| |
Main
Date: 08 Nov 2006 21:44:55
From: hankus
Subject: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
I have designed (see earlier posts) a new type of IC-a double barreled IC
wherein instead of having a continuous 34 foot 3/8" coil I have two 17 foot
coils which are connected to a T.This allows the wort to be cooled by a
second cool stream at the 18 foot point rather than just an additional 17
feet of now tepid water.
My results today (first use) were very satisfying with a cooling of 11
gallons dropping from 180 to 90 in 13 minutes which is much better than the
old rate of 18 minutes-water temp is 73 this AM and run at 1 GPM. A small
paddle is turned with an ice cream churn motor (RPM = 10?) with blade
below the coil level.This is the same setup that I had when I used this coil
as a continuous run.
I note that the same flattening at 100 degrees of the cooling rate curve
appears again as one comes into the zone in which coolant and wort are
within 25 degrees and cooling rate diminishes.I plan to deal with that by
using a little pond pump which will pump tap water from a bucket until wort
approaches 100 and then will be removed from bucket,placed in a cooler with
an ice bath.This is the approach I use when the water is in the 80s and
works very well in contradistinction to pre chillers which do NOT work (let
the doubters measure the input/output temps of a prechiller AFTER the first
couple of minutes).
I recognize that my setup with paddle may be unusual but since it is the
setup I had used in the past with a continuous run IC (got to find a use for
the ice churn I found a few years ago don't I?) it was the best way to
compare only one variable,that is, a parallel rather than serial water flow.
Feedback and experiences welcomed
--
Thanks
Hank
|
|
| |
Date: 09 Nov 2006 18:13:05
From: Scott Alfter
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
In article <Xux4h.11791$Wb2.3353@newsfe22.lga >,
hankus <hbienert@cox.net > wrote:
>I have designed (see earlier posts) a new type of IC-a double barreled IC
>wherein instead of having a continuous 34 foot 3/8" coil I have two 17 foot
>coils which are connected to a T.This allows the wort to be cooled by a
>second cool stream at the 18 foot point rather than just an additional 17
>feet of now tepid water.
> My results today (first use) were very satisfying with a cooling of 11
>gallons dropping from 180 to 90 in 13 minutes which is much better than the
>old rate of 18 minutes-water temp is 73 this AM and run at 1 GPM. A small
>paddle is turned with an ice cream churn motor (RPM = 10?) with blade
>below the coil level.This is the same setup that I had when I used this coil
>as a continuous run.
I've considered doing something similar with three or four parallel, smaller
tubes instead of one larger tube, but never got around to it. (The trick
would be to figure out a way to connect the tubes together without leaking.
Ideally, I'd use something similar to a collector, which ties the header
pipes together in high-performance automotive exhaust systems. Now that
I've thought about it a bit again, maybe a small cube of brass with three or
four small holes drilled halfway in on one side and a larger hole drilled
halfway in on the other side such that they all intersect would work. The
tubes would then need to be soldered or brazed in.)
The increased surface area of multiple tubes in parallel ought to result in
faster heat transfer, and now, you've confirmed it.
> I note that the same flattening at 100 degrees of the cooling rate curve
>appears again as one comes into the zone in which coolant and wort are
>within 25 degrees and cooling rate diminishes.I plan to deal with that by
>using a little pond pump which will pump tap water from a bucket until wort
>approaches 100 and then will be removed from bucket,placed in a cooler with
>an ice bath.
That's what I do with my chiller, except that I replace the cooler and the
bucket with the kitchen sink.
_/_
/ v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
(IIGS( http://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
\_^_/ rm -rf /bin/laden >What's the most annoying thing on Usenet?
|
| | |
Date: 10 Nov 2006 11:52:42
From: William Benz Jr
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
"Scott Alfter" <scott@alfter.DIESPAMMERSDIE.us > wrote in message
news:45536fb1$0$14811$9a6e19ea@news.newshosting.com...
> I've considered doing something similar with three or four parallel,
smaller
> tubes instead of one larger tube, but never got around to it. (The trick
> would be to figure out a way to connect the tubes together without
leaking.
> Ideally, I'd use something similar to a collector, which ties the header
> pipes together in high-performance automotive exhaust systems. Now that
> I've thought about it a bit again, maybe a small cube of brass with three
or
> four small holes drilled halfway in on one side and a larger hole drilled
> halfway in on the other side such that they all intersect would work. The
> tubes would then need to be soldered or brazed in.)
>
> The increased surface area of multiple tubes in parallel ought to result
in
> faster heat transfer, and now, you've confirmed it.
> / v \ Scott Alfter (remove the obvious to send mail)
> (IIGS( http://alfter.us/ Top-posting!
> \_^_/ rm -rf /bin/laden >What's the most annoying thing on
Usenet?
>
Why not build a collector just like you described? Find some copper tubing
that the smaller tubes fit into fairly closely. You should be able to form
the larger tube around the smaller ones and then solder in place. It would
give a much straighter flow than a brass block or T fittings.
Bill
|
| | | |
Date: 10 Nov 2006 20:55:14
From: hankus
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
-I believe that the more turns and twists and the fewer straight runs cause
more turbulence and more cooling
-I also disagree with the statement that double coils have more surface
area;I am using the same total tubing length.The BOG popint is that -I am
introducing MULTIPLE cold water inputs rather than one,i.e. what would've
been the second part of the tube no longer contains tepid water but rather
cold water and therefore a greater cooling potential
--
Thanks
Hank
"
|
| | | | |
Date: 10 Nov 2006 19:08:57
From: Bob F
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
"hankus" <hbienert@cox.net > wrote in message
news:mYa5h.12942$tH2.9398@newsfe20.lga...
> -I believe that the more turns and twists and the fewer straight runs
cause
> more turbulence and more cooling
> -I also disagree with the statement that double coils have more surface
> area;I am using the same total tubing length.The BOG popint is that -I am
> introducing MULTIPLE cold water inputs rather than one,i.e. what would've
> been the second part of the tube no longer contains tepid water but rather
> cold water and therefore a greater cooling potential
> --
The advantage of splitting into multiple coils is that
you can easily push more water through it, so you
have more cold copper in the wort.
Bob
|
| | | | | |
Date: 11 Nov 2006 09:14:50
From: Mark R
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
"Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com > wrote in message
>
> The advantage of splitting into multiple coils is that
> you can easily push more water through it, so you
> have more cold copper in the wort.
Which becomes even more of an advantage when your tap water can top 85
degrees during the summer.
Mark R
|
| | | | |
Date: 10 Nov 2006 20:58:34
From: hankus
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
...and the description given by Mark is essentially what I did-a Tee with
hose at input and via hoses reduced to two 3/8 tubing coils.
--
|
| | | | | |
Date: 11 Nov 2006 09:19:00
From: Mark R
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
"hankus" <hbienert@cox.net > wrote in message
news:u%a5h.12943$tH2.9499@newsfe20.lga...
> ...and the description given by Mark is essentially what I did-a Tee with
> hose at input and via hoses reduced to two 3/8 tubing coils.
I got a few reducers and elbows and soldered everything together. It's all
hard piped except for the garden hose attachment. Makes it really easy to
handle and I can use the chiller to do the stirring of the wort.
Mark R
|
| | |
Date: 09 Nov 2006 23:29:03
From: Bob F
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
"Scott Alfter" <scott@alfter.DIESPAMMERSDIE.us > wrote in message
news:45536fb1$0
> I've considered doing something similar with three or four parallel,
smaller
> tubes instead of one larger tube, but never got around to it. (The trick
> would be to figure out a way to connect the tubes together without
leaking.
Standard plumbing "T"'s would do fine, soldered together
with standard lead-free solder.
Bob
|
| | | |
Date: 10 Nov 2006 10:26:23
From: Mark R
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
"Bob F" <bobnospam@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:MqCdnarkH8gJt8nYnZ2dnUVZ_q6dnZ2d@comcast.com...
>
> "Scott Alfter" <scott@alfter.DIESPAMMERSDIE.us> wrote in message
> news:45536fb1$0
> > I've considered doing something similar with three or four parallel,
> smaller
> > tubes instead of one larger tube, but never got around to it. (The
trick
> > would be to figure out a way to connect the tubes together without
> leaking.
>
> Standard plumbing "T"'s would do fine, soldered together
> with standard lead-free solder.
That's what I did when I built mine. 1/2 inch tubing with the end if an old
water hose clamped over it. 1/2 inch tee with a reducer on each end down to
3/8. Two 3/8 coils, one inside the other. The coils were wrapped around
small and large coffee cans, one around 12 ft the other around 20.
Mark R
|
| |
Date: 21 Nov 2006 10:29:22
From: Bill Velek
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
hankus wrote:
> I have designed (see earlier posts) a new type of IC-a double barreled IC
... snip ...
> A small paddle is turned with an ice cream churn motor
... snip ...
> ... using a little pond pump which will pump tap water from a bucket ...
... snip ...
> Feedback and experiences welcomed
Well, you asked for feedback and experiences, so here goes. I think
your system sounds ingenious, and no doubt is probably the best
immersion chiller in the world, but it is complicated and sounds like a
lot of trouble. If nothing else you have more gear to clean, store, and
retrieve. And it sounds more difficult and expensive to build than a
nice counterflow chiller (hose in hose -- not a plate chiller), so why
not go that way? Now, I have never used a CFC, so maybe they have their
problems, and if so I'd like to hear about them.
As for what I do, it's simple. I purchased coiled copper tubing (can't
remember the length, but it seems like maybe it was just 15 feet or 20
feet; I bought the spring-like tool for bending it (I might not have
really _needed_ that, but at least I never kinked the coil). I easily
spread and tightened the coils into a spring configuration with the ends
of the tubing protruding over the edge of my pot. I bought a piece of
plastic tubing that I cut to the correct lengths with scissors. Done.
I almost always bottle and brew on the same day, so I already have my
dirty bottling bucket and the crate that elevates it in place next to
the sink. When my boil is finished, I move the pot next to the bottling
bucket which I have already filled with ice cubes and water, connect the
tubing between the bucket spigot and the copper coils and another one
running down into the sink to drain, and then I open the valve. I use a
pot to dump additional cold water into the bucket, as needed. With this
system, I didn't need to find a way to connect any hoses to my kitchen
faucet, plus I get to use the ice to make the coils extra cold. Toward
the end of the cooling, I use a sanitized paddle or spoon to gently stir
the wort to improve heat exchange. This system has worked great for me,
although I have been wanting to build a CFC so that I can try a hopback.
I don't mean to imply that you are wrong for using a more complicated
system; what ever floats your boat. I just think it will be useful for
newbies to see how cheap and simple good cooling can be. When I first
started brewing years ago, I used to boil water and put it in sanitized
plastic containers to make sanitized blocks of ice that I would then
drop into my hot wort. That was a LOT more work, probably not as
sanitary as what I do now, and it diluted my beer somewhat. It takes
practically nothing to move to a simple chiller like I use, and I wish I
had used this system since the very beginning.
Cheers.
Bill Velek -- my web-sites: www.velek.com & www.2plus2is4.com !!
You're invited to join "HomeBrewers" grid-computing team to help
cure diseases; visit http://home.alltel.net/billvelek/team.html
|
| | |
Date: 21 Nov 2006 10:54:14
From: The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
Bill Velek wrote:
> hankus wrote:
>> I have designed (see earlier posts) a new type of IC-a double barreled IC
> ... snip ...
>> A small paddle is turned with an ice cream churn motor
> ... snip ...
>> ... using a little pond pump which will pump tap water from a bucket ...
> ... snip ...
>> Feedback and experiences welcomed
>
> Well, you asked for feedback and experiences, so here goes. I think
> your system sounds ingenious, and no doubt is probably the best
> immersion chiller in the world, but it is complicated and sounds like a
> lot of trouble. If nothing else you have more gear to clean, store, and
> retrieve. And it sounds more difficult and expensive to build than a
> nice counterflow chiller (hose in hose -- not a plate chiller), so why
> not go that way? Now, I have never used a CFC, so maybe they have their
> problems, and if so I'd like to hear about them.
>
> As for what I do, it's simple. I purchased coiled copper tubing (can't
> remember the length, but it seems like maybe it was just 15 feet or 20
> feet; I bought the spring-like tool for bending it (I might not have
> really _needed_ that, but at least I never kinked the coil). I easily
> spread and tightened the coils into a spring configuration with the ends
> of the tubing protruding over the edge of my pot. I bought a piece of
> plastic tubing that I cut to the correct lengths with scissors. Done.
>
> I almost always bottle and brew on the same day, so I already have my
> dirty bottling bucket and the crate that elevates it in place next to
> the sink. When my boil is finished, I move the pot next to the bottling
> bucket which I have already filled with ice cubes and water, connect the
> tubing between the bucket spigot and the copper coils and another one
> running down into the sink to drain, and then I open the valve. I use a
> pot to dump additional cold water into the bucket, as needed. With this
> system, I didn't need to find a way to connect any hoses to my kitchen
> faucet, plus I get to use the ice to make the coils extra cold. Toward
> the end of the cooling, I use a sanitized paddle or spoon to gently stir
> the wort to improve heat exchange. This system has worked great for me,
> although I have been wanting to build a CFC so that I can try a hopback.
>
> I don't mean to imply that you are wrong for using a more complicated
> system; what ever floats your boat. I just think it will be useful for
> newbies to see how cheap and simple good cooling can be. When I first
> started brewing years ago, I used to boil water and put it in sanitized
> plastic containers to make sanitized blocks of ice that I would then
> drop into my hot wort. That was a LOT more work, probably not as
> sanitary as what I do now, and it diluted my beer somewhat. It takes
> practically nothing to move to a simple chiller like I use, and I wish I
> had used this system since the very beginning.
>
You can actually simplify this by using a submersible pond pump to pump
the ice water through the coils. No need to elevate anything, and no
need to dump additional water in the bucket -- once the temp's below 120
or so, you can simply recirculate the water. The submersible pumps are
cheap -- you can get them at walmart, home depot or wherever.
You can also improve on the chillers performance by doubling the coil
length -- 15-25 feet is pretty short.
Note that faucet-garden hose adapters are cheap and available from any
HB store. I mention this because it's generally more efficient to start
cooling without the ice.
Cheers - m
--
(Replies: cleanse my address of the Mark of the Beast!)
Teleoperate a roving mobile robot from the web:
http://www.swampgas.com/robotics/rover.html
Coauthor with Dennis Clark of "Building Robot Drive Trains".
Buy several copies today!
|
| | | |
Date: 21 Nov 2006 17:47:42
From: Bill Velek
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty wrote:
snip my 'ice water in bottling bucket draing through immersion chiller'
description
>
> You can actually simplify this by using a submersible pond pump to pump
> the ice water through the coils. No need to elevate anything, and no
> need to dump additional water in the bucket -- once the temp's below 120
> or so, you can simply recirculate the water. The submersible pumps are
> cheap -- you can get them at walmart, home depot or wherever.
>
> You can also improve on the chillers performance by doubling the coil
> length -- 15-25 feet is pretty short.
>
> Note that faucet-garden hose adapters are cheap and available from any
> HB store. I mention this because it's generally more efficient to start
> cooling without the ice.
I'm sure you are correct, but as I mentioned, I want to build a counter
flow chiller. I've been meaning to do it, but never seem to think about
it in advance of a brew session, when I am too busy and just resort to
using my old method. Aren't counter flow chillers more efficient than
immersion chillers?
--
Bill Velek -- my web-sites: www.velek.com & www.2plus2is4.com !!
You're invited to join "HomeBrewers" grid-computing team to help
cure diseases; visit http://home.alltel.net/billvelek/team.html
|
| | | | |
Date: 21 Nov 2006 19:37:40
From: The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty
Subject: Re: A new kind of immersion chiller-REPORT
|
Bill Velek wrote:
> The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty wrote:
>
> I'm sure you are correct, but as I mentioned, I want to build a counter
> flow chiller. I've been meaning to do it, but never seem to think about
> it in advance of a brew session, when I am too busy and just resort to
> using my old method. Aren't counter flow chillers more efficient than
> immersion chillers?
>
A good one can cool faster -- I pump ice water through my Therminator,
which basically lets me 6 gallons down to around 45F (for lagers) in 15
minutes, which is about as fast as I can run off. You are still limited
by the temp of your cooling water (which is why I use ice water -- the
ground water here can be quite warm).
Using an IC -- even a big one -- it takes a good bit longer to get to
those temps. I suspect, however, that a good arrangement for keeping the
wort moving can enhance the cooling power of an IC substantially. If
your recirculating ice water and factor in water usage, an IC is
actually quite efficient.
Note also that not all CF chillers are created equal -- some designs do
a far better job than others. The plate chillers work well, but can be
problematic if you use hop pellets (which I don't). Some of the best
non-plate types are made with convoluted copper tubing -- but that kind
of tubing is quite expensive.
Also, CFs do have their share of problems. They require more effort to
clean and sanitize compared to ICs, and (depending on how fast you can
get your wort through the CF) some worts can end up with elevated levels
of DMS after cooling.
Really, I like the Therminator because it's fast and extremely compact,
but I don't use it for all beers.
In the end (especially for HB-sized batches) I don't think either method
has huge advantages over the other -- although if you're dying to use
a hopback, a CF probably makes more sense than an IC.
--
(Replies: cleanse my address of the Mark of the Beast!)
Teleoperate a roving mobile robot from the web:
http://www.swampgas.com/robotics/rover.html
Coauthor with Dennis Clark of "Building Robot Drive Trains".
Buy several copies today!
|
|
