Concial fermenter

[jmitchell3]

I think that 8 gallons would be perfect. I have almost bought the Speidel 30L fermenters a couple of times but I really like the thought of using stainless, but the price is usually a turn off. My only dimensional requirements are 29" or less in height and 17" (14" would be ideal so I could fit three wide in my ferm chamber) or less in diameter so I might have to forgo the bottom dump valve assembly and have some shorter legs.

I brew 5 gallon batches but start with 6 gallons. A half gallon loss from kettle to carboy and another half gallon loss from carboy to keg, I end up with 5 gallons. 5.5 gallons or so in a 6 gallon better bottle is really tight. I like my wheat beer with WY3068 so a blow off tube is required. I think last time I lost about a liter due to blow off.

I really despise racking in general. If the stainless conical has a loss of 0.75 gallons, hell, even 1 gallon, it would be a small price to pay to not have to rack from carboy to keg. I have been overshooting my OG numbers lately anyway so I could just add a bit more water in the beginning to make up for any extra dead space in the fermentor and not miss my OG.

Yeah, I do the same for volumes!

 

[Bswan0508]

I might be interested in a 7.5 gallon one also. Depending on price of course. Maybe even two. I was just eyeing the SS Brewtech 7 gallon bucket when I remembered this thread.

Did you guys figure out a price and the dimensions for the 7.5 gallon conical? If you did, would you mind posting it here or do you want me to PM you?

Lastley, where in Michigan are you located? I am here in West Michigan. I was born and raised 20 miles south of Detroit and then moved to the West side of the state in 1996. I work in Grand Rapids but live in a small town about 20 miles from Lake Michigan.

i do not have a price figured out for a 7.5 gallon yet but i can tell you the 20 gallon ones i am building now are 15" diameter and 32" height without the legs i realize this is probably going to be top heavy which i am going to compensate for by mounting the legs higher and i am actually thinking i am going to weld tapped pads on so the legs can be bolted instead of welded this way if you wanted shorter legs or longer it wouldn't be hard to change. The price i have figured on the 20 gallons is $400-$450. But off the top of my head i would say the selling price for the 7.5 gallon would be around $250-$275. I have started building them and will upload pictures a little later this evening so everyone can see the progress.

And to answer your question i live about an hour north of Detroit near Port Huron.

 

[Bswan0508]

I think that 8 gallons would be perfect. I have almost bought the Speidel 30L fermenters a couple of times but I really like the thought of using stainless, but the price is usually a turn off. My only dimensional requirements are 29" or less in height and 17" (14" would be ideal so I could fit three wide in my ferm chamber) or less in diameter so I might have to forgo the bottom dump valve assembly and have some shorter legs.

I brew 5 gallon batches but start with 6 gallons. A half gallon loss from kettle to carboy and another half gallon loss from carboy to keg, I end up with 5 gallons. 5.5 gallons or so in a 6 gallon better bottle is really tight. I like my wheat beer with WY3068 so a blow off tube is required. I think last time I lost about a liter due to blow off.

I really despise racking in general. If the stainless conical has a loss of 0.75 gallons, hell, even 1 gallon, it would be a small price to pay to not have to rack from carboy to keg. I have been overshooting my OG numbers lately anyway so I could just add a bit more water in the beginning to make up for any extra dead space in the fermentor and not miss my OG.

Also i could build one at 14" diameter and 16" height from bottom of cone to top would give you roughly 8 gallons.

 

[Bswan0508]

Sorry guys didnt get a chance to upload pictures yesterday but here are a couple

this one is after the material rolled

and this is a close up of the welds these are not finished and will be cleaned up but to get an idea of what the welds look like inside the fermenter

I will upload more later once they are cleaned up. I also realize the pictuee quality isnt very good the camera on my phone isnt very good. Ill try to get better pictures

 

[user 125772]

I'd be very interested in a 20 gallon stainless conical for $400 :rocking:

This is the place that spins them. https://www.toledometalspinning.com

PS: the Pics (above) failed to upload

 

[Bswan0508]

The pics are showing fine for me are they still not showing?

 

[Toejam792]

I don't see any pictures

 

[CA_Mouse]

No images here either. Tried 3 different browsers.

 

[jabba11]

I can see them

 

[Bswan0508]

Sorry guys its weird i can see them perfectly fine ill upload them to google photos and provide the link here

 

[Bswan0508]

Here are a couple more photos of the progress hopefully these ones upload correctly

I have sanded down and rounded off the weld on the outside for the seam where the cone meets the cyliner. I am hoping to electropolish the whole thing when done. Which will get rid of the grind marks eliminate the need for passivation and make it really shiney lol

 

[CA_Mouse]

You are going to buff out the skin before you call it finished, I hope... How does the interior weld look? As long as it it ground smooth and buffed to a polish, it should be great!

 

[Bswan0508]

The electropolishing will take care of the buffing actually what it will do will take a few thousandths off the surface which will shine it right up and smooth it out. Also the interior welds will also be sanded down and smoothed out too but as of right now they look like this

 

[laredo7mm]

What is the angle on your conical portion? It looks kind of shallow, but that might just be the pictures. Shouldn't it be around 60° for being most effective at getting the yeast and trub to slide down to the bottom?

 

[Bswan0508]

Its a 55° angle

 

[Brentk14]

What is the angle on your conical portion? It looks kind of shallow, but that might just be the pictures. Shouldn't it be around 60° for being most effective at getting the yeast and trub to slide down to the bottom?

My understanding of conical shapes is that 60 is ideal. However, if it's not going to be 60, then it's better to have a shallower inner wall for the yeast to go down, rather than a steep wall where yeast gets compacted. I might be completely wrong, but that was my thought process.

 

[laredo7mm]

My understanding of conical shapes is that 60 is ideal. However, if it's not going to be 60, then it's better to have a shallower inner wall for the yeast to go down, rather than a steep wall where yeast gets compacted. I might be completely wrong, but that was my thought process.

I agree, but it all depends on what reference you are using to measure your angle. In the picture below, the one on the left is how I think the "industry" measures the angle and is why I asked the question. When I said "shallow," I was referring to the the height of the cone. The one on the right is what I think the OP measured. I could be wrong too.

 

[WrQth]

I agree, but it all depends on what reference you are using to measure your angle. In the picture below, the one on the left is how I think the "industry" measures the angle and is why I asked the question. When I said "shallow," I was referring to the the height of the cone. The one on the right is what I think the OP measured. I could be wrong too.

Quick calculations from the pictures provided point towards the more shallow cone as being the result, 55 degrees.

 

[laredo7mm]

Quick calculations from the pictures provided point towards the more shallow cone as being the result, 55 degrees.

Here is one at 55°. I guess I should have done that in the first place, but I have 60° stuck in my head. Plus, I don't know what diameter the OP is making his conical, so I just guessed at 14 inches. The diameter will effect the cone height.

 

[Bswan0508]

The diameter is 15" and the height is 8" it may be closer to 50°

 

[laredo7mm]

Here is 15 diameter with 8 height:

 

[Bswan0508]

Yes thats what that shows to the point of the cone its 8" but the cone on mine is cut off to have a 2" opening you add the point it will add height to the cone i would say at least 2 inches. Which would put it at 10" height and thus the angle changes ill put an angle finder on it later and show you its a little over 50°

 

[laredo7mm]

Yes thats what that shows to the point of the cone its 8" but the cone on mine is cut off to have a 2" opening you add the point it will add height to the cone i would say at least 2 inches. Which would put it at 10" height and thus the angle changes ill put an angle finder on it later and show you its a little over 50°

I believe you. Now that I have the geometry right it is showing almost 51°

 

[Bswan0508]

Lol see i wasnt lieing the reason i said 55 is because at first i was going to go with a 10" height from the 2" dia on the bottom to the 15" dia on top but then it would have been under 20 gallon capacity with the cylinder being 22" height so i opted for 8"

 

[Drumminguy81]

Brewhemoth Conicals are made with a 45* cone and work excellent for yeast dumping/harvesting. They did a ton of research before making them and from what i remember the 60* was beneficial for dry product flow but there was no conclusive proof that it made a huge difference with yeast/beer. the 60* was just adopted in the beer world because it was easier to source from the plethora of grain conicals.. don't quote me on that though-just what i remember reading somewhere. but I will say I have 2 brewhemoth fermenters and the 45* works excellent. your 50-55 will be just fine.

 

[BeardedBrews]

For what it's worth, a 60° (inside the cone) angle is one of the more efficient ways to utilize flat stock to make a cone that fits a cylinder.

If you cut a 30" circle, and then split that in half, each half can be rolled into a cone for a 15" cylinder. The resulting cone is ~13" tall to the point, and has an inside angle of 60°.

 

[maazak]

For what it's worth, a 60° (inside the cone) angle is one of the more efficient ways to utilize flat stock to make a cone that fits a cylinder.

If you cut a 30" circle, and then split that in half, each half can be rolled into a cone for a 15" cylinder. The resulting cone is ~13" tall to the point, and has an inside angle of 60°.

Makes sense. Often devices are produced a certain way for efficiency of manufacturing more than efficiency of the actual product use.

 

[Bswan0508]

For what it's worth, a 60° (inside the cone) angle is one of the more efficient ways to utilize flat stock to make a cone that fits a cylinder.

If you cut a 30" circle, and then split that in half, each half can be rolled into a cone for a 15" cylinder. The resulting cone is ~13" tall to the point, and has an inside angle of 60°.

While you may be right about being able to get 2 15" cones with a 60° angle out of one 30" circle i disagree with it being more efficient. The cones i am using can be cut from a piece of material 24" x 16" so to get 2 i would need a piece 24" x 32" and a full sheet comes in at 48" x 96" so i can make a total of 12 cones out of 1 sheet. Where as if i did it the way you are saying id only get 9

 

[Bswan0508]

Just to clarify.

 

[BeardedBrews]

While you may be right about being able to get 2 15" cones with a 60° angle out of one 30" circle i disagree with it being more efficient. The cones i am using can be cut from a piece of material 24" x 16" so to get 2 i would need a piece 24" x 32" and a full sheet comes in at 48" x 96" so i can make a total of 12 cones out of 1 sheet. Where as if i did it the way you are saying id only get 9

Very good point, I hadn't considered the reduction of width on the flat version by reducing the cone angle. Your design looks like the winner.