Fishies to Fermenting; aquarium chiller fermenter

[cwi]

"The heat produced during ferm isn't very large."

That statement I suspect is completely wrong. Again relying purely on experience. 5 gallon batches raise temp a couple degrees above ambient. My conical full (10-11 gallons) raise temperature 5-8 degrees above ambient at peak fermentation. I imagine batches larger--and any commercial brewer can probably attest to this-- would raise fermenting temperatures significantly above ambient if not controlled (via jackets or immersion devices).

I said it requires about a 10F ambient differential.
By not very large, I mainly meant in relation to the chiller capacity. Even a 10 gal batch doesn't produce that much power during ferm. What do you consider large? It is obviously much less than the capacity of my freezer that runs <10% duty cycle even at >80F ambient. So I guess around 1W/gallon, or less depending on the ferm temp. Definitely within an order of magnitude of that.

Your assumption that the SS metal provides insulation is true, but if you apply your same insulation value to that as you do your SS metal coil, it wouldn't work very well.

The difference is that chest freezers have to penetrate the stainless insulation (of fermenter wall) via cold air.... That transfer is relatively inefficient. In contrast, the coil submerged in the fermenter is transferring cold through the stainless steel via direct contact with a liquid.

No number crunching required: Stick your hand in the freezer and then stick your hand in a bucket of ice water---then tell me which makes your hand colder more quickly!

I don't think you are getting it. You said the stainless provided insulation. I believe I was very clear in my explanation of air/beer boundary layers, transfer rates of air vs. water, etc. As long as the freezer can transfer, via air, enough heat to the fermenter in a sufficient amount of time to maintain temps, it doesn't matter that the transfer rate is lower than liquid-metal-liquid transfer rates, it is sufficient for the task at hand.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

As long as the freezer can transfer, via air, enough heat to the fermenter in a sufficient amount of time to maintain temps, it doesn't matter that the transfer rate is lower than liquid-metal-liquid transfer rates, it is sufficient for the task at hand.

I never question sufficiency--when I say the freezer struggles with large batches--I mean the compressor runs--near constantly or constantly. The chest freezer does a great job (maintains the temp); however, it just wears itself out all day long doing it--> when fermentation is active.

The chiller again, in contrast, runs briefly and then shuts off. The pump in the bath water kicks on every couple hours to drop the fermenter temperature down.

The chiller does the same job as the chest freezer--maintains the temperature of the ferment--> it just does so without the compressor needing run all the time.

That is my point... It is an observation. Not debatable.

Here, let me talk cave man:

Freezer = compressor run a lot during active ferment and large batch

Chiller = compressor run WAY LESS during active ferment

Both = maintain temperature

Both = work

Benefit of chiller = more quickly adjusts temperature and compressor runs less when controlling temperature of dedicated fermenters (even without insulation at ale temperatures).

Benefit of Freezer = more capacity for lots of kegs and more versatile.

Downside of Chiller = may need to insulate the fermenter for lagers or compressor will run more often.

 

[cwi]

Two reasons, surface area, and delta T.

The surface area of the fermenter is significantly less than that of the of the fridge/freezer to outside world. Less surface area offsets some of the benefits of the insulation in the freezer...which often isn't much (R3-R7)

This doesn't match up with you having to place your conical in a cabinet, while I can ferment and cold crash in less than 12 hours in fridge in a 100F garage. Stainless steel R value is ~0. Chest freezers are ~R15. Also, if you use an appropriate size of chamber for the vessel, the difference in surface area won't overcome the uninsulated open air fermenter in the same ambient.

Second, is Delta T.
I prefer to control my temps based on the temp of the wort, not the surrounding air, because wort temp is really what I care about. Because air is a poor conductor of heat, and because water/wort has a very high thermal mass, the air temp in the fridge/freezer ends up dropping fairly low to get decent heat transfer out of the fermenter.

If you only control air temp, that's less of an issue, but it's not something I'm interested in doing.

Controlling to wort temps is why I bought a controller, controlling the air means I have to be the second controller. Me no likey.

Why does it matter if the air drops to low temps in the chamber? Are you adding in constraints like the chamber also has to keep any bottles in the chamber at a specific temp range as well? In reality, the ambient doesn't go much below 20F lower than ferm temp during the active phase, and only ~10F max on average. Fans, thermal mass, and probe response tricks can reduce those if they matter to you.

Aq chillers, or even a homebrewed submerged glycol chillers, benefit from higher evaporator temps, but it isn't that great of an advantage. Certainly not enough to offset a fermenter inside an insulated space (freezer) vs. an uninsulated fermenter in open air within normal, and especially extreme, ambient ranges.
I don't believe this is a factor at all, my evaporator temps are somewhere around 15 degrees in the glycol bath. In a freezer/fridge, they'll be anywhere from -10 to 45 depending on how long the cycle times are.

You keep your glycol bath close to freezing though, right? If the bath was kept closer to the needed offset, the evap temps during "on times" could be significantly different. Even at the ranges you quoted, it could be enough to double the COP, but it has been a while since I looked at COP charts. I do remember that for one DC compressor setup, evap temps going from ~0F to 30F raised the COP from ~1 to 4. Evaporator temp control is coming in the next green fridges.

For the 85 gallon batches at the microbrewery I sized the system around a peak fermentation output of 1000 btu/hr. That would be a vigorous fermenation that would substantially complete in 24-48 hrs. a more typical case will be around a half to a third of that. As for your duty cycle assuming that your freezer is capable of 1000 BTU/hr (not sure what how big a chest freezer you have, but that would be ballpark) a 10% duty cycle would be consistent with about half that energy coming from ferementation.

A large percentage of low duty cycles like that are startup costs, but about 50% loss to ambient is definitely possible in the summer. I never really cared as long as it kept up with ferm, which it had no problem doing at 10%. Do you have an explanation why the OP couldn't get 30 gallons of low power lager to maintain temps in a freezer? Maybe he put it in hot? It still should have been able to start freezing it in 2-3 days max.

It's not as much of an issue as is being made out. During active ferementation it's a non-issue because the turbulence caused by the co2 outgassing is more than enough to mix. The rest of the time it's easily solved by having the coils at the top of the chamber. Convective currents are enough to stir the mix.

If you have a layer above the top of the coils you can have an issue, esp the more rapid the chill down.

I forget the specifics, but after the highly active phase radial and vertical strat is a confirmed issue for jacketed conicals. With a non-jacketed, non-insulated conical, I can't imagine it gets better. With a large single wall internally chilled conical, radial strat, or a least a boundary layer at the vessel wall is highly likely, maybe even during active ferm depending on ambient. There is a lot of literature on strat issues, and how to mitigate it. You can choose to dismiss it if you like.

For homebrewers that primary for extended time periods, leaving a centrally chilled conical in an 10-20F ambient diff will certainly cause temp strat.

*I get VERY precise temp control - as little as .1F without ever having to worry about short cycling a compressor.

It is possible to get much more precise control with glycol, but if the ambient diff is large, it would be difficult realize it without insulation. That is why insulating the fermenter, or putting it in a fridge with ambient set to ferm temp, makes so much sense. Whether .1F is necessary, is another issue, but is good for bragging rights. No complaints from me if I could get it. I have dreamed up submerged kegs/fermenters as a poor mans jacket for multiple temps in one keezer/chamber. There are easier ways to do the same thing, but the liquid cooling has more sex appeal.

I didn't say there weren't benefits to glycol, and especially with a more substantial chiller like a fridge or A/C unit as the source, there are some cool things one can do. My suggestion was that to do any lagering (which the OP mentioned), or crashing, the conical will need to be insulated. At that point, it seemed like a free/cheap fridge would be easier/cheaper to deal with than finding/fitting/cleaning insulation for the conical. It may still be, even if just to get the ambient down, and still chill with the coil.

 

[cwi]

This would be consistent with my calculations. You're probably putting out 200-500 BTU/hr from the ferementation in a chest freezer probably rated around 700 BTU/hr

I don't doubt the aq chillers have an energy efficiency advantage over a freezer, and for sure an immersed coil has a transfer rate advantage of air. The question is what the multipliers are between them an chest freezers.

The OP's aq chiller is 1 amp max if the 1/10 hp rating is the compressor. A typical freezer is rated at ~5amps, but usually has a 2-3amp run current. Out of the gate the chiller would need a 3:1 multiplier given similar compressor designs.

I have ferm'd 12+ gallons in a 1/2 bbl in a 5amp rated fridge in a 100F garage. It had no issues during the peak ferm, and was never over temp with frequent checks. No logging or anything, but it had no problems. I think this is a common experience. I am sure others have done even larger batches, and have logging for on times, etc.

If the OP is having issues, especially ferming lagers which is basically just turning a chest into a kegerator as low power as lager ferments are, something is up. Keezers have no prob maintaining ~35F even with bare collars. Guys with logging report 10-20% duty cycles.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

cwi,

I think you numbers are just screwy...

Chiller: 2.63 amp and 1270 btu's

JBJ 1/10HP Arctica Aquarium Chiller

Freezer: 1.6 amps (blame the tree huggers and their "green energy stars")

It certainly does not run 10-20% of the time FULL of active ferment! More like 70%+ during active ferment... I have never timed it, but the compressor is rarely off. Temperature of ferment is reached but is running near constantly.

 

[Shockerengr]

This doesn't match up with you having to place your conical in a cabinet, while I can ferment and cold crash in less than 12 hours in fridge in a 100F garage. Stainless steel R value is ~0. Chest freezers are ~R15. Also, if you use an appropriate size of chamber for the vessel, the difference in surface area won't overcome the uninsulated open air fermenter in the same ambient.


Controlling to wort temps is why I bought a controller, controlling the air means I have to be the second controller. Me no likey.

Why does it matter if the air drops to low temps in the chamber? Are you adding in constraints like the chamber also has to keep any bottles in the chamber at a specific temp range as well? In reality, the ambient doesn't go much below 20F lower than ferm temp during the active phase, and only ~10F max on average. Fans, thermal mass, and probe response tricks can reduce those if they matter to you.

The answer is it doesn't, You had asked for reasons why insulation is less of an issue in this case and I gave them.

You keep your glycol bath close to freezing though, right? If the bath was kept closer to the needed offset, the evap temps during "on times" could be significantly different. Even at the ranges you quoted, it could be enough to double the COP, but it has been a while since I looked at COP charts. I do remember that for one DC compressor setup, evap temps going from ~0F to 30F raised the COP from ~1 to 4. Evaporator temp control is coming in the next green fridges.

Probably, or I can leave the controller at the low temp, not worry about stuff growing as fast, and let it run. I insulated the glycol tank with 3" of foam to compensate for the lower temps I run at...which is better insulation than the rest of the freezer's I have.

A large percentage of low duty cycles like that are startup costs, but about 50% loss to ambient is definitely possible in the summer. I never really cared as long as it kept up with ferm, which it had no problem doing at 10%. Do you have an explanation why the OP couldn't get 30 gallons of low power lager to maintain temps in a freezer? Maybe he put it in hot? It still should have been able to start freezing it in 2-3 days max.

I think you're overestimating the heat transfer capacity of his keezer...not all are the same, and the newer units with better insulation have gotten smaller compressors. given the 1.6 amps, it's not going to be move more than about 500-700 btu/hr

I forget the specifics, but after the highly active phase radial and vertical strat is a confirmed issue for jacketed conicals. With a non-jacketed, non-insulated conical, I can't imagine it gets better. With a large single wall internally chilled conical, radial strat, or a least a boundary layer at the vessel wall is highly likely, maybe even during active ferm depending on ambient. There is a lot of literature on strat issues, and how to mitigate it. You can choose to dismiss it if you like.

For homebrewers that primary for extended time periods, leaving a centrally chilled conical in an 10-20F ambient diff will certainly cause temp strat.

I'm not saying it's never an issue. I have to make a mod to one of my conicals because of it (the chiller is 4-5" below the surface of 10 gals...which as I said does cause stratification)

But I do believe it's being made into a much bigger deal than it needs to be. It's easy to fix...put the chiller coil such that it's at the top/surface and convection takes over from there. I did several tests with chillers when I was first setting up these system to confirm that stratification wasn't going to be a problem, and have probably 100bbls of brewed beer to back up that theory.

It is possible to get much more precise control with glycol, but if the ambient diff is large, it would be difficult realize it without insulation. That is why insulating the fermenter, or putting it in a fridge with ambient set to ferm temp, makes so much sense. Whether .1F is necessary, is another issue, but is good for bragging rights. No complaints from me if I could get it. I have dreamed up submerged kegs/fermenters as a poor mans jacket for multiple temps in one keezer/chamber. There are easier ways to do the same thing, but the liquid cooling has more sex appeal.

There's no disagreement there, other than what each of us considers a large diff. I can run my system around 40-50 degrees below ambient, down to a wort temp of about 40-45. I limited more by the temps of the glycol on how low I can go than I am by the ambient temps. But above about 10-20 degrees below ambient, I suggest some form of insulation to prevent condensation issues and reduce system run times.

If I had my system in my house like the OP, and was only doing ales, I would suggest forgoing insulation for a glycol system with an internal chiller. The savings in energy aren't great enough to offset the cost of insulation for a 10-15 degree temp delta. I insulated mine because I have much higher temp deltas to deal with, and will have up to a barrel of beer fermenting at a time...which puts enough heat out on it's own that I'll use around half of the systems capacity just to remove the heat of fermentation.

(and as a note, I only control to .5 deg as I don't think .1 is necessary either)

I didn't say there weren't benefits to glycol, and especially with a more substantial chiller like a fridge or A/C unit as the source, there are some cool things one can do. My suggestion was that to do any lagering (which the OP mentioned), or crashing, the conical will need to be insulated. At that point, it seemed like a free/cheap fridge would be easier/cheaper to deal with than finding/fitting/cleaning insulation for the conical. It may still be, even if just to get the ambient down, and still chill with the coil.

I wouldn't worry about it just for crashing...the time frames are short enough to ignore the inefficiencies.

As to the free/fridge comment. I used to use a fridge, I built the glycol system. I am much happier with the new setup and I find it to be more efficient than my previous setup. The insulation in the old fridge was only about r3-r5 (and I stand by that being typical for older fridges), it had air leaks, would freeze up and generally be a poor performer compared to what I have now.

I should also note, that I gutted the fridge to get the cooling system for my glycol system, so I have a direct comparison in performance between the two. Glycol works better. It's not for everyone, but for anyone that's interested, and is willing to set one up, I think they will be very happy with the end product. They are just so much more capable than a standard fridge.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

My wife wouldn’t know what do without that expensive mutt.

Oh yes! I am in 110% agreement with that statement.

I was skeptical about spending money on a dog--let alone a mutt--but "Project Manager" has been worth every penny. Had a few different breeds growing up--> there is no comparison with this guy. Just an easy, enjoyable, experience, all the way around from day 1 (8 weeks old).

Must be great when all those pups get together!

 

[cwi]

cwi,

I think you numbers are just screwy...

You mean these numbers:

1/10 hp aquarium chiller

They are your numbers, so who is screwy? It was all I had to go on, so that is what I used.
1hp = 750W (no matter whether the horse is submerged in a conical, or not)

Did you go to a law school that taught using the 'modified' Socratic method- lesson number one, bury them in documents and mix in some red herrings for good measure.

I can't even imagine what lesson number two would be, maybe the "Chewbacca defense".
[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1QI4P0YqtM]South Park - The Chewbacca Defence - YouTube[/ame]

Chiller: 2.63 amp and 1270 btu's

More than likely that is peak, and not run current, but who knows. Something isn't right if it is using 3A steady and only claiming 1/10hp. No matter, the (claimed) btu rating is what is important. With a fridge, one has to go off watts and a WAG for COP.

Freezer: 1.6 amps (blame the tree huggers and their "green energy stars")

This is what I was referring to about something being atypical with your experience. If the plate rating is 1.6A, you have a wimpy freezer. My puny freezer has a 5A plate rating The compressor run power is much less, but probably more than 1.6A. My old bigger one, RIP, had a ~4 amp motor.


It really makes no difference. The issue I am trying to convey is that you can't get more power out than you put in, regardless. It doesn't matter how good it transfers heat, there is only some much heat it can move based on the energy input (X COP for Carnot cycle devices). Yes, the aquarium chiller has advantages that can make it remove more heat for a given energy input, so it can have a lower % on time than an equivalent freezer. My comments were more related to what the analysis looks like, and what effects are at play.

What % on time the aq chiller has will be related by some formula to what a freezer % on time will be. With some empirical data, it would be easy enough to come up with one. However, for the same amount of beer, if a freezer has a 90% on time, an aq chiller with 1/3 the energy input only having a 10% on time would require a COP 9 times the freezer. That can happen in theory, but not in reality. This is a case where I agree with you on theory and reality not agreeing.

My original suggestion is now even more pertinent since you now seem to think insulating would be a good idea. If you feel that dealing with directly insulating the fermenter or building your own chamber, is easier than putting it in a fridge, that is a personal preference. Something I already mentioned.

 

[cwi]

I think you're overestimating the heat transfer capacity of his keezer...not all are the same, and the newer units with better insulation have gotten smaller compressors. given the 1.6 amps, it's not going to be move more than about 500-700 btu/hr

Yes, the rating on his freezer is surprising, and something I will keep in mind when I shop for my next one. 1.6A doesn't leave much reserve power. That is not a typical system, until now I guess. That is why I said something must be up with his system since others don't have similar experiences

I did several tests with chillers when I was first setting up these system to confirm that stratification wasn't going to be a problem, and have probably 100bbls of brewed beer to back up that theory.

I was talking more about radial strat post-active ferm in an internally chilled fermenter with no insulation. There are some guys on here who have done so thorough testing on this just to confirm their hunch. They also found some strange strat effects caused by the cone. From memory, it created an inversion layer type effect, or something like that, causing separate zones each with its own strat.

There's no disagreement there, other than what each of us considers a large diff. I can run my system around 40-50 degrees below ambient, down to a wort temp of about 40-45. I limited more by the temps of the glycol on how low I can go than I am by the ambient temps.

I would think that post-ferm, the ambient temp is the limiting factor, since you should be able to get very close to glycol temp with good insulation. The chiller rating limits this at some point if it can't keep up with the heat loss even with insulation.

If I had my system in my house like the OP, and was only doing ales, I would suggest forgoing insulation for a glycol system with an internal chiller. The savings in energy aren't great enough to offset the cost of insulation for a 10-15 degree temp delta.

This was part of the confusion on my part, as I originally thought this was in a non-climate controlled space based on my casual review of the pics, and the OP opening by talking about the Florida heat.

I wouldn't worry about it just for crashing...the time frames are short enough to ignore the inefficiencies.

I have didn't comment on the cost of the energy used mattering, except for the joke comment. I was referring mainly to optimizing system performance. It will just impact the crash rate, but probably not by much. He is limited to 32F for chilling, though, so it might have a bigger impact.

 

[Shockerengr]

I was talking more about radial strat post-active ferm in an internally chilled fermenter with no insulation. There are some guys on here who have done so thorough testing on this just to confirm their hunch. They also found some strange strat effects caused by the cone. From memory, it created an inversion layer type effect, or something like that, causing separate zones each with its own strat.

In practice with the systems I have, the only strat issues I've run into are where the coils are submerged and leave a layer on top. If there is any stratifcation remaining, it's not something that i've noticed.
I like running cold water, with a the coils up high to maximize the convective effects. So far, it's worked well.

I would think that post-ferm, the ambient temp is the limiting factor, since you should be able to get very close to glycol temp with good insulation. The chiller rating limits this at some point if it can't keep up with the heat loss even with insulation.

In theory...yes. In practice, the heat transfer rate between fluids drops way off once you get inside 10 degrees delta T, enough that for me, it's not worth running the pump that long. I could get there, but I've found that it would takes about 3-4 times as long to get from 45-40 as it does to get from 65-45. The chiller keeps up as the glycol temps keep dropping, i'm just not transfering much heat. I could drop the glycol temp further down...but there's a point where I'd start getting concerned about causing beer slush.

I have checked to see what the effects on heat loss are, which is easy to do, and found that it's the dominant factor. That's why I'm not as concerned about the insulation used.

(It's easy to test, chill to a temp, shut the chiller off, and monitor how fast the temp rises..I calc'ed about 100-200btu/hr at 45 degrees.)

 

[cwi]

Not trying save electrical costs--trying to make sure the chiller lasts. Again, its only running about 3 hours a day (so far). Maybe a bit more today as fermentation ramped up, but I don't think so.

I was just joking because earlier you said energy costs weren't important, and they really aren't much no matter what one uses for chilling.

And it is not cycling often. My bet is it is designed to handle frequent cycling anyway--it's an aquarium chiller... from my experience with reef fish tanks and hot metal halides hanging above them (to grow coral) that's what these chillers do--cycle frequently! To maintain a precise temperature (a sudden drop of even just 2-3 degrees can bleach or kill stony coral).

There no easy way to make an AC compressor handle frequent cycling, so I doubt it has anything to mitigate cycling. Running for longer times, with fewer cycles, is what they like. I don't know how factual it is, but I have read that a fridge is the longest lasting of all household appliances. They can last a very long time as long as they aren't short cycled, or cycled too frequently. The general consensus is that total run time is a much smaller contributor to failure than cycle count is.

The temp differential setting is what has to biggest impact on cycling freq. That would be one downside to not using the bath, as I commented earlier. To maintain ~1F variance with no buffer may cause excessive cycling. This is what the bath provides, as does the air when using a fridge and controlling to actual beer temps.

there is no reason for the bath

1. How would I control two different fermenters independently.
Convince another relative give up their reef tank hobby!
Seriously- A solenoid valve for each fermenter tied to the temp controller. Almost what you are doing now, I assume, just with 2 pumps, instead of 2 solenoids and one pump. You do lose your reserve capacity and cycle smoothing of the buffer/battery that the bath provides.

2. The chiller came from a fish tank.... My beer is not going through it...
I was referring to hooking the chiller up directly to the chiller, with the pump inline of course. I wasn't referring to cycling you beer through the chiller, although it does appear to have titanium piping. Serious bragging rights if you did do it. Stainless, please. Haven't you heard- titanium is the new SS. I don't even like CF chillers, so not for me though.

1/10 hp = ~100W

The chiller runs at 2.6 amps and is 115 volt... I think your calculation is off.

I already answered this one.

This weekend there will be 22 gallons going... Again--the chiller isn't struggling with 12 gallons. It's barely running. Maybe 4 hours a day and that being generous.

That is about 20% run time which is close to freezer run times also. A freezers performance does degrade when heat extraction demands increase due to the colder temps needed to compensate for the lower conductivity/transfer rates from using air. The aq chiller should have a much more linear increase as demand increases since the evap temps stay relatively constant, not going to -10F like a freezer.

That 80 cents per 10 days in Jacksonville.

You guys are at ~$0.08/kWh? Cheap. I think I am ~$.014.

If the chiller jumps to running 12 hours a day (3X more) that will be $2.28 per 10 days in Jacksonville.

It may be even less. The 2.8 is probably peak/start current. Chilling is cheap.

In contrast, once again, nothing is wrong with chest freezers. However, if they have 20-30 gallons of fermenting beer--they run near or totally constantly.

however, you have failed to convince me (or likely anyone) that the chest freezer is more efficient to use for that volume of beer.

I was talking, and still am, about the size of chiller needed to do that. If a freezer with a 4 amp motor can't keep up, even given its issues at high loads, it is doubtful that an aq chiller at ~1/4 the energy input, even with its advantages, could keep up either, and the coil to beer bit is not relevant here. This assumes both can keep up. It would need to have a COP 4X the freezer. It could be possible, but it is not a clear cut case that doesn't need some experimental verification.


That said, the my secondary fermentation will be in chest freezers. It has nothing do with efficiency. My secondaries/serving vessels are corny kegs and I can fit butt load of them in the chest freezers. The chest freezers do not run all the time to maintain non-fermenting beer at any temperature. Chest freezers, IMO, for that purpose, are ideal.

This is why your lager issue confuses me. Ferming a lager at ~50F should be so low power to be almost equivalent to maintaining finished beer at 50F. If you put them in there hot, and tried to ramp to 50F, I could see issues with a runaway ferm the freezer would have trouble with dropping.

Chest freezers also work well for primary fermenting--the compressor just runs more than this chiller set up and the temperature control does not respond as quickly.

It is different than my experience, but I also don't have a 1.8A plate rating. Fans help a lot with transfer rates, and why fridges 'as built' are probably a better choice for high volumes. For crashing, the aq chiller, especially with the bath/battery is for sure better down to some beer-chill fluid temp diff. Going past that temp, or as the glycol system nears the temp, the fridge based setup will start to outperform it due to its -10F temp floor.

 

[cwi]

In theory...yes. In practice, the heat transfer rate between fluids drops way off once you get inside 10 degrees delta T, enough that for me, it's not worth running the pump that long.

It was more of a commentary on the dynamics in play- that as glycol/beer delta decreases, and ambient/beer temp increases, insulation becomes more important. 'Theory', as you say. The ~200btu loss isn't that large, but neither is the amount of heat being extracted as the glycol/beer delta gets small. As long as 45F works as a crash temp for you, it is a moot point. Insulating the tanks, unless they were then clad in SS or the like, would introduce a nightmare cleaning situation. That is something the OP should keep in mind regarding his insulation options.

The guys with jacketed conicals can get their rigs down to ~32F, at least that is what they claimed when I asked a few of them during tours.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

My original suggestion is now even more pertinent since you now seem to think insulating would be a good idea. If you feel that dealing with directly insulating the fermenter or building your own chamber, is easier than putting it in a fridge, that is a personal preference. Something I already mentioned.

You have missed the entire point. Insulating the fermenter is not necessary for ales because the room temperature isn't much different than my desired fermenting temperature.

It takes a couple hours for the fermenter to warm up a single degree. What would insulating it do? Make it take fours hours? That difference is negligible.

I don't know about lagers with the chiller--that is why I asked on this forum. Based on the comments--I think insulating the fermenter for a lager, at say 52F, I think would be desirable. (1) condensation (2) chiller would run longer and wear out more quickly. The cost in electricity, again, I don't care about. We a talking about 50 cents.

If the plate rating is 1.6A, you have a wimpy freezer

Get use to it. It's called the EPA. And they strangle manufacturers with unreasonable mandates. That is an area I have expertise in.

Personally, I buy old toilets that actually hold water and flush (on one try)--and (when I think of it) I am buying appliances up ARE NOT "energy star"--a few years old usually means better functioning appliance. Apparently I failed with this freezer.

As to my expertise:

The EPA is Malthusian. I have no respect for that Agency. Their very goal is drive up energy and appliance costs. It is harmful to every person, business, and employer in America. What they propose via administrative dictate is especially hard on the poor. It is also harmful to the environment. No economy = no clean environment. In short, they are nuts. They spend just as much time and money fighting "green" energy projects as they do traditional sources of energy. Their goal is not efficiency or clean energy or a better world. Their goal is simply--NO ENERGY and rationing via high costs--suffering for suffering's sake. AND of course to guarantee themselves jobs and pensions forever.

You guys are at ~$0.08/kWh? Cheap. I think I am ~$.014.

None of us will have "cheap" electricity for long if people keep buying Sierra Club calendars and supporting EPA mandates. (see above)

This is why your lager issue confuses me. Ferm a lager at ~50F should be so low power to be almost equivalent to maintaining finished beer at 50F. If you put them in there hot, and tried to ramp to 50F, I could see issues with a runaway ferm the freezer would have trouble with dropping.

The wort went into the freezer at about 75F. I allow the freezer to drop the to 45 (takes awhile). I oxygenate well and then pitch the yeast and ferment at about 50F (allow the temperature to ramp up to 50-52F). The yeast being pitched is a large, active, slurry, (always for lagers) at 45F--so it starts within minutes typically.

One thing--I don't really agree that lagers are not vigorous fermenters. They may not be as active as ales, for sure, but they do not compare to finished beer. They certainly go we bit crazy ramping from 45F to 52F--until the freezer kicks on. IME, they steadily crank for a week or so.

Again-- I think the volume of beer has a lot to do with it. The freezer was totally full. And apparently the freezer is some greeny's cruel joke at keeping food warm--and screwing with my homebrewing.

I'll let you know how this weekend affects the chillers performance. Your's and others comments have convinced me not to both bother with a lager unless I insulate the conical to some degree. Again, not for costs, mostly the condensation issue--I saw what the lines did on the ale--until I wrapped them.

I will make another ale this weekend, and then perhaps, next weekend a lager once I figure out an easy/cheap insulator. Perhaps "Project Manager's" (dog) blanket.

Question:

Right now the chiller kicks on to keep the bath at temperature more often than the pump in the bath kicks on to cool the ferment...

The bath raises about 2F every hour-and-half (without the fermenter pump kicking on). The R/V pump is constantly on to the chiller. Although it is outside the bath--I assume the moving of the water constantly--speeds the heating of the bath water.

The r/v pump move water at 600gph and chiller only requires a 250gph. Would slowing the water down--slow the warming of the bath water?

Alternatively, is it possible to just have the pump come on right before the chiller comes on?

 

[Shockerengr]

Question:

Right now the chiller kicks on to keep the bath at temperature more often than the pump in the bath kicks on to cool the ferment...

The bath raises about 2F every hour-and-half (without the fermenter pump kicking on). The R/V pump is constantly on to the chiller. Although it is outside the bath--I assume the moving of the water constantly--speeds the heating of the bath water.

The r/v pump move water at 600gph and chiller only requires a 250gph. Would slowing the water down--slow the warming of the bath water?

Alternatively, is it possible to just have the pump come on right before the chiller comes on?

having the rv pump constantly on and moving water will definitely cause heat loss. Also, that style of pump (diaphragm) isn't really designed for continuous operation like that. with no load, it's easier on them, but they will wear out. A small fountain pump would help, but then you're adding a heat source to the bath. For reference, I don't like to run my diaphragm pump for more than 4-8hrs at a shot. (and also why I don't try to get as cold as possible.)

Given that you have to circulate through the chiller, you're limited to a degree about what you can do about, other than to minimize the amount of water that's moving and make sure everything in that loop is well insulated.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

having the rv pump constantly on and moving water will definitely cause heat loss. Also, that style of pump (diaphragm) isn't really designed for continuous operation like that. with no load, it's easier on them, but they will wear out. A small fountain pump would help, but then you're adding a heat source to the bath. For reference, I don't like to run my diaphragm pump for more than 4-8hrs at a shot. (and also why I don't try to get as cold as possible.)

Given that you have to circulate through the chiller, you're limited to a degree about what you can do about, other than to minimize the amount of water that's moving and make sure everything in that loop is well insulated.

Okay, thanks. How about a small fish pump that run outside the bath? Just prime it and let it go? I can't see how it would lose its prime?

I have some "Maxi-Jet 1200's" (from the family fish stuff box). They say rated for 290 GPH. With about 4 or 5 feet of 3/8 tubing attached to them--plus whatever resistance the chiller provides--> Do you think one of those would hit the 240gph (not 250 gph, my mistake) that the chiller's manual requires?

I don't know the how to calculate that resistance off-hand.

 

[Shockerengr]

an easy way to check is to hook it up and pump into a bucket and measure it. it should pump a gallon in 15 seconds. If it works, great, hook it up and insulate the bits as best you can.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

an easy way to check is to hook it up and pump into a bucket and measure it. it should pump a gallon in 15 seconds. If it works, great, hook it up and insulate the bits as best you can.

I like simple solutions.

Alternatively, any harm in just overriding the thermostat on the chiller. Kind of like keezer set up. Have the pump and chiller come on at the same time at the desired bath temperature?

There is a 3 minute delay, always (programed into the chiller), before the compressor comes on. (i.e. the target temp is hit and then three minutes later the compressor turns on. )

Would that harm the chiller in anyway? Less cycling I would think. Just would have to put a temp probe into the bath water.

 

[cwi]

You have missed the entire point. Insulating the fermenter is not necessary for ales because the room temperature isn't much different than my desired fermenting temperature.

It takes a couple hours for the fermenter to warm up a single degree. What would insulating it do? Make it take fours hours? That difference is negligible.

Well, wouldn't that cut your running time for your chiller in half? You have mentioned that is one of your concerns.
You are a conundrum. Frequently you will play both sides to suit your needs.
Insulation could increase performance, temp stability, equipment longevity, etc. Cost savings are just a side effect, and one I have never mentioned, except in jest. Maybe you are interpreting some of my terminology as referring to cost, when it is just system related.

I don't know about lagers with the chiller--that is why I asked on this forum. Based on the comments--I think insulating the fermenter for a lager, at say 52F, I think would be desirable. (1) condensation (2) chiller would run longer and wear out more quickly. The cost in electricity, again, I don't care about. We a talking about 50 cents.

I don't know where this is coming from. I plainly stated I was joking about the energy cost, and have numerous times stated my only concerns are system performance, energy costs be damned.

Get use to it. It's called the EPA. And they strangle manufacturers with unreasonable mandates.

Have your heard about the conspiracy theory that the R-12 'hole in the ozone' and subsequent ban was nothing more than a ploy by DuPont to keep its market share since the patent was running out? Actually seems plausible, but haven't researched it any.

R-12 is a less effective refrigerant than the newer stuff, so the increased energy usage is just a bonus, I guess.

One thing--I don't really agree that lagers are not vigorous fermenters. They may not be as active as ales, for sure, but they do not compare to finished beer. They certainly go we bit crazy ramping from 45F to 52F--until the freezer kicks on. IME, they steadily crank for a week or so.

Hence why I used 'power'. energy/time. Ales at 68F, 3-4 days, or less for Shockerengr.

Again, not for costs

Please, I beg of you, no more with the costs.

Question:

Right now the chiller kicks on to keep the bath at temperature more often than the pump in the bath kicks on to cool the ferment...

The bath raises about 2F every hour-and-half (without the fermenter pump kicking on). The R/V pump is constantly on to the chiller. Although it is outside the bath--I assume the moving of the water constantly--speeds the heating of the bath water.

The r/v pump move water at 600gph and chiller only requires a 250gph. Would slowing the water down--slow the warming of the bath water?

Alternatively, is it possible to just have the pump come on right before the chiller comes on?

Much more important than having the pump come on before the chiller, is to have the pump run for a few minutes after the chiller shuts off. You don't want the water to freeze in the chiller heat exchanger. Most chillers of this type specifically prevent temp settings below 32F, or have icing sensors if low temp fluid is used.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Much more important than having the pump come on before the chiller, is to have the pump run for a few minutes after the chiller shuts off. You don't want the water to freeze in the chiller heat exchanger. Most chillers of this type specifically prevent temp settings below 32F, or have icing sensors if low temp fluid is used

This chiller cannot be set below 32F. Any risk of freeze up? What if I add salt to the bath water? (came from salt water fish tank).

Well, wouldn't that cut your running time for your chiller in half? You have mentioned that is one of your concerns.

Not really. Because the chiller is turning on to control the bath water's rise in temp (which is occurring much less b/c of the fermentation and more because of cooler's perhaps poor insulation and the r/v pump running constantly).

Stated another way, if the chiller came on only when the pump to the fermenter turned on--that would be hardly at all--without insulation... So adding insulation won't do much.

p.s. And because I don't care about costs! haha

 

[cwi]

This chiller cannot be set below 32F. Any risk of freeze up? What if I add salt to the bath water? (came from salt water fish tank).

You can do whatever you want to lower the fluid freezing point. You would still want to run the pump for a bit after chiller shutdown for safety, though. Parts of the hex are more than likely capable of temps around ~0F, or lower. Well below the freeze point of whatever liquid you use. The reason glycol is used is so in case there is an unseen leak that results in some getting into the product, it is less likely to poison someone, or ruin the product. Also why many use vodka or starsan for airlocks.

Not really. Because the chiller is turning on to control the bath water's rise in temp (which is occurring much less b/c of the fermentation and more because of cooler's perhaps poor insulation and the r/v pump running constantly).

With you current setup, true. I think I had the bathless system in mind when I said that. Using a smaller bath, higher temp bath, etc. would all reduce 'on time'. You only need a temp low enough to meet your desired fermenter temp variance. Lots to balance though, with peak load, cycling, recovery, etc. Shouldn't be too difficult dial in a temp that is a good balance and still meets your needs.

Stated another way, if the chiller came on only when the pump to the fermenter turned on--that would be hardly at all--without insulation... So adding insulation won't do much.

Except, according to your numbers, cut your chiller run time in half, and therefore extend the life of it.

p.s. And because I don't care about costs! haha

Forgot, it would also lower your electric bill, thereby starving all those conspiratorial agencies out of their pensions.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

okay good advice.

I will be looking to hook up a different pump when I have time (there is box of coraline algae covered fish stuff) to help with the heat....

Yesterday--> I dropped the temp of the bath to 45F. It took about a few minutes to get there. Then I just shut the chiller and chiller pump off for the whole day.

Left until this morning. The beer stayed at the right temp (bath pump kicked on when needed) and chiller only ran less than an hour for 24 hours! The temperature of the bath increased 56F (from 45f).

That is with no insulation on an ale.

For now, I think I will continue like that--to further reduce cycling on the chiller. Maybe for two batches set the bath at like 35F and then shut the thing down for the rest of the day. The bath can do the work. perhaps a timer on the chiller and its pump is the solution.

Forgot, it would also lower your electric bill, thereby starving all those conspiratorial agencies out of their pensions.

No conspiracy.... You can have the case law if you want it. Just search "CERCLA," "NEPA," "Clean Water/Air Act," "Ozone", "NSPS," "BADT," "LAER," "Arranger," "Transporter," "U.S. v. Mass," etc, etc, etc, in Google Scholar (that should be free way to find a lot of that stuff).

Like reading the back of credit card agreement, though, I warn you.

Its called regulatory capture and crony capitalism. Old as the sky is blue.
Only its on steroids with the EPA and businesses buying cartels/monopoly from the gov't via regulation.

Don't get me wrong--attorneys make a pretty penny litigating all this...

But I am objective enough to realize it is nothing but that--make work. Doesn't help anyone or the environment--the opposite is roughly true. Our air and water and environment has ever never been cleaner.

Arbitrarily increasing air and water quality standards--as well as energy efficient mandates--are done to feather regulator's (and related industries) nest. Not to protect anyone or the environment.

The EPA may have had a purpose 40 years ago.... But today, I think we can say "mission accomplished" and disband the agency. States have the equivalent, and the massive, wasteful, federal bureaucracy--is not needed.

There is a reason relatively unregulated products prices go down over time--> and regulated products--> prices increase. Regulators.

 

[cwi]

For now, I think I will continue like that--to further reduce cycling on the chiller. Maybe for two batches set the bath at like 35F and then shut the thing down for the rest of the day. The bath can do the work. perhaps a timer on the chiller and its pump is the solution.

You should be able to set the diff to a large difference to accomplish the same thing, without the danger of forgetting to activate it one day, or a timer that may activate more, or less, than needed. The bath only needs to be cold enough to effectively maintain the ferm temp. For ex., if a 56F bath is able to keep your ferm at 65F, you could set the bath at 36F with a 20F diff, although most thermo controllers have limits on how large the diff can be. That way, the chiller would only come when needed (56F), and run for a long time to charge the 'battery'. This would result in less cycling, but a longer total 'on time' due to losses from maintaining the colder bath. But, like I mentioned, the overriding factor for wear is cycling. You can also increase the size of the 'battery' to accomplish the same thing without the increased inefficiency of the lower bath temp.

Controllers are screwy in how the setpoint and 'diff' are used and interact, so you would need to see what method your chiller uses.

Its called regulatory capture and crony capitalism. Old as the sky is blue.
Only its on steroids with the EPA and businesses buying cartels/monopoly from the gov't via regulation.

I wasn't saying you weren't correct about how US capitalism works, and that the conspiracy wasn't real. Did you see my comment about Freon and the ozone? Seems like it was a case of Dow getting the govt to ban its product just as the patent was running out, and then only approve a new Dow product, when there were several other products that can't be patented that were more efficient, safer, cheaper, etc.

There is a reason relatively unregulated products prices go down over time--> and regulated products--> prices increase. Regulators.

Yes, in general, regulators aren't needed. The ketchup inspector's duties will be taken care of by market forces. I was even raised on money from the deregulation of telecom/AT&T.

Other things like insurance/financial/stock market regulations and political QPQ, though, are necessary, even though the regulators/politicians are frequently in cahoots with the very businesses the regs were meant to control. Even Greenspan has admitted the folly of 'self-regulation' for Wall street. Most guys on Wall street have criminal minds/tendencies, they just apply their intellect to gaming the system within the limits of the law. Except for the blatantly illegal scams, that is. I have worked with energy guys, and they all were either trying to manipulate the market, or steal a little bit of money from a whole lot of people (the public).

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Okay, my chiller doesn't seem to allow me to adjust the temperature differential... any solutions? Just overriding it still creates the problem of turning on and off the pump to bath--unless I use two seperate controllers.

hmm thought--the aquarium has "Neptune Aqua controller jr." that may be a solution--although as easy to program as the Ranco unit.

Other things like insurance/financial/stock market regulations and political QPQ, though, are necessary, even though the regulators/politicians are frequently in cahoots with the very businesses the regs were meant to control. Even Greenspan

Completely disagree. Two words: Moral Hazard. Regulations--especially in the financial sector are the very cause of this our problems. And Greenspan's opinions continue to evolve. However, he is not very good reference for anything if you ask me.

 

[cwi]

Okay, my chiller doesn't seem to allow me to adjust the temperature differential... any solutions? Just overriding it still creates the problem of turning on and off the pump to bath--unless I use two seperate controllers.

hmm thought--the aquarium has "Neptune Aqua controller jr." that may be a solution--although as easy to program as the Ranco unit.

You can use any of the popular controllers, even the ~$20 dual stage ebay aquarium controller.
https://www.homebrewtalk.com/f51/ebay-aquarium-temp-controller-build-163849/
Just make sure you order the 110V and dual stage (just to have heat if you need it). The ebay pics all look the same for various models.

You will just max (min) out the temp on the aq chiller, and let the other one do the controlling. The built in 3 minute delay on your chiller will prevent immediate activation, but a 3 minute delay won't affect anything since you have a heat battery. Having the pump stay on for a few minutes after the chiller stops is a trickier situation that is best solved with a separate timer set to run for 2-3 minutes after power is shut off. These are very common in industry, but I am not sure of a source for a cheap one.

Completely disagree. Two words: Moral Hazard. Regulations--especially in the financial sector are the very cause of this our problems. And Greenspan's opinions continue to evolve. However, he is not very good reference for anything if you ask me.

Aren't regulations in place to protect the 'uninformed' from the moral hazard? (in the sense of regs protecting the little guy, not the little guys behavior affecting the big guy like in insurance) Although, the regs are frequently flawed, on purpose.
I suppose in an ideal market, the consumer would be informed and move his money away from those who take risks he does not want to take. While good in "theory", self-regulation has been been shown not to work, for various reasons. How does the shoe fit?

Markets have a history of boom and bust, with the general public picking up the tab on the way up, and the way down. The big money guys have frequently abused loose/no regs to create volatility, which they love, and make out like bandits on both sides. S&L crisis?

Take the latest CDO debacle- CDS were supposed to be used to offset risk by the buyer of the CDO, like insurance, but CDSs turned into a speculative instrument, because it was purposely not brought under insurance regulations. It would be like me taking out 1000 automobile insurance policies on the teenager down the street driving a Corvette, and getting paid out $10,000,000 when they have a $10,000 wreck.

This is essentially what happened, and was part of the screwy bailout that tried, and was successful to some extent, to let the CDOs fail, CDSs be paid out, even though many of the CDSs were not even held by the owner of the CDO, or multiple CDSs were held for the same owned CDO. They knew what was happening, and the CDSs were cheap, since no one even knew the risk, and there didn't have to be any capital reserves backing the CDS, since they prevented them from being considered "insurance".

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

I'll work on the chiller... for now the turn it on once a day manual method seems to work well.

moral hazard: In insurance, this is an important concept because without counter incentives--insurance products will incentivize the vary behavior being insured against.

S&L crisis

Perfect example. Federal insurance means that both bankers and investors are not careful with their money. Regulation did not prevent the S&L crisis because the regulators were "captured" by the industry (as stated before--> regulatory capture).

The best--most strict regulation--are market forces. I would argue market regulation is also the most just. No bailouts and no special favors and cartels. Courts have a role to stomp out actual fraud and crime. Courts presently are bogged down by enforcing needless regulation and therefore--many times--actual crime and fraud goes unaddressed.

Further, boom and busts in the economy, are caused by market dislocations and mal-investment. The more free then market, the smaller the corrections and therefore the smaller the boom and bust. Goverment investment is largest source of mal-investement and thus boom and bust cycles.

Regulation is one way how government invests. Politicians care less about helping the little guy--they just pander to whomever they are speaking to get reelected.

That means they invest tax dollars and create regulations for political returns--> not market returns. This creates massive mal-investment and eventually massive booms and busts when the market finally tries to clear.

The housing crisis is prime example of this boom and bust--gov't created asset bubble.

Stated another way--> people spend their own money wisely when they know it is at risk and not "guaranteed." If they invest in something that doesn't work--they go bankrupt or stop investing and cut their losses. The government in contrast, never does that. I am sure typewritter makers are still getting subsidies somewhere.

Gov't continually throws good money after bad--until the market finally demands a clearing of the mal-investment (recession).

Take the latest CDO debacle- CDS

There are plenty of people who would agree with you. That more regulation of securities will somehow solve catch and solve the problems before they occur. I would point to history and say that regulation is always reactionary, solves few problems, and regulators are easily influenced to look the other way (S&L comes to mind)...

We have several hundred thousand pages of regs on the books--> how much more do you think we need?

The problem is more fundamental. Investing is risky. Especially in a fractional reserve system. Reducing the moral hazard by not bailing out speculative bankers and investors would create far more certainty long run.

A lot of these instruments only had value because gov't implicitly or explicitly guaranteed the original debt they were made of... that's the other problem..

 

[cwi]

S&L Crisis
Perfect example. Federal insurance means that both bankers and investors are not careful with their money. Regulation did not prevent the S&L crisis because the regulators were "captured" by the industry (as stated before--> regulatory capture).

The S&L crisis was brought about by financial players who were attracted to the more lax regulations of S&Ls vs. banks. It was common for bankers to purchase S&Ls solely to use as instruments with regulations favorable to increased leveraging and market pumping and manipulation.
​

The best--most strict regulation--are market forces. I would argue market regulation is also the most just. No bailouts and no special favors and cartels. Courts have a role to stomp out actual fraud and crime. Courts presently are bogged down by enforcing needless regulation and therefore--many times--actual crime and fraud goes unaddressed.

Yes, most regulations currently in place do no good to prevent unethical behavior, and creating ones that do is very difficult. Mainly because the very entities being regulated are able to neuter regs before, or circumvent them after they are put in place using preconfigured 'outs'. That, and they are constantly trying to look for ways to get around the 'spirit' of the regulations.
​

The housing crisis is prime example of this boom and bust--gov't created asset bubble.

Helped by financiers prodding the politicos to loosen policy.
​

There are plenty of people who would agree with you. That more regulation of securities will somehow solve catch and solve the problems before they occur. I would point to history and say that regulation is always reactionary, solves few problems, and regulators are easily influenced to look the other way (S&L comes to mind)...

I think the S&L regulators, and legit S&Ls themselves, tried to stop the malfeasance, but were hobbled by the weak regs, and political pressures (ultimately derived from QPQ).
​

We have several hundred thousand pages of regs on the books--> how much more do you think we need?

More simple broad ones where needed, and less where they are not. And no special exclusions added on continually, which is where a big part of where the problem and bloat resides.
​

The problem is more fundamental. Investing is risky. Especially in a fractional reserve system. Reducing the moral hazard by not bailing out speculative bankers and investors would create far more certainty long run.

Yes. It has created a history that certain types count on. I believe they even teach it in some famous institutions. Whose creed is it that goes: "The reason for the masses, is to lose their asses."?
​

A lot of these instruments only had value because gov't implicitly or explicitly guaranteed the original debt they were made of... that's the other problem..

Yes, but it was even more funny than that. They let the assets drop by forcing mark to market after the crisis started, triggering CDS payouts, then stepped in to guarantee the assets, which were not as bad as they are rated if held until maturation. They just can't be unloaded due to a bad perceived reputation.

It looks as though someone orchestrated the whole thing, and played every side to maximum advantage.

That is the crux of the matter. There are devious people out there that will try to circumvent any regulations that are put out there, and historically there has been no penalty for doing it, or they devise ways to avoid trace-ability.

If there weren't fancy lawyers to get the guilty crooks off, and lynch mobs were allowed to take care of matters, maybe they would think twice about it first. That would make a good argument for no laws either. Let market forces take care of the rules and enforcement.​

 

[phoenixs4r]

Isn't there a politics/debate forum?

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

Isn't there a politics/debate forum?

yeah sorry... this is what I do for a living... Beer brewing forum should be a (much needed) break from that ...

Brewing tomorrow.... Will test chillers chilling capacity by weeks end.

 

[cwi]

Meh. As long it stays mostly on topic, and the active participants, and especially the OP, don't care, no worries.

The issue had been completely played out, and mostly resolved, with plenty of good info in the first 50 or so posts for the person stumbling upon the thread seeking tech info about aq chillers.

I was just trying to finally steer it to a point that I could make fun of lawyers to get even for the OP wisecrackin' about engineers. I am still disappointed the modified Socratic teaching method and Chewbacca Defense comments didn't generate anything.

 

[DrewBrewTheGreat]

made a pale ale 12 gallons. Beer went in fermenter at 76F. Bath water at 40F. less then 20 minutes and wort at 60F in fermenter. Bath got up to 47F. Set bath at 45F. Hit that, and then shut the thing down for the night.

One beer--pretty much done at 64F, other at 60F. Room temp at 72F. about 24-25 gallons total.

works for me.... will check bath in morning and turn on chiller. Hopefully will only need to do once a day.