my external water-bath cooling efforts: Make sure you put something like a trivet under the pot so water gets underneath. Feed your water in at the bottom of the bucket and siphon the warmed water from near the surface of the water to maximize your external delta-T.

 

[ong]

If the water coming out of the chiller is still quite cool, it indicates that you've got the flow rate up too high. Either increase the amount of heat being exchanged during the time the water is passing through the chiller (e.g., by stirring), or decrease the flow rate, so the water spends more time in the chiller and soaks up more heat.

 

[PlexVector]

Way off topic...



That's a little complicated. The universe is infinite, and expanding. It may also be closed (by the definition of "universe", although that's far from clear), but for a particular observer, a radiating heat source at some distance is also radiating heat in the other direction that can never reach the observer, as that radiated energy will always remain beyond the observer's future event horizon. So while the universe may be closed, the observable universe isn't closed, and as far as any observer is concerned, his observable universe is an open system.

Expansion also does some funny things, as a larger universe has many more gravitational modes than a smaller one, which is why the universe now can have much larger temperature variations than it used to have, and why we have bright things in a dark sky within a universe which was once all same temperature.

Way, way, way off topic.
However the perspective of an observer outside the universe would not be bound by spacetime of that universe and thus it could appear closed. Of course the observer would have to be a higher order of dimension than the universe. The bigger question is if dark energy permeates the multiverse, then a universe is definitely not a closed system.
(I'm not trying to be a cosmological troll...just thinking outside the box.)