Over carbonated keg?

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk:

cgseanp

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I've been having some big foam problems with my new kegerator setup. I saw a video where a guy hooked his gas line up to his beer out line on his corny keg and it fixed the over foaming issue. My question is if I can do this on a keg with a sankey coupler? Getting desperate to fix my problem. I'm probably going to order a 10' line as I have 5' now, but thought id give this a try! Thanks
 
OP
C

cgseanp

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Ya I am planning on getting a 10' line but figured I'd try this if possible. I feel like adding the longer line might just be masking another issue but then again I don't know a whole lot.
 

day_trippr

"This Space For Rent"
Joined
May 31, 2011
Messages
37,500
Reaction score
20,346
Location
Stow, MA
bknifefight said:
Google "keg balance calculator"
I wouldn't bother, as I've never found one that produces a useful result. They all start with the premise that 3/16" id line has a resistance around 2.7 psi per foot, which from nearly all accounts is way too high.

1 foot per psi works good. No calculator needed...

Cheers!
 

Double_D

Supporting Member
HBT Supporter
Joined
Feb 17, 2011
Messages
1,958
Reaction score
215
Location
Las Vegas
I wouldn't bother, as I've never found one that produces a useful result. They all start with the premise that 3/16" id line has a resistance around 2.7 psi per foot, which from nearly all accounts is way too high.

1 foot per psi works good. No calculator needed...

Cheers!
I found that out accidentally.:ban: And it works perfectly.
 

Golddiggie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2010
Messages
13,318
Reaction score
1,463
Location
Living free in the 603
I wouldn't bother, as I've never found one that produces a useful result. They all start with the premise that 3/16" id line has a resistance around 2.7 psi per foot, which from nearly all accounts is way too high.

1 foot per psi works good. No calculator needed...

Cheers!
1' beer line per 1psi CO2 pressure for the keg is a good rule of thumb. You can put a bit more pressure on the keg, with that line length, but I wouldn't go too far. IME, 10' of beer line is good for up to about 13psi of CO2. After that, you start to get too much foam in the glass. Lower pressure (8-10psi) just makes for a slightly longer pour time. On the home brewing scale, that's not an issue. I don't have any problem if it takes a few more seconds for the pint glass to fill up with beer. IMO, better than getting half a glass of foam.
 

bknifefight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
124
Location
PA
I have a balanced system and there is no guess work involved. I have 13 PSI on kegs with 6 feet of line and they pour perfectly. You guys can keep extending your lines, but I promise that it is easier to punch some numbers into a calculator and have it tell you what you need to know.
 

Golddiggie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2010
Messages
13,318
Reaction score
1,463
Location
Living free in the 603
I have a balanced system and there is no guess work involved. I have 13 PSI on kegs with 6 feet of line and they pour perfectly. You guys can keep extending your lines, but I promise that it is easier to punch some numbers into a calculator and have it tell you what you need to know.
I call BS on that... Using one of you're google result sites would have me use just over 6 feet of hose at 14psi. I can tell you, from experience, that even using 10' at that pressure produces tons of foam. Also, I move the lines between kegs at two different heights (two shelves in brew fridge, all taps are at the same height) so having a shorter length means I'm locked into putting that/those faucets on only one shelf.

From my own experience, having 10' of line for 8-12psi produces a VERY good pour without excess foam. I don't care if it takes a few seconds longer to fill a pint, or 22-23oz glass. I'm not serving tons of people pints all day long where a few more seconds actually could matter.
 

bknifefight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
124
Location
PA
Lol, I don't know why you question that a calculator worked well for me. I promise you I am not making this up. I have a 4 tap kegerator, 6' lines and my regulator is set to 13 PSI. I pour a pint in about 7 seconds and it has a perfect head on it.
 

Golddiggie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2010
Messages
13,318
Reaction score
1,463
Location
Living free in the 603
It's FoF for my setup. So, you either need to be SURE the tool will produce results that will work for your setup. OR use the 'rule of thumb' that will result in solid pours for more. IME, longer lines don't reduce the wanted foam level in the glass. I also don't care if it takes me 2-3 seconds more to pour a pint. I've actually never timed the pour, since it's always been a good enough rate to not be an issue.

MAYBE if my taps were far above the kegs, it could be different (keezer). But with them going through the fridge door, the line length I'm using results in GREAT pours for the pressure range.
 

bknifefight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
124
Location
PA
Every calculator I have seen incorporates the distance between the center of the keg and the taps.
 

Golddiggie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2010
Messages
13,318
Reaction score
1,463
Location
Living free in the 603
Every calculator I have seen incorporates the distance between the center of the keg and the taps.
And if that is <1-2 feet? I seriously doubt the top shelf is even a foot distance there. Lower shelf MIGHT be 2' distance. Still, the results from the tool would have me pouring glasses full of foam at the pressures I have the kegs at. IF I cut the tubing to those lengths.

Also, I don't see anything 'wrong' with running longer lines. Especially with how many people have posted about pints of foam from the 5' hoses included with kits. Only to get proper pours when moving to 10' hose lengths. Kind of tells you something right there.

IF the calc works for YOU, great. Just don't assume it's a perfect solution for all kegging setups.
 

bknifefight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
124
Location
PA
Regardless of the distance, it is still an important part of the calculation, whether it be 1 foot or 100 feet.

I am sure your beer pours great, you've said so yourself. But it seems to me that you're just finding out that the calculations include the height difference. I am inclined to believe that these calculators, if used properly, will give you good results. It's math. I can understand your distrust in the government from the other threads, but you can't distrust math, can you?
 

Golddiggie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2010
Messages
13,318
Reaction score
1,463
Location
Living free in the 603
Regardless of the distance, it is still an important part of the calculation, whether it be 1 foot or 100 feet.

I am sure your beer pours great, you've said so yourself. But it seems to me that you're just finding out that the calculations include the height difference. I am inclined to believe that these calculators, if used properly, will give you good results. It's math. I can understand your distrust in the government from the other threads, but you can't distrust math, can you?
Math and reality don't always mesh in all situations. While it can be valid results in some cases, there will be others (perhaps just as many) where it's bunk.

Brewing systems, configurations, methods and even kegging systems and configurations are almost as varied as we are. I know, for my system, if I increase the serving (and as a result carbonation) pressure level even to 14psi, I get massive amounts of foam. Put it back to 12psi (or less) and I get solid pours every time. I'm not about to cut my perfectly working hose length to 5-6' on a whim, due to some calculator. Especially with what I'll need to do to correct it (replacing the line) later.

IF you get good pours with your hose length at pressure, then leave it alone. If you're getting excessive foam in the glass, either drop the pressure or increase the hose length (or both).

Also, use the chart to figure out the PSI at temperature the kegged beer is at. IME, that's just as important.
 

bknifefight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
124
Location
PA
Math...it's bunk.
Lol

IF you get good pours with your hose length at pressure...
I like how you type IF in caps, like you think I'm lying about my beer lines, pressure or foam.

You are right, each kegging system is different. These differences are the variables for the equation. I am not telling you to go cut your lines back, obviously you tried shorter lines and it didn't work for you. Something was wrong so you went with longer lines to solve the issue. But, I think it's worthwhile to try and solve the real issue, rather than spending money on longer lines to band-aid the problem. Sure, it will work, but you will end up a few dollars poorer and have a tangled mess of unnecessary line to deal with. Don't you think that you should first try to remedy the situation with the lines you have?
 

Golddiggie

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 14, 2010
Messages
13,318
Reaction score
1,463
Location
Living free in the 603
Changing my system now will be wasting lines. I bought enough to do the system, and have more left over (for other things). I find it interesting that you think my system has issues when it, in fact, pours properly as it stands. IF I was posting about having bad pours at proper CO2 levels, that would be one thing. But, I'm not. I'm just saying that a line longer than 5' will, very often, fix the issues of excess foam in glass. I also don't have any issue with taking a few seconds longer to pour a pint. It's not a race after all.

BTW, I use the pressure needed, at temperature, to get the CO2 levels I desire. I'm running the brew fridge at 40F (beer temp) so the pressure sets are typically 10psi for browns, 8psi for porters and 12psi for pale ales and IPAs. Gives me what I want in the glass.

BTW, you seriously cropped the first quote line... Far too much actually. Would have been smarter to use the full line...
 

JuanMoore

Getting the banned back together
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
29,305
Reaction score
7,111
Location
The Old Pueblo
I've been having some big foam problems with my new kegerator setup. I saw a video where a guy hooked his gas line up to his beer out line on his corny keg and it fixed the over foaming issue. My question is if I can do this on a keg with a sankey coupler? Getting desperate to fix my problem. I'm probably going to order a 10' line as I have 5' now, but thought id give this a try! Thanks
More likely a line balancing issue as others have mentioned. If it is an overcarbonation issue, and you want to use the quick de-gassing method you saw for corny kegs, it is possible. You will need to pull apart your sankey coupler and remove the check valve on the liquid side. Then reassemble, cap the gas in port, put the gas line on the beer out port, and turn the gas on at low pressure. Pull the pressure relief valve and the gas bubbling up through the beer will knock bunch of CO2 out of solution and out of the keg through the relief valve. Disconnect and reassemble the coupler in it's stock configuration, and you should be all set.

I have a balanced system and there is no guess work involved. I have 13 PSI on kegs with 6 feet of line and they pour perfectly. You guys can keep extending your lines, but I promise that it is easier to punch some numbers into a calculator and have it tell you what you need to know.
Those calculators make a lot of assumptions that don't apply to all kegging systems, especially kegging systems set up by the average homebrewer.

Lol, I don't know why you question that a calculator worked well for me. I promise you I am not making this up. I have a 4 tap kegerator, 6' lines and my regulator is set to 13 PSI. I pour a pint in about 7 seconds and it has a perfect head on it.
We believe you, but that doesn't mean that the calculator will come up with reasonable numbers for someone elses system.

You are right, each kegging system is different. These differences are the variables for the equation. I am not telling you to go cut your lines back, obviously you tried shorter lines and it didn't work for you. Something was wrong so you went with longer lines to solve the issue. But, I think it's worthwhile to try and solve the real issue, rather than spending money on longer lines to band-aid the problem. Sure, it will work, but you will end up a few dollars poorer and have a tangled mess of unnecessary line to deal with. Don't you think that you should first try to remedy the situation with the lines you have?
Longer lines can be used as a solution to some existing problem, but in many cases the length the calculator gives will be way too short, even if there are no problems or issues with the system. Those calculators all assume an "ideal" flow rate of ~1gal/minute, which is fine for commercial systems with cold beer and moderate carbonation levels. Many homebrewers like to serve their beer warmer, in which case a slower flow may be needed to keep the CO2 in solution. The calculators also assume fixed resistance figures for line resistance, when line resistance is actually variable depending on several factors, including flow rate and the SG of the beer. The last major assumption those calculators make is that the carbonation level will fall within a certain range. Many homebrewers like to carb belgian's, hefe's, wheat's, etc to levels above that range, in which case the flow needs to be slowed down below 1 gal/min once again, which once again requires longer lines and makes the calculator useless.

Those calculators were designed for commercial systems, where beers are required to be stored between 34° and 38°F, carbed between 2.2 and 2.7 vol, and poured at 1 gal/min. If you keep your beer/system within (or relatively close to) those parameters, then the calculators will probably work fine for you. If not, then the calculators are likely useless.

The other issue I have with the calculators is that they all imply that the "ideal line length" is the shortest one that doesn't create major foaming issues. For a commercial setting (what the calculators were designed for) this is true, since being able to pour a lot of beers quickly has an impact on profit and customer satisfaction. The only downside to a longer line is a slightly slower pour. For me, the "ideal length" is the one that allows me to pour a wide variety of beers at a wide variety of carb levels and temperatures without having to worry about foaming issues. I'm not usually trying to serve a crowd of thirsty people where the time it takes to pour a beer is important. I figure that if I have time to drink a beer, then I also have a few extra seconds to wait for that beer to pour. IMO that's a small price to pay for the ability to serve a wide range of carb levels and temps through my keezer.

As always, YMMV.
 
OP
C

cgseanp

Member
Joined
Nov 3, 2012
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
Happy to report 10' of line at 12 psi is giving me perfect pours!
 

bknifefight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
124
Location
PA
Longer lines can be used as a solution to some existing problem, but in many cases the length the calculator gives will be way too short, even if there are no problems or issues with the system.
Yes, longer lines will fix the problem but if you have 5 feet of line, should you automatically go buy a 10 foot span to fix it or does it make sense to try and balance it with what you have? The OP mentioned having 5 foot lines. That is the only reason I brought up trying to use a calculator. Sure, 10 foot lines will reduce foaming, but why spend the money if you dont have to?

Those calculators all assume an "ideal" flow rate of ~1gal/minute, which is fine for commercial systems with cold beer and moderate carbonation levels. Many homebrewers like to serve their beer warmer, in which case a slower flow may be needed to keep the CO2 in solution. The calculators also assume fixed resistance figures for line resistance, when line resistance is actually variable depending on several factors, including flow rate and the SG of the beer. The last major assumption those calculators make is that the carbonation level will fall within a certain range. Many homebrewers like to carb belgian's, hefe's, wheat's, etc to levels above that range, in which case the flow needs to be slowed down below 1 gal/min once again, which once again requires longer lines and makes the calculator useless.

Those calculators were designed for commercial systems, where beers are required to be stored between 34° and 38°F, carbed between 2.2 and 2.7 vol, and poured at 1 gal/min. If you keep your beer/system within (or relatively close to) those parameters, then the calculators will probably work fine for you. If not, then the calculators are likely useless.
All of the things you say the calculator is assuming, resistance, carbonation level, temperature, are variables in the calculation, and are to be inputted into the calculator. Maybe I found one that was a lot more comprehensive than anything anyone else has used, but I went from 0% experience kegging or dealing with anything keg related, to having a 100% functional and nice pouring kegerator with one of these calculators.

The other issue I have with the calculators is that they all imply that the "ideal line length" is the shortest one that doesn't create major foaming issues. For a commercial setting (what the calculators were designed for) this is true, since being able to pour a lot of beers quickly has an impact on profit and customer satisfaction. The only downside to a longer line is a slightly slower pour. For me, the "ideal length" is the one that allows me to pour a wide variety of beers at a wide variety of carb levels and temperatures without having to worry about foaming issues. I'm not usually trying to serve a crowd of thirsty people where the time it takes to pour a beer is important. I figure that if I have time to drink a beer, then I also have a few extra seconds to wait for that beer to pour. IMO that's a small price to pay for the ability to serve a wide range of carb levels and temps through my keezer.
For me, the ideal length of line is the one that I have. OP, as I said before, has 5 foot lines. I already talked about this at the beginning of the post.

TL;DR?
I think you should try to fix the problem with the equipment you have (5 ft lines) before spending more money on 10 foot lines. Is that too hard for people to understand or get behind?
 

JuanMoore

Getting the banned back together
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
29,305
Reaction score
7,111
Location
The Old Pueblo
All of the things you say the calculator is assuming, resistance, carbonation level, temperature, are variables in the calculation, and are to be inputted into the calculator. Maybe I found one that was a lot more comprehensive than anything anyone else has used, but I went from 0% experience kegging or dealing with anything keg related, to having a 100% functional and nice pouring kegerator with one of these calculators.
You either didn't read my post, or didn't understand it, so I'll try to explain it in simpler terms. The only thing the line balancing calculators will do is tell you the line length required to achieve a flow rate of ~1gal/min. They do this very well, but that flow rate doesn't work at all temperatures or for all carbonation levels. Trying to pour a highly carbed beer or a beer stored at warmer temps that fast will result in a mess of foam.

It's great that a 1 gal/min flow rate works well for your beer serving system, but insisting that it should work for every beer serving system is simply ignorant.

TL;DR?
I think you should try to fix the problem with the equipment you have (5 ft lines) before spending more money on 10 foot lines. Is that too hard for people to understand or get behind?
No, not TL;DR. Unlike you I actually read and understood your entire post. The problem very well could be the line length, since the carb level/temperature combination may require a slower flow rate than what the line balancing calculators would result in. Is that too hard for you to understand?
 

opteek

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 18, 2009
Messages
110
Reaction score
3
Location
chicago
I'm surprised nobody has mentioned this thread. I have been using these bad boys ever since I started kegging and have never had foaming issues, none at all, and I've kegged belgian strong ales with PSI as high as 24 without any kind of problems using the length of hose that came with my original kegging kit (maybe 5'). IMO, these little plastic mixers should be standard kegging equipment right next to o-rings.
 

bknifefight

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 18, 2009
Messages
1,950
Reaction score
124
Location
PA
Okay, this is getting ridiculous and I am only responding because you are not being very civil or pleasant.

YOU SAID:
Those calculators make a lot of assumptions that don't apply to all kegging systems, especially kegging systems set up by the average homebrewer.
Those calculators all assume an "ideal" flow rate of ~1gal/minute, which is fine for commercial systems with cold beer and moderate carbonation levels.
Okay, you say they make assumptions. Gotcha.

The calculators also assume fixed resistance figures for line resistance
Okay, you say they make assumptions about Resistance.

The last major assumption those calculators make is that the carbonation level will fall within a certain range
Okay, you say they make assumptions about Carbonation level.

Those calculators were designed for commercial systems, where beers are required to be stored between 34° and 38°F, carbed between 2.2 and 2.7 vol, and poured at 1 gal/min.
Okay, you say they make assumptions about Temperature.


AND THEN I SAID

All of the things you say the calculator is assuming:
resistance,
carbonation level,
temperature,
are variables in the calculation, and are to be inputted into the calculator.
Which is true! All of these assumptions you are talking about ARE THINGS THAT CAN BE PUT INTO THE CALCULATOR THAT I USED TO GET THE LINE LENGTH! And then you quote that and say this:

You either didn't read my post, or didn't understand it, so I'll try to explain it in simpler terms
No, not TL;DR. Unlike you I actually read and understood your entire post.
...
Is that too hard for you to understand?
I don;t think you read or understood my entire post, or didn't understand YOUR entire post. And on top of that, you have to be rude? Good job, dude.

Trying to pour a highly carbed beer or a beer stored at warmer temps that fast will result in a mess of foam.
In the scenario of a highly carbed beer, or a beer at warmer temps, THE CALCULATOR WILL GIVE YOU DIFFERENT RESULTS FOR THE LENGTH OF LINE. These things, AS I HAVE SAID are VARIABLES which get put into the calculator.
 

JuanMoore

Getting the banned back together
Joined
Oct 19, 2009
Messages
29,305
Reaction score
7,111
Location
The Old Pueblo
All of these assumptions you are talking about ARE THINGS THAT CAN BE PUT INTO THE CALCULATOR THAT I USED TO GET THE LINE LENGTH!
Yes, you can input whatever pressure, temperature and line resistance you want into the calculator, but what comes out will always be the line length required to create a flow rate of ~1 gal/min, which doesn't work for all situations. The other assumptions I mentioned are all indirectly related to this main assumption that a flow rate of 1 gal/min works well for all situations, which simply isn't true.

In the scenario of a highly carbed beer, or a beer at warmer temps, THE CALCULATOR WILL GIVE YOU DIFFERENT RESULTS FOR THE LENGTH OF LINE. These things, AS I HAVE SAID are VARIABLES which get put into the calculator.
Yep, it will give you a different line length that still results in ~1 gal/min flow, which depending on the temp/carb level combination may or may not produce a good pour.

Okay, this is getting ridiculous and I am only responding because you are not being very civil or pleasant.

And on top of that, you have to be rude? Good job, dude.
I agree, this is getting ridiculous. And my tone is admittedly rude, as was your response to my initial post. In fact, I used some of the exact phrases you had used specifically to make you aware of how rude you were being.
 
Top