stevea

I'd give them a call and see what details they need. Also talk to any microbrewery in the water district - they might help you sate the bureaucracy. You certainly shouldn't need to spec which yeasts you use or the relative amounts of various grains. If you aren't doing grist-in distilling, then you can probably describe stillage as 'N' Plato beer (w/ yeast) & ethanol removed. My local district want's to nick you if the pH is too far of neutral, if the biological oxygen demand (BOD) is too high[likely], or if the temperature is too far out of whack. Water use for cooling depends on temps & the efficiency of your cooling system. Someone else can address that better.

Thanks sincerely bluestar. I've an opportunity for some brewery conicals - ~20 beer barrel size - at a good price, but the ~60 degree cones scares me.

I think it's pretty obvious why grist-in ferments are ill-suited for beer brewery conical fermenters, but has anyone done this successfully ? Maybe some re-circ slurry pumps to keep things happy ? How about using brite-tanks as grist-in fermenters ?

Wow - great stuff. Thanks. LCP - right - I don't often think of TN Whiskey, tho' I have some Dickel here somewhere. It is diferent way to impart wood flavors.

I'm pretty certain every person here has a notion of who RBID (Really-big-Indiana-Distiller) is. I've seen their ~24k-27k gallon fermenters and the several big column stills. Out of curiosity - do they use more than a continuous doubler before barreling ? LCP ? I'm missing that acronym.

Uhhm - viewing your other thread, this suggests your authority is unfamiliar with distilling and fire code related to such hazards. F-1 is your occupancy classification. I * SUSPECT * what that are asking for are physical diagrams/drawing, so they can define a "sombrero of death" (google it), then all the electricals w/in the 'sombrero' *should* be Class I, Division 2. If your still vendor won't spec their electrical still heating as class I Division 2, then you have a real problem. You'll likely bump into ventilation requirements too.

3pg/bu is 223 LA/metric tonne, and should be read readily achievable w/ malt, conventional beer-brewery & non-enzymatic conversions.

Depends on the community. The FM in one local city was the long-pole [he dealt with other industrial flammable production]. In the next city over [also a lot of industrial flammables] FM said they only do compliance inspections and it's totally up to zoning/building.

That's a very high figure and likely only applies to maize/corn with it's higher starch content. USDA reports a fuel ethanol yield of 425.6 LA/mton (w/o cellulosic conversion) in 2014, and you are quite unlikely to match that in a 300gal step mash tun. "The Alcohol Textbook", 4th Ed, Jennsen 2003 has a table that can be converted to ... (LA/mton). 425 LA/mton - finely ground corn (3/16" screen) 395 LA/mton - coarse corn (5/16" screen) 373 LA/mton - barley 358 LA/mton - rye "Whisky: Technology, Production,Marketing" , Inge 2003, describes (then recent) Scotch extraction improvements using 'Chariot' barley malt 420 LA/mton - malt 'Science and Technology of Whiskies' by Piggott et al, 1989 cited a malt figure around 381LA/mton === Grist isn't the biggest expense per barrel and you shouldn't get too upset about 10%-ish lower extraction figures.

I've been down this path with a couple properties. Part of zoning is about what the authority wants to allow for the community, and so a microbrewery model is good starting point. The extra safety/fire code issues are the main difference. DON'T offer extra information nor open new topics, but be prepared to address objections with information. Be prepared to give a high level non-technical glossy overview, then let them drive. Some topics/objection you should be ready to address: How do you plan to dispose of solid waste ? What is your sewerage waste like (BOD, quantities , temperatures) ? If you mill 'process' or 'crush' grain on-site then the dust can be explosive fire code applies. [argue similar to brewery] How much high proof alcohol and at what proof will you have on premises ? There is a difference in the code for 'process' vs 'storage' tanks, so your receivers & mixing tanks, bottling tank are 'process'. Storage tanks & Barrels are 'storage' and wooden barrels have a special status that exempts them from NFPA fire code but not building code. My county is quite prickly about "above ground storage & process" 25ft set-off from property boundaries unless you have exceptional fire-walls. If you are going to store more than a few barrels-worth you'll run into MAQ(maximum allowable quantity) restrictions that will push you to fire containment areas, sprinklers and perhaps an expensive H-3 classification. Vertical stacking of non-exempt storage like pallets of filled bottles, might be a trigger issue. Still over-pressure venting & barrel storage ventilation reqs might be discussed. So be prepared to describ theTalk to your architect/code-guy before hand, AND let them field the code compliance questions. With a tasting room and you could see questions related to local/state code, serving reqs, and proximity to churches, schools, community or rehab centers. It's not really part of the zoning agenda, but you'll want to note the value to the community, economic activity; drawing customers to the area, possible providing some jobs. Observe the 'vibe' of the proceedings. You will get hard questions, but if you come away with the clear impression that they don't want a distillery then it's best to find another location. They can run your biz into the ground with enforcement issues.

>> no way can you get 405mL of pure alcohol from 1kg of grain Yes you can, and the fuel-ethanol types do better than that regularly. You may need enzymes to get to that with malt. The other thing I'd say is that malt is expensive stuff, and used for it's unique flavor. So flavor is generally more important than extractable starch. If you aren't using exogenous enzymes for conversion, then of course the malt enzymes are critically important.

You are off by a factor of two. Sucrose is a disaccharide, so 1mol of sucrose produces 4 mol of EtOH and 4 mol CO2. You won't see much sucrose from malt, instead you'll end up with mostly maltose (another di-sacch) or glucose (a mono-sacch) if you use enzymes. Yes, an efficient operation really can get >400LA from a metric tonne of grains tho' I more often see such high figures associated with corn rather than malt. 405 LA * (789 g/LA) / (46.07 g/mol EtOH) = 6936 mol EtOH 6936 mol EtOH requires the fermentation of 3468 mol of monosaccharide (2 EtOH/monosacch) or 1734 mol of disaccharide (4 EtOH/disacch) 3468 mol glucose * (180.156 g/mol glucose) = 624787g = 0.625 metric tonnes of glucose 1734 mol of disacc * 342.3 g/mol disacch) = 593554g = 0.594 metric tonnes of disaccharide. [[ note the mass difference in sugar mass is just the mass of water needed to hydrolyse the dissach, iow 0.594 mton of maltose + 1734 mol water => 0.625 mton monosacch hexose sugars]] The yeast consume ~3% of available carbon primarily for their mannose cell walls, so you'd need to extract (0.625 / 0.97) = 64.4% of the malt mass as glucose to obtain the 405LA/m.tonne. Too mathy ? A rule of thumb, for most grains and high extraction methods, 3kg of grist => 1kg of EtOH, 1kg of CO2 and 1kg of waste

#2 I got a quote for $47k for the 50bhp Sellers H-series installed from their local rep. I expect their 60hp is ~10% more with similar installation costs. #3. Sellers H-series for direct steam injection. You MUST soften the water well to prevent scaling, but you don't need to add chems to reduce O2 & raise pH as there is no ferrous metal in the H-series boiler. I agree the limited turndown on the Sellers is a headache. Aldrich got my consultant's "thumbs up" as well. I must say the Miura's look very fine, but I would imagine corrosion could be a problem if you run them with RO-water and no chems. There are broadly 3 classes of steam ... http://stellarfoodforthought.net/plant-steam-vs-culinary-steam-vs-pure-steam-what-food-manufacturers-need-to-know/ and if you think you can put in a screen and convert plant steam to culinary steam, then you are on the wrong side of the FDA. https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?FR=173.310 The FDA approved chems seem to cost 4x or more than typical boiler chems. Given the high blow-down rates on DSI systems, the chem cost is significant over time.

I was reviewing this thread, as we are having some rye problems in our lab this past week. And after a little consideration there SEEMS to be an error here. I know John well enough to know that he is a bright & honest & very technical guy, so .... 1000gal at 11%-12% ABV is 110 to 120 gallon of pure ethanol. A gallon of pure ethanol is 64.859 mol of ethanol, requiring fermentation of 32.43 mol of glucose equivalent fermentable or 12.88 lbs of sugar. So 110 gal of EtOH requires fermentation of 1416 lb of fermentables. Further there is quite close to 3% loss to yeast mass, so at least 1460 fermentable carbs. from 2000lb or rye ! That is not happenin'. Even some beta-glucans hydrolysis can't ge t you there. 11% in the above would be 459LA/metric on, which equals top top commercial conversions for maize. If you happen to trip across this old thread John, how long a rest do you do for the Laminex C2K ? We have been having great success with the Amylex 5T & SSF2, but we need to work out the rye/C2K.

I've see that study before, and it's a bit hard to interpret WHY copper in the wash condenser and the spirit pot have the most impact. The latter part of pg 110 says ... << When used for the first time, the laboratory scale copper stills produced a spirit with a relatively sulphury and meaty aroma. Several repeat distillations were required prior to the start of this experiment to reduce this aroma suggesting that some corrosion of the copper may have been required in order to activate it. The actual mechanism of sulphur compound removal, however, remains to be elucidated.>> Copper has two oxidation states, and I might *suspect* Copper(I) oxide (Cu2.O) is the more likely hero of the story, can't say. An acid cleaning would eliminate the Cu2O and perhaps make the still ineffective of sulfur removal. The paper blames Dimethyl trisulfide (DMTS) as the main problem. This chem is detectable & obnoxious at parts per trillion! It's not very volatile, but a little goes a long way. Dimthyl Sulfide & sulfoxide are also present in large amounts, but are less problematic. There is an old winemaking trick of adding copper or a little copper sulfate to get rid of hydrogen sulfide (H2S) in wine. Copper sulfate can (w/ free chloride ions) remove DMSO. I wonder if copper sulfate in the wash might eliminate the DMTS or precursors. === Do get well soon Paul. I'm not your biggest fan, but I've been through the surgery/pain-killer thing myself and wish it on no-one.

I *suspect* the copper plates & caps will do the job. wrt copper. If you went to stainless you could electro-plate a copper layer in the interior - not hard to do. [for those who might care to pick fights, the rectification fluids & vapor are not electrolytic, and the joint is not exposed], but frankly the glass column is likely to be educational. I recently heard the Beam uses a stainless column but adds copper pipe stacked within the column at some unspecified plate. I can't attest to the accuracy. Odd but plausible.

I hate to tweak Silk's excellent contribution, but there are a couple advantages to "dual flow"/sieve (perf) plates over bubble caps, in some applications. Perf plates don't easily foul (given adequate hole size for the media) , so they can (must) be used in a stripping column for grist-in. Perf plates have lower pressure drop, making the product separation a bit more efficient. Somewhat higher efficiency (closer to a theoretical plate) - *IF* operated in a tight range of vapor flow - which is practically impossible for a non-continuous still. OTOH sources claim a 1.5:1 type turn-down ratio for a perf plate, vs a ~2.5:1 turndown for a bubble plate. Floating valve plates have a huge turn-down, up to ~8:1!!!, but more pressure drop, cost & fouling are worse. I've never seen small scale valve plates. == Yes, given your application bubble-plates are the obvious choice - for any small scale non-continuous rectification.

Nice work. That *looks* like a lot of heads per the amount whitedog based on flow rate. Stumpy's had problems w/ his hardware supplier previously https://www.idahostatesman.com/news/business/article187541748.html

Yeah - mibad - 95.63% by mass, the ABV azeotrope is close to 97% ABV

Hi Silk, thanks. I always find you comments intelligent and on point. On 2) I assume most know, but pH drops with increasing temps, and it's not a trivial amount. An ATC meter reads pH at the sample temp, which is usually unlikely to be the mash tun temp unless you have a high temp process meter, so you have to apply a correction. So pH 5.7 for the HTAA at 85C, will read about 6.2-6.3 if the sample is cooled to 25C, and the meter can't account for it. pH 5.8 @ 50C = pH 6.17 @ 25C pH 5.7 @ 85C = pH 6.45 @ 25C pH 5.3 @ 63C = pH 5.83 @ 25C The delta-pH values for the three rests would be -0.28, -0.62 if measuring at 25C. >>only adjust down for GA, ... Right! My view is that you can likely the 'split the difference' in pH for the gum-rest & liquification rest (BG & HTAA). The HTAA rest does not need to be as complete as the GA rest. The main purpose of he HTAA rest is to prevent the branched amylopectins from trapping all the water, thus stalling the the hydrolytic enzymes (and of course viscosity). Acidifying accurately for GA is critical for good attenuation. https://www.westlab.com/blog/2017/11/15/how-does-temperature-affect-ph >> There is a really popular gelatinization temp chart that's made it's way around the internet. Ignore it, it's garbage. ++. This (below) is the inaccurate chart. It dates to a 2009 aussiehomebrewer forum, and the guy says he pulled it together from another amateur HB forum. The PDF page attached is from "Food Chemistry" 4th Edition by Belitz, W. Grosch, P. Schieberle. Note that Rye is way off in the chart. >> 4) Add your HTAA right after your glucanase rest is complete, it helps keep mash thin. Depending on the specific enzymes used, you may be able to add the HTAA with the GA. In any case I think the arabinoxylanases + BG may improve the rest time and the SG readings late. gelatinization.pdf

FWIW Vendome makes a still a little larger than yours (12" diam) for 3.1gpm (700lph). I don't think you'll get 1000lpm or normal wash feed through an 8" (200mm) rectifier at any reasonable vapor velocity. Reboiler design is a complex issue, particularly if you are processing wash grist-in. Many stills this size and smaller use direct steam injection to avoid fouling. Condensers are just heat exchangers, and they have to be sized to the load. To get 100% reflux from a top plate you need to match the heat of vaporization of the two components (ethanol&water) according to there molar flow rates. 95.63%ABV is the azeotropic limit to water:etoh separation near atmospheric pressure - you can't get to literal 96%ABV that way.

100% rye is a sort of torture-test. You might try a <70% and see how it goes. There are Dupont viscosity reducing enzymes from Gusmer's available aimed at rye & wheat. I don't have experience but Headstill wrote about them a while back. These reduce the arabinoxylose & hemicellulose 'gums'. The prices aren't bad at all, but the minimum qty is like 25kg. IoR is an indirect measure of sugars (and anything else that differs in rotation from water) , OTOH hydrometry is also indirect and just measures the density. If you want to get hard-core there is a Fehling's test (strips are available as Clinitest) for reducing sugars. You can even measure glucose (not maltose etc) using a diabetic test meter & strips - very easy & cheap. In the US these measure in milligram/deciliter with an accurate range ~50-200 mg/dl - so you'll need to understand dilution. A 100 reading on a diabetic meter is 100mg/dl or almost exactly 0.1 Plato (of glucose only). I'm not suggesting these as a regular procedure, but it's nice to have a couple tools in the drawer when things are unclear.

The smallest one I've ever seen close-up was about 8ft diameter. That was used in a chemical plant. I've been told they are sometimes used in petroleum cracking. A Japanese company makes some tiny ones with a 1 to 3 m^2 transfer surface, but I'll wager the price is terrific.

Roger - your 2.5% grade in a 2" tube would dictate a minimum ~33gpm @ ~1meter/sec to keep it filled.. Yes that is adequate for both turbulent flow but only marginaly improves the turndown ratio. Of course you need to be able to fill and empty the shell unlike ...

Mostly agree. At gelatinization the amylopectics go into solution (assuming you have enough water or some alpha-amylase) reducing the amount of solids by 60-70%. (oddly amylose is insoluble). Also the viscosity increase makes the sedimentation velocity drop, but also reduces the Reynolds number (turbulence). Of course the viscosity drops a lot more at sanctification and fermentation. >>If you are recirculating back to the tun, there is no reason to run a slow flow rate. Faster the flow the better the efficiency, don’t get fooled thinking the smaller delta t is a problem. That's not my only use-case. I need to flow milled wheat&rye from a 'gum' tank (~50C, arabinoxylan & hemicellulose degradation) to a gelatinization temp tank near 90C and I have waste-heat I could use to pre-heat it. So not gelatinized, low flow rate, one-pass. >>And those idiot dairy farmers didn’t bother to consider smaller inner tubes Maybe not such idiots, https://www.dairyfoods.com/articles/92787-selecting-the-best-heat-exchanger-for-dairy-pasteurization I see "dual tube", tubes-in-shell and lpates from dairy HX vendors. >If you are recirculating, optimizing HX efficiency is a whole lot less important, since you can just trade time or adjust flow rate. Unless you are paying for water or to run a chiller. You need velocity in the counterflow HX to improve heat exchange in a turbulent regime, and this additionally keeps the solids moreso in suspension. Some have dimpled or corrugated tubes to improve turbulence. I wish that spiral plate HX were available in a size I need - they have no issues w/ slurries.