2 plate chillers of same size.

[cantrell00]

I've been fortunate enough to grab two plate chillers and was wondering which method is more efficient? Run them in series or parallel?

They are both Alfa Flaval CB27-10L, Approximately 12" x 4.5" x 10 plates.

Should you split the flow of wort & chilling water or connect them in series?

I could do trial & error but I have to order the fittings & series would obviously require less overall.

http://www.alfalaval.com/globalasse...rs/brazed-plate-heat-exchangers/cb/cbxp27.pdf



Thanks!

 

[SpahrBrewing]

The best result will be running your wort side in series and your water side in parallel. This would be the fastest and most efficient. Reason being, your wort running at full speed will not chill in one pass through a single chiller but by the time it leaves the first one, it should be well within range to be finished by the end of the second chiller.

Your water passing through will be hot coming out of the first chiller and would do nothing to help chill in the second chiller. That's why you'd split it; so you have ice cold water running through each chiller.

 

[cantrell00]

Makes sense. I really never thought of the third option.

I will be recirculating back to the kettle BTW.

Not sure if that changes anything or not.

 

[SpahrBrewing]

Doesn't really change anything. You'd still have a much quicker chilling time doing it that way. Not sure why you'd be recirculating back into the kettle, except for whirlpool, but it wouldn't be required as you'd reach temps in one pass most likely.

 

[cantrell00]

Mainly for hopstands @ specific temps. I don't have a hop rocket.

Ports are 3/4" so I would be best served to leave the connections that diameter when connecting the two I would think on the cold side. More water flow, faster chilling?

Everything on the hot side would be 1/2" camlock connections so that one doesn't matter

 

[SpahrBrewing]

Yeah, to a certain point, more water flow = faster chilling. There is a point where the water doesn't have enough contact time and results diminish but you'll know when that happens.

If you're doing hopstands and shooting for certain temps, you may want to put a valve in after the water split for the 2nd chiller. Reasoning there would be so you're not chilling the wort too fast and overshoot your temp.

 

[cantrell00]

True. It's an electrical element kettle so it recovers quickly. Yeah, will check that out.

Thx

 

[wilserbrewer]

If running wort back to the kettle, wouldn't running the chillers in parallel be most efficient as the delta between wort and chilling water would be the greatest?

 

[cantrell00]

Yeah.. That is what we had determined for the chill water. The wort would be in series.

I can always test each too.

 

[cantrell00]

The other thought that I have is to run chilled ice water through the second.

I need to see how efficient it will be in the first pass though.

I think running through both down to 80-100 degrees & then recirculating ice water is going to be the way to go in all likelihood though. I am going to test both. I'm more interested in saving time than water.

I brew a lot of lagers & live in the southeast so 80-90 ground water is the rule, not the exception.

 

[SpahrBrewing]

Honestly, I use roughly 40-50 pounds of ice and like 2 gallons of water and have a pump in the bottom of that bucket. I have a single 30 plate chiller. I pump the hot water back into the bucket, which melts my ice and raises the temp, obviously, but it's lower water consumption. I throttle my pump from the kettle to about half (partially because full speed breaks the cone of break material that I whirlpooled). I can run off 15 gallons of near boiling wort to pitch temps in less than 5 minutes doing this.

If you didn't care about water and just wanted to save time, you could fill the bucket with water and instead of circulating your hot water back in, drain it to another bucket to dump or clean with. This keeps your ice water extremely cold the whole time.

I live in Florida by the way.

 

[cantrell00]

Makes sense. I experienced similar results using that much ice also.

I have plenty of chest freezers. I think I'll chill 10 gallons to near freezing & recirculate it on my next lager.

 

[wilserbrewer]

Makes sense. I experienced similar results using that much ice also.

I have plenty of chest freezers. I think I'll chill 10 gallons to near freezing & recirculate it on my next lager.

While chilling water to recirculate will help, pound for pound I think ice has 3X the chilling power of 32 degree water due to the phase change.

 

[cantrell00]

I figured that ice would be more efficient but didn't know it was that much.

Thx