BrunDog 50A eRig - no HLT for me!

[BrunDog]

Yes, I have grown accustomed to your detail (and appreciate it!). Yes I drilled two holes, but they are fairly sealed. I could add some silicone around the holes but don't feel it necessary. With the location high up, it would be really unlikely water/wort would make it up there, let alone go sideways into the holes. I was thinking of doing a signal tower but still needed locations for the switch and E-stop, so went this route. This box is watertight and comes pre-drilled with 22mm holes. Got it on Amazon for $18: https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00GUTOOG6/

 

[BrunDog]

I have been documenting my most recent addition/experiment here:

So not it’s time for my next experiment for potential upgrade: Reverse Flow Mash!

This has been done before, and is incorporated in certain systems like the Braumeister. But I want to take it to the next level and make it LODO friendly by incorporating an upside-down false bottom (aka false top) mounted to a mash cap. The idea is that the inbound liquid will flow up through the grain then flow back out through this false top. The mash cap/false top will float on top of the mash liquid. The possible benefits include: no stuck mash and unhindered recirculation flow rate, underletting the grain at the start (great for automation), taking advantage of heated liquid’s natural convective currents and LODO ready via underletting and a sealed top. The possible detriments include: poor wort clarity due to no true grain bed “filter”, inability to effectively sparge (because the wort will be more dense than sparge water, causing it to sink).

This will be a test, but I ultimately envision a center drain and a “telescoping” tube feed for that drain, which would allow the mash cap to rise and fall with liquid volume changes. For the test, I am using my sparge ring to feed the bottom and a hose to drain. More to come!
View attachment IMG_1804.jpg

 

[TheLostBeer]

Talk about changing things up, very curious to see how this turns out!

 

[BrunDog]

We’re underway on this test. Never mashed at this fast a flowrate before!
View attachment IMG_1805.jpg

 

[BrunDog]

Wort not moving much at the surface. This is probably what happens down at the bottom and we just don’t know it. Wort was cloudy for a long while but is now pretty clear.
View attachment IMG_1806.jpg

One thing for certain, when you recirc fast, you get no temp variation. This thing has been PINNED at 149.5.

View attachment IMG_1807.jpg

 

[thekraken]

How are you priming the pump and getting the circulation started?

(Edit)
Oh wait, nvm I see. It's like a skimmer.

This now comes to mind: http://www.clearbeerdraughtsystem.com/info.html

 

[BrunDog]

Ya I will post up the concept drawings tmo.

Here is the result. Unfortunately it looks like this won’t work. I expected an efficiency hit and I sure got it. I also expected less clear wort and I got that too, but not as bad as I thought.

The real problem is during the latter stages in draining the MT, the grain holds the mash cap well above the liquid level, and the siphon to the pump transferring to the BK is lost. I had to push the cap down into the grain to get most of the liquid out to hit my volume target. But alas, despite my best effort, efficiency was way off. I was supposed to get 7 gals of pre-boil at 1.035 and got 1.027 by refractometer. Then at the end it was supposed to be 1.044 but it landed at 1.030. In fairness I boiled off a half gallon less than expected due to the spray condenser system, so that meant more volume than expected too.

This was also impossible to stir which I usually do once or twice early in the mash which makes me wonder if that affected efficiency. I doubt it as I was able to absolutely rip the recirc rate.

Initial runnings to BK. Not as clear as usual but not horrible.

View attachment IMG_1809.jpg

The dent in the mash made by pushin down hard on the cap:
View attachment IMG_1816.jpg

Much more true in the sample, though in fairness I drew it off the bottom of the fermenter pre-pitch.
View attachment IMG_1817.jpg

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

Nice experiment although I have to criticize you for breaking a cardinal rule of scientific experimentation: Never have multiple experiments running at the same time! It’s too hard to separate the different effects of each process variable.

Of course, since I really want to see the results of your steam condenser, I can’t complain too much!

I also wouldn’t call this a failure. You’ve identified a key factor for success: the mash lid needs some sort of locking mechanism to hold it down. Maybe a brace that uses pressure against the sidewalls of the tun to hold it down? Something like this: https://www.amazon.com/Camco-44063-Cupboard-Bars-pack/dp/B000EDUUHQ/ref=sr_1_8?s=hi&ie=UTF8&qid=1508414243&sr=1-8&keywords=spring+tension+rod

I use these in our RV fridge to keep everything from falling over while driving. Not very high tech, but inexpensive and could be used to verify the concept before investing in something more robust.

 

[thekraken]

I wonder if the process would be more conducive to us full volume biabers.

I notice that the nozzles on your lok line are mostly pointed toward the kettle wall, could you reorient them to all spray directly up into the mash? Would it make a difference?

 

[BrunDog]

Here is the concept drawing of the reverse mash flow tun. Not my best artwork but you get the gist.

 

[BrunDog]

Nice experiment although I have to criticize you for breaking a cardinal rule of scientific experimentation: Never have multiple experiments running at the same time! It’s too hard to separate the different effects of each process variable.

Oh you are so right - and believe me I feel guilty. The reality is it will be impossible to know what contributed what. Let's see... Unproven recipe, steam condenser, reverse mash flow, automation script not setup for this system, etc. Ya, good luck!

Just for giggles, here is the recipe I used. This is all leftover grain I had laying around. The hops are the only spare package I could find. Oh, and the dry yeast expired a year ago (I only use liquid - just keep it for backup). Surprisingly the sample was tasty, so it may turn out alright!

BTW the mash efficiency was ~55%. In order for this to really work, the flow direction would need to be reversed, which would take some valve work that I am not sure is worth it.... will stew on this for a while and figure out next steps if any.

View attachment ReverseMashBastard.pdf

 

[augiedoggy]

Did you have to drill through the box? I've always avoided that if I can to be extra careful (some people use a word that starts with "a"...) about letting water into my electrical boxes.

I may have said before (or possibly given the impression ) that I am detail obsessed. One of the biggest challenges for me when designing an epic brewing stand is how to mount the various components. It's amazing how hard it can be to mount a weatherproof electrical box...those little tabs they come with aren't worth dealing with.

I could understand wanting it to be waterproof it it was somewhere that water or wort could get in but its mounted up above? unless he has a poor ventilation setup (Which I know he doesnt ) Its not too much of a concern as far as I can tell.

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

Here is the concept drawing of the reverse mash flow tun. Not my best artwork but you get the gist.
View attachment 417751

Seems like attaching the telescoping tube at the bottom would be difficult to do, especially if it comes loose during a mash.

You got me thinking about this; how about a false bottom and top connected together by a threaded rod? Your overflow could go out a side opening at the top; maybe a 2" tri-clover fitting attached to the side of the kettle using JB Weld...hmm...seems like I saw someone do that recently

The outflow tube would have to be a decent size and maybe transparent so you could monitor level and make sure you didn't suck it dry when starting recirculation. This would have the advantage of allowing sparging by reversing the suction and discharge lines. You could also easily re-prime the pump by pouring water into the top of the overflow tube.

Something like this:

 

[BrunDog]

Actually the telescoping tubes was easy. Compression fitting at bottom in middle, 5/8" SS tube in that, then 1/2" SS tube inserted into that. This provides a fairly wide range of movement before disengaging. But this would also yield the same problem I had yesterday... no way to get all the sweet wort out.

The overflow idea you have is interesting but a fixed overflow location would be very difficult to use with different batch sizes, grist ratios, etc. At the end of the day, reversing flow again would need to be accomplished.

 

[BrunDog]

I wonder if the process would be more conducive to us full volume biabers.

I notice that the nozzles on your lok line are mostly pointed toward the kettle wall, could you reorient them to all spray directly up into the mash? Would it make a difference?

No, there are some pointed out and some pointed in. This is my normal sparge ring that sits atop the mash and it works well.

 

[BrunDog]

I am not sure at this point there is value in pursuing this further for my system. If the mash needs to be re-reversed (made normal, that is) for sparging and draining, that would require 2x 3-way valves to accomplish. That is significant additional hardware & controls for a gain of being able to underlet and recirc at high flow rates. I don't think that is a legit tradeoff, especially since grain conditioning and proper crush results in very infrequent stuck sparge on my system.

Plus with automation via the script, my mash recirc rate is self-tuning... meaning that if the pressure starts to drop at the bottom, the flow rate is automatically reduced and vice versa. It tunes throughout the mash, starting slow and going faster as the mash progresses.

For LODO, I would use the same mash cap and attach my sparge ring to the bottom (the LODO guys do this now). That would make it easy to implement and keep the flow direction normal.

BTW, brewing with the 22" touchscreen right on the rig was HEAVEN!

On to the next experiment/upgrade! I don't know what that is just yet but suggestions are welcomed!

 

[cod3ck]

BrunDog — any thoughts on the efficiency hit with a batch sparge?

 

[BrunDog]

Good point. This is probably the way this should be done, but with the cap it would not be possible to stir the mash. No doubt it would improve efficiency though.

I think this method would be the dude if you could put a legit distribution filter/ring at the bottom and another at the top. Use these in place of a false bottom or false top. Mash recirc at very high flow rate. Then switch direction for mashout, sparging, and draining. This would need might be practical for those using manual hose switching.

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

I know I suggested switching direction for sparging, but as I think about it, why can’t you pump your sparge water in from the bottom? If you go at typical sparging rates, I don’t see why that wouldn’t work.

 

[BrunDog]

You did, and that would be the right thing to do. The problem with putting the sparge water on the bottom is you have to pull the wort off the top, which is fine during the sparge, but fails when you stop adding sparge water and begin to drain only. I suppose you could continue to sparge indefinitely but I have to believe efficiency would take a hit. Plus the cleanup is more of a PITA. Thought that might be good for LODO.

The other hypothetical problem with sparging water on the bottom is that water is less dense than the wort, so they may be inclined to switch places over a long sparge, hurting efficiency more.

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

When I used to work in a dairy plant, we would "push" the milk out of the pipes & heat exchanger using water. There was an optical sensor which would see when the color of the milk was starting to fade, and would dump the stream at that point.

Seems like you could do something similar: run sparge water until the specific gravity hit a target, then stop sparging. You would have a lot of water still in the grains, but at that point, it should have rinsed most of the sugars out. All we would need to automate this process would be an inline specific gravity meter...hmm...seems like a good suggestion for your next experiment!

 

[thekraken]

Sounds to me like you're describing fly sparging.

 

[BrunDog]

When I used to work in a dairy plant, we would "push" the milk out of the pipes & heat exchanger using water. There was an optical sensor which would see when the color of the milk was starting to fade, and would dump the stream at that point.



Seems like you could do something similar: run sparge water until the specific gravity hit a target, then stop sparging. You would have a lot of water still in the grains, but at that point, it should have rinsed most of the sugars out. All we would need to automate this process would be an inline specific gravity meter...hmm...seems like a good suggestion for your next experiment!

Interestingly enough, I have been researching pH and SG process measurement. pH is easy enough and I have integrated a pH sensor into BC. The right probe can handle the mash fluid temps temps. On the other hand, SG is tricky. I have scoured the bowels of the Internet to find an inexpensive solution without much success. I have a concept in mind but I need to run some bench tests to gauge its accuracy and feasibility. I would love to have SH and pH on screen and avoid doing testing these manually!

 

[BrunDog]

One additional note: I have found that with normal ABV beer mashes, I don’t need to measure SG at any point... the runnings into the BK are always above 1.010 and the pH ok. When the beer gets lower in OG target, say <1.038 the late runnings might cross the threshold.

 

[Wizard_of_Frobozz]

An Inline refractometer sounds like the most likely solution but probably not within a homebrewing budget!

I have found the same thing as you: I don't need to monitor SG of my runnings either; I always hit my target volume before I get too low on the SG or high on the pH. The simplest solution for automating the reverse mash & sparge would be to measure kettle volume and stop sparge water flow once the target volume was reached. If you sparge slowly and have a good false bottom to distribute the sparge water evenly, you shouldn't get any channeling. I really don't see any downsides doing that except cleaning out the mash tun will be harder with all that water in the grains...unless you could add enough water to liquefy the mixture and then pump the grain/water mixture out! Automated mash tun cleaning!

 

[BrunDog]

Normally I add sparge water until the volume dictated by BeerSmith is used. Then I just continue to drain the MLT until my boil volume is achieved. This always leaves about 3/4 inch of water left in the MLT. I figured that BeerSmith’s magic is good stuff and never considered sparging continuously until the boil volume was achieved. Should be ok to do, but as you said, makes more work for clean-up.

Again though, the problem with reverse sparging is the density of wort will be higher than water, so they might try to mix rather than have a “front” of water moving the sweet wort toward the exit.

 

[BrunDog]

Btw I have contemplated adding a 2” or larger TC to the bottom of the kettle in order to have a manual dump valve for cleaning! Lazy but cool!

 

[jcav]

Having the gravity and ph readings tested automatically and on the screen would be hot! I know with some experimenting and time you could make this happen!

John

 

[Nessie]

Wow! There's a lot going on here! Great build, thanks for sharing. I'll have to come back to a few ideas shown here once I have finished my current build. So much learning to do!

 

[thekraken]

Along with BruControl changes, I finally got around to adding liquid level sensing to my Boil Kettle.
...
Now, one problem with this layout is there is tubing that has air in it. It will be sensitive to temperature changes, and admittedly as I sit here writing this, I am seeing some creep as a result. I will report back after more use!

Are you still seeing some creep? How bad is it, do you account for it? How long is your length of tube? Would you make any changes? I assume the shorter the tube, the less the creep. Would rigid tubing help?

Do you have a link to the SS 1/8" NPT x 0.170" barbed elbow?

Sure. Electrically, there are three connections. Ground on the sensor is tied to system ground, which the micro-controller is also tied to. +5V on the sensor is tied to +5V output of the controller (or 5V power supply). The output of the sensor is tied to an analog input of the controller. The capacitors were added to smooth (filter) any ambient electrical noise.

What size caps did you use? Is this your schem: http://brucontrol.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/BruControl-Analog-Sensor-Schematic.pdf ?

Happy to help! One point of concern regarding changing the T to a cross and connecting the sensor airgap tube there... when liquid flows through the port, the pressure will drop (depending on the flow rate and relative restrictions) and causing invalid readings.

I had the idea to actually use this as a flow *detection* sensor, or flow switch, as a safety check for RIMS in lieu of an actual flow meter. I've never liked that the cheap plastic one I use isn't food rated and its temp limit is less than boiling.

Finally, how accurate are the volume readings during a boil? I assume the more vigorous the boil the more noisy the signal?