meerkat

Disclaimer - I am the author of the AlcoDens program mentioned by PeteB above When converting between mass and volume you have to use the density (or specific volume). Sometimes it is confusing whether you should multiply or divide, and the trick is to look at the units. TTB Table 4 will tell you that the specific volume of 98.6 proof spirit is 0.12835 gallon/lb. To convert your 184 lbs to gallons you must multiply by the 0.12835 gallon/lb because if you multiply lb x gallon/lb the lbs cancel out and you are left with the gallons that you want. Multiplying these two together tells you that you will have 23.62 gallons at 60 °F. You can then use Table 7 to correct to your actual temperature. If you download the trial version of AlcoDens ( http://www.katmarsof...om/alcodens.htm ) it will tell you that the volume at 60 °F is 23.59 gallons. The trial version will work for 15 runs, so rather leave it running until you switch your computer off at the end of the day or you will use up the trial runs very quickly. The layout of the TTB Tables is specifically designed to enable you to do the dilution calculation you want. The procedure required was very well described by Will in another thread so I won't try to do it again here. See http://adiforums.com...owtopic=769&hl= While you are learning to do the TTB calculations you can test yourself by doing them in AlcoDens as well to check that you get the same answers. You will also find several online (i.e. web based) dilution calculators, but so far the ones I have found all use the Pearson Square method which is not accurate for spirits. Its fine for blending wines of similar strengths, but it does not take into account the volume changes that occur when ethanol and water are mixed. The TTB Tables (and AlcoDens) do take the volume changes into account properly.

Disclaimer: I am the author and vendor of the AlcoDens program mentioned above. I have had a query from someone who saw the post above, and has asked me how well calculations done in AlcoDens match those done using the TTB Tables. Of course, I have done many comparisons with the TTB Tables during the testing of the program but I am in South Africa and I am not regulated by the TTB Tables. This means that my testing is a bit theoretical because I do not have the experience of having to satisfy the US authorities. I would be very grateful if any of the registered users of AlcoDens, or people who have downloaded and tested the trial version, could comment on the practical details of using AlcoDens in an environment governed by the TTB Tables. In my comparisons I have found that AlcoDens and the TTB Tables match extremely closely. This is not surprising since AlcoDens is based on the OIML data which in turn is based on much of the same experimental data that went into the making of the TTB Tables. The one exception to the close agreement is the Wine gallons per pound data in Table 4. This is an apparent, rather than a real difference because Table 4 is based on weights in air while AlcoDens and the OIML data are based on absolute mass. If a correction is made for the bouyancy of the air then AlcoDens and Table 4 match as closely as the other Tables. This difference has not concerned me in the past because I assumed that nobody would try to determine the Proof of a blend by weighing out a known volume - you would rather use an hydrometer which is not affected by air and does not require you to measure the volume to 4 decimal places. And the differences caused by the "in air" versus "in vacuum" data are so small that they do not have any affect on blending calculations done using Table 4 vs AlcoDens. If anyone else has done some comparisons, or who sees any potential problems caused by the "in air" vs "in vacuum" basis I really would appreciate your comments. Thanks very much. Edit: April 21, 2016 I still get occasional hits on my web site from this thread so I would like to update it to mention that as of version 3.0 AlcoDens now has an option to switch between "in air" and "in vacuum" (i.e. TTB or OIML method). This has brought the agreement between AlcoDens and the TTB Tables even closer. One caveat on the TTB Tables that is relevant to AlcoDens users but also to general users of the Tables - Table No 6 gives SG values for "in air" and "in vacuum" but almost all hydrometers and EDMs are calibrated on an "in vacuum" basis. The "in air" values are what you would measure if you used a pycnometer to measure the SG. The differences are small, but no matter which calculation method you are using if you measure your SG with an hydrometer you should be using the "in vacuum" values. If you are using Proof or ABV hydrometers then there is no problem as Proof and ABV are not affected by the presence of air.

There are 3 ways (that I know of) to remove water from air. These are compression, cooling and chemical absorbtion. The more you compress the air the less water it can hold. It is like a sponge that is squeezed. If you are going to drain water from your system anywhere, do it at the highest pressure point. Cooling the air also decreases its water-carrying capacity. We see this every day when water drips from the air conditioning unit. Chemical absorption is done typically with dessicants, but I have never used this type of dryer for a breathing air supply so I cannot comment on your toxicity concerns. To get dry air for your bottles use a filter (as recommended by Dave) at the highest pressure point, and cool the compressed air before the filter if possible. The flip side of this is that if you can heat the air before it goes into the bottles it will be less likely to have droplets and will be more effective in drying the bottles.

Theoretically you need 0.002 kg of steam to raise the temperature of 1.0 kg of water by 1 degree C. Or 0.0011 lb of steam to heat 1.0 lb of water by 1 degree F. If your tank is not insulated and you are working at high temperatures there will be losses to the atmosphere as well. This will give you some idea of the amount of dilution you can expect. The explosions are actually implosions - the collapsing described by ViolentBlue. It is exactly the same mechanism as cavitation in pumps. As the steam (or vapor in a cavitating pump) collapses it makes the noise and causes the damage or vibration. The bigger the bubbles the louder the sounds and the higher the risk of damage. I have seen 20,000 litre tanks trying to jump off their hold down bolts when using 10 mm holes. On the other hand, I have seen sparge pipes with 3 mm holes work reasonably quietly with minimal vibration. Unless you have experience in designing these spargers I would recommend using a proprietary device like the pickheater where the supplier can properly size it to your application.