Ss Brewtech Brite Tank Review and Photos

[Vale71]

You'd need a spunding valve to constantly release gas thus mantaining a pressure differential between receiving and source vessel. Completely depressurizing the brite tank on the other hand would promote foaming and cause oxygen ingress. A CO2 blanket does not exist anywhere on Earth so I would not necessarily rely on something that does not exist to protect the beer from oxidation.

 

[rwinzing]

I own two of these and love them. I get they are not for everyone but they do serve a purpose. I have a Bock going into one this weekend where it will sit hooked to my glycol unit for 5-6 weeks to lager. It is a great tool. It is a ninch thing and a nice to have. They are well made. You can make damn good beer without them for sure.

I think we all are different when it comes to this stuff. I personally am not looking for ways to shorten my brew days or keep things simple. I like the steps in the process and really working to perfect the craft. I also love all the toys this hobby opens up for me. Some folks are looking for something completely different out of the hobby and don't want to or can't spend the money on toys. There are no wrong ways to go about it.

Cheers!

 

[augiedoggy]

H22lude that's not true at all. A bright tank is a storage vessel a keg is a serving vessel. They serve completely different functions in the brewing process. A brite tank is not a just a large keg.

A brite tank is also considered a serving vessel in most breweries... in fact serving "vat to tap" which many brewpubs and breweries do to avoid brand labeling approval on every beer they make requires they serve directly from brite tanks. At my brewpub we do both and besides the ability to add a carbonation stone to the brite tank one can substitute for the other in function just fine.. in fact if it wasnt for the cost involved in needing 12 brite tanks to avoid serving from kegs alltogether we would be using them to serve from like most breweries or brewpubs not distributing. The key here is a britetanks main advantage is that it is normally sized to a much larger bulk size than kegs... as pointed out on a homebrewing scale they really do lose most of thier distingiushing practial advantage if your kegs are the same size as the brite. kind of like the advantages of kegging vs bottling.

 

[augiedoggy]

A carbonation table tells you that the lower the temperature is the lower the equilibrium pressure for a given CO2 content will be. It tells you absolutely nothing about how fast the beer absorbs or releases gases to reach that equilibrium.

As with most reactions absorbtion and release of CO2 proceeds faster the higher the temperature as CO2 molecules (or any other gas, for that matter) diffuse faster at higher temperatures.

I dont know what hairs your trying to split here But for the sake of this conversation and the intended homebrewers (not scientists) having it, I understood Don in E texas's statement to be correct. Your first statement more or less states the same thing. The equalibrium pressure has a direct correlation to both the amount of co2 absorbed and the speed at which its done.. The beer does in fact reach the proper carbonation level much faster at lower temps and for that reason we do the same thing as far as using our brites in a 38 degree cooler and carbonate there vs room temp.

 

[Vale71]

The beer does in fact reach the proper carbonation level much faster at lower temps and for that reason we do the same thing as far as using our brites in a 38 degree cooler and carbonate there vs room temp.

No it doesn't but I'm done with this pointless debate. I've given you pointers to the relevant information, if you don't want to be educated but prefer to cling to your erroneous beliefs which are basically based on the fact that you're all saying the same (incorrect) thing then I say go for it, I couldn't care less.
By the way what you're saying implies that beer will lose its carbonation faster at colder temperatures than at warmer temps. Anybody, even a complete layperson, who's let beer sit in a glass for a while knows the opposite is true but if you're so sure about that then I'm happy for you.

 

[augiedoggy]

An interesting discovery I made in regards to the co2 "blanket" theory... I had a brite tank at the pub (3bbl) that had been drained of beer and the pressure relieved via the valve on the top being completely opened and left open for 5 days in the cooler.. because I did not have time it sat this way until I went to clean it .. after doing a water rinse to remove solids (dryhopped beer) that could effect the sprayball I removed the top to check the inside for such particles and to check the top shoulder area of the tank and when I stuck my head inside I did get a good Co2 burn in my nose telling me that even though the 3/8 valve was wide open to the atmosphere for days the tank retained a large amount of co2 inside... I am not sure why or how long it would have taken for this to dissipate. I am also under the understanding that the co2 blanket mixes and equalizes with any surrounding gas in short order even though c02 is heavier... I do however wonder about how long this actually takes to occur now without any type of breeze or disturbance of the atmosphere.

 

[augiedoggy]

No it doesn't but I'm done with this pointless debate. I've given you pointers to the relevant information, if you don't want to be educated but prefer to cling to your erroneous beliefs which are basically based on the fact that you're all saying the same (incorrect) thing then I say go for it, I couldn't care less.
By the way what you're saying implies that beer will lose its carbonation faster at colder temperatures than at warmer temps. Anybody, even a complete layperson, who's let beer sit in a glass for a while knows the opposite is true but if you're so sure about that then I'm happy for you.

let me clarify here... the vessels I use only allow up to 15psi pressure when I carbonate beer in them it occurs faster at colder temps than at room temp..
here is a better explanation I found elsewhere here.



[IMG alt="MrFoodScientist"]https://cdn.homebrewtalk.com/data/avatars/m/74/74321.jpg?1352490209[/IMG]


MrFoodScientist
Well-Known Member




To further illustrate what Bobby's saying.

Keg System A- 12psi at 37°F (equilibrium at 2.62 volumes)

Compared to:

Keg System B- 24psi at 58°F (equilibrium at 2.62 volumes)

System B would theoretically have a greater rate of carbonation due to warmer temperatures (meaning more molecular movement and interaction).

If you were to carbonate at the same pressure at two different temperatures, the lower temperature would reach the equilibrium point of the higher temperature sooner (even though the lower temperature would continue to carbonate). This is why it is perceived that cold temperatures carbonate faster. If I remember right, Bobby has some nice graphs of carbonation rates in This Thread that might help explain it as well.

And to echo Yooper and Skiffy: yeah, bottle condition is a different beast and depends on yeast activity, which is always faster at warmer temperatures. Which is probably what you're thinking about when you say "Everybody says the opposite."

 

[Vale71]

Sorry if I snapped at you but I'm really tired of this debate and prefer not to participate any more. Have a cold one...

 

[augiedoggy]

Sorry if I snapped at you but I'm really tired of this debate and prefer not to participate any more. Have a cold one...

No worries.

 

[Vale71]

An interesting discovery I made in regards to the co2 "blanket" theory... I had a brite tank at the pub (3bbl) that had been drained of beer and the pressure relieved via the valve on the top being completely opened and left open for 5 days in the cooler.. because I did not have time it sat this way until I went to clean it .. after doing a water rinse to remove solids (dryhopped beer) that could effect the sprayball I removed the top to check the inside for such particles and to check the top shoulder area of the tank and when I stuck my head inside I did get a good Co2 burn in my nose telling me that even though the 3/8 valve was wide open to the atmosphere for days the tank retained a large amount of co2 inside... I am not sure why or how long it would have taken for this to dissipate. I am also under the understanding that the co2 blanket mixes and equalizes with any surrounding gas in short order even though c02 is heavier... I do however wonder about how long this actually takes to occur now without any type of breeze or disturbance of the atmosphere.

The mixing of gases via diffusion begins as soon as the vessel is opened to the outside. How fast it takes for the vessel to be filled with normal atmosphere depends on many factors such as geometry of the vessel, size of the opening and lastly on temperature as diffusion speed is directly proportional to temperature. With a large vessel and a small orifice I'd expect it to take possibly several weeks for that to happen but the point is that if you're going to store beer in the vessel then you'll want to avoid any oxygen ingress as even very low oxygen levels will cause significant cold-side oxidation. You only achieve that by never letting the receiving vessel completely depressurize.
In your example you were still able to perceive the presence of CO2 by breathing it in (which I don't recommend, BTW...) but since as little as 10% CO2 can give you a sharp burning sensation if you take a full, deep breath then that test is quite meaningless. Even if you still had 50% CO2 and 50% air that would be an unacceptable oxygen level for your beer. Same goes for the "lighter test". Lighter fluid requires a minimum of 16% oxygen to ignite so even if your lighter were to extinguish its flame when placed in a container you could have as much as 15% O2 in there and that would be totally unacceptable.
Lastly, a gas being "heavier" or "lighter" only affects the rate of diffusion as heavier atoms/molecules move slower at the same temperature. It has nothing to do with heavier gases sinking and lighter gases floating as to get any sort of lifting force you'd need actual displacement of the atmosphere and you only get that with a solid body. Gases are not solid and will not displace surrounding gases but will readily mix with them. You also will never get any type of stratification, you can only have a temporary gradient as diffusion works its magic until concentrations are uniformly equalized. This means that some O2 will get to the surface of your beer really quickly, it will just take some time for it to reach maximum concentration but exposure will begin to happen pretty quickly.

 

[Vale71]

I dont know what hairs your trying to split here

Ok I'l give you a couple examples to show you that this is anything but hair splitting as the differences in carbonation speed are really significant.
You mention your maturation vessels only allow you to apply 15 PSI of pressure. Let's say you target 2.5 vols of CO2 in your finished beer.
Now you could achieve this in two ways using the set and forget method:

1 - Chill to 32°F and apply 8.1 PSI
2- Chill to 54°F and apply maximum pressure of 15 PSI

In both cases you'll reach your desired carbonation level. In the first case you'll be limited by the cooling capabilites (I'm assuming 32°F will be the lowest temp you can reach in practice) in the second case you'll be limited by your vessel's maximum working pressure.

I can't calculate how long it will actually take to carbonate as I'd need to know all the variables of your setup but I can do a differential calculation. Let's say it takes exactly 10 days to reach carbonation at 45°F. At 32°F it'll take you 12.94 days or nearly 30% longer. Now that might not be a problem for your operation if you're demand-limited and working below maximum production capacity, but if the opposite were true then those 3 days you'd save would certainly work towards increasing your margin, wouldn't you agree?

Now let's assume your equipment allowed you apply up to 30 PSI of pressure, which is certainly the case with corny kegs. The comparison now is between:

1 - Chill to 32°F and apply 8.1 PSI
2 - Chill to 65°F (or don't chill if that's your ambient temp = energy saving!) and apply 29 PSI

Both settings will let you again reach 2.5 vols of CO2 using the set-and-forget methodology. In this case if it would take you 10 days at 65°F to reach carbonation dropping the temperature to 32°F would increase your process duration to a whopping 18.33 days or over 80% more. I'd say that would definitely have a positive effect on your costs and therefore your margin which as a commercial brewer I'm sure you'd be very happy about, am I right?

Now if somebody asked you if it would be faster to carb his freshly kegged ale at room temp or if he should chill it first and then carbonate using set-and-forget and assuming he is not equipment-limited in any form or fashion, based on the above what would you think you should tell them?

 

[CodeSection]

How are folks filling and purging these brites? I just ordered one.

My idea is that you'd fill it with a no-rinse sanitizer after cleaning, push out with CO2 and then push beer from the bottom up from your fermenter. The only issue I can think of is that the pressure inside of the brite is going to eventually equalize and you're going to need to put more head pressure on the fermenter than it's built for.

FWIW, I follow @_dirty_'s method as well. When the PRV is slightly opened, it allows CO2 to escape without depressurizing the entire tank. Perhaps a spunding valve may be more precise in allowing for the CO2 release, but I haven't found the need for one in this situation. As far as I can tell, I have not had any foaming issues either.

Now to be fair, I am transfering roughly 10-10.5 gallons from my fermenter into a SSB BME 20 gallon Brite Tank. So I have plenty of CO2 head space to work with. I bought the 20 gallon version because I wanted weld ports on the bright tank. Also, I carb in the bright tank, not in the fermenter.

Maybe my process will change slightly when I start spunding in the fermenter. I'm open to a best practice tip or suggestion if the slightly carbonated beer from the fermenter (due to spunding) would cause a change to my current closed system transfer process to the bright tank.