| |
Main
Date: 21 Sep 2006 10:05:04
From: Matt
Subject: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
something?
|
|
| |
Date: 21 Sep 2006 19:46:04
From: Lefty Skywalker
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
Matt wrote:
> Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
> using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
> find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
> valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
> something?
I'm not a beer expert, but I do know about valves.
Ball valves give a perfect flow path when fully open, and high pressure
tolerance, and potentially a low stroke (less than 90 degrees). Sealing
is good due to the sphere nesting against its seal under pressure. The
price for this is high friction and high weight, and high seal wear in
reusable applications. But that's in rocket engines where we run hot
and fast and thousands of psi.
So, in the beer application, it wouldn't turbulate the flow as it passes
through the valve. Dunno if that's important to anyone at that stage,
but rather doubt it. The flow is going to be pretty messy to begin with
after coming into the pipe from the cooler. Not much of the rest of it
matters. We run low pressures and low flow rates, and if it's going too
slow you can simply use a bigger size valve. There's a vague
possibility than turbulence in the valve could be transmitted back up
into the tun but it's going to be pretty insignificant.
--
Daniel O. Miller
"The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the
fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true
science. Whosoever does not know it and can no longer marvel, is as good
as dead, and his eyes are dimmed." - Albert Einstein
WWYD? (-o-) <* > Genesis 49:17
Real email address: darth dot lefty at golf mike able india lima.
|
| | |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 04:06:46
From: Artarius
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
Now who could argue about rocket science with a rocket engine
ngineer? -Just Kidding! :)
"Lefty Skywalker" <dmille15@hotmail.com > wrote in message
news:45134dc9$0$97224$892e7fe2@authen.yellow.readfreenews.net...
> Matt wrote:
>> Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
>> using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
>> find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
>> valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
>> something?
>
> I'm not a beer expert, but I do know about valves.
>
> Ball valves give a perfect flow path when fully open, and high pressure
> tolerance, and potentially a low stroke (less than 90 degrees). Sealing
> is good due to the sphere nesting against its seal under pressure. The
> price for this is high friction and high weight, and high seal wear in
> reusable applications. But that's in rocket engines where we run hot and
> fast and thousands of psi.
>
> So, in the beer application, it wouldn't turbulate the flow as it passes
> through the valve. Dunno if that's important to anyone at that stage, but
> rather doubt it. The flow is going to be pretty messy to begin with after
> coming into the pipe from the cooler. Not much of the rest of it matters.
> We run low pressures and low flow rates, and if it's going too slow you
> can simply use a bigger size valve. There's a vague possibility than
> turbulence in the valve could be transmitted back up into the tun but it's
> going to be pretty insignificant.
>
> --
> Daniel O. Miller
>
> "The most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious. It is the
> fundamental emotion which stands at the cradle of true art and true
> science. Whosoever does not know it and can no longer marvel, is as good
> as dead, and his eyes are dimmed." - Albert Einstein
>
> WWYD? (-o-) <*> Genesis 49:17
>
> Real email address: darth dot lefty at golf mike able india lima.
|
| | | |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 09:35:49
From: hankus
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
As regards a mash tun-I used to go through the ritual of removing the
plastic valve assembly,finding washers,etc and putting in a new ball valve
setup but have instead switched to simply drilling right through the
existing valve with a drill slightly smaller than the OD of Cu 3/8"ID tubing
and then pushing such a tube through this new channel.Very simple,leakproof
and,if you wish to attach a small valve to it with a compression fitting it
is easy.Remember the we seek a slow draining of the tun.
--
Thanks
Hank
"
|
| | | | |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 17:02:58
From: Scott Alfter
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
In article <gxSQg.1524$Go3.903@dukeread05 >, hankus <hbienert@cox.net> wrote:
>As regards a mash tun-I used to go through the ritual of removing the
>plastic valve assembly,finding washers,etc and putting in a new ball valve
>setup but have instead switched to simply drilling right through the
>existing valve with a drill slightly smaller than the OD of Cu 3/8"ID tubing
>and then pushing such a tube through this new channel.
Sounds like what I did, only I drilled out the valve body to the same size
as the tubing (not undersize) and used epoxy to keep it from leaking. So
far, it's worked well. Compression fittings attach it to a copper manifold
on the inside and a brass needle valve on the outside.
_/_
/ 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: 22 Sep 2006 09:36:59
From: hankus
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
As regards a mash tun-I used to go through the ritual of removing the
plastic valve assembly,finding washers,etc and putting in a new ball valve
setup but have instead switched to simply drilling right through the
existing valve with a drill slightly smaller than the OD of Cu 3/8"ID tubing
and then pushing such a tube through this new channel.Very simple,leakproof
and,if you wish to attach a small valve to it with a compression fitting it
is easy.Remember that we seek a slow draining of the tun.
--
Thanks
Hank
|
| |
Date: 21 Sep 2006 11:21:30
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
Matt wrote:
> Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
> using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
> find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
> valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
> something?
>
No advantage at all, at least for me. I replaced my nylon valve with a
brass ball valve for a while and fouynd I couldn't control the flow as
well. I went back to the nylon valve.
------------ >Denny
|
| | |
Date: 21 Sep 2006 14:30:17
From: The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
Denny Conn wrote:
> Matt wrote:
>> Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
>> using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
>> find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
>> valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
>> something?
>>
> No advantage at all, at least for me. I replaced my nylon valve with a
> brass ball valve for a while and fouynd I couldn't control the flow as
> well. I went back to the nylon valve.
But ball valves produce a higher-quality flow with fewer impurities.
--
(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 Sep 2006 12:31:26
From: Denny Conn
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty wrote:
> But ball valves produce a higher-quality flow with fewer impurities.
Damn...never knew that....;)
---------- >Denny
|
| | |
Date: 22 Sep 2006 16:57:48
From: Scott Alfter
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
In article <4rOdnXyZJd7KRY_YnZ2dnUVZ_rydnZ2d@giganews.com >,
Denny Conn <denny@projectoneaudio.com > wrote:
>Matt wrote:
>> Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
>> using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
>> find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
>> valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
>> something?
>>
>No advantage at all, at least for me. I replaced my nylon valve with a
>brass ball valve for a while and fouynd I couldn't control the flow as
>well. I went back to the nylon valve.
Ball valves are tricky to control because you only get 90° of rotation to
play with. Both of my mash tuns (converted coolers) use brass needle
valves, which makes dialing in the desired flow rate much easier.
_/_
/ 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: 21 Sep 2006 17:44:42
From: Joel
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
Matt <djembefola24@yahoo.com > wrote:
>Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
>using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
>find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
>valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
>something?
Stainless is more durable. I've had plastic valves
break or crack. But it also depends on what you use
as a mash tun. Converted kegs or stainless pots
generally use stainless ball vales, while plastic
setups (coolers, buckets) generally use plastic
spigots, from what I have seen.
--
Joel Plutchak
"Things just fall apart." - Now They'll Sleep (Belly)
|
| |
Date: 21 Sep 2006 17:42:58
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
On 21 Sep 2006 10:05:04 -0700, <djembefola24@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
> using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
> find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
> valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
> something?
Not really. I think it's just a matter of using what you have available.
I've got a brass spigot on my mash tun, but I could just as easily have
hooked it up with a plastic spigot. The main reason I didn't was that I've
had some bad luck with the cheap plastic spigots that come with bottling
buckets leaking.
John.
|
| |
Date: 21 Sep 2006 17:31:30
From: John Bleichert
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
Matt <djembefola24@yahoo.com > wrote:
> Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
> using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
> find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
> valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
> something?
>
Which/what plastic spigot do you use?
Is this a Rubbermaid water cooler?
I'm using a ball valve on my Rubbermaid water cooler and I don't like
it. Too heavy, to difficult to seal. Lightweight plastic would be much
preferred.
-----------------------------------------------
John Bleichert syborg@earthlink.net
The heat from below can burn your eyes out!!
|
| | |
Date: 21 Sep 2006 13:19:01
From: The Artist Formerly Known as Kap'n Salty
Subject: Re: Plastic spigot vs. stainless ball valve
|
John Bleichert wrote:
> Matt <djembefola24@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Just curious what the advantages of using a ball valve would be over
>> using a plastic spigot for the mash tun. I currently use the spigot and
>> find that works great, but it seems that allot of people are using ball
>> valves to drain their wort. Is there a difference in the flow or
>> something?
>>
>
> Which/what plastic spigot do you use?
>
> Is this a Rubbermaid water cooler?
>
> I'm using a ball valve on my Rubbermaid water cooler and I don't like
> it. Too heavy, to difficult to seal. Lightweight plastic would be much
> preferred.
I use a ball valve on mine -- works fine, but you need to use washers
and maybe an o-ring to get a good seal. For what it's worth, I'm using
one of the 10-gallon round "gott" types.
--
(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!
|
|
