Silk City Distillers

Perhaps Lutein is the magic Xanthophyll?

https://repositorio.ucp.pt/bitstream/10400.14/2762/3/Study of major aromatic compounds in port wines.pdf

Don't have access to this one, but also indicates β‐Damascenone formation from precursors during distillation, in a way that is aligned with the Shochu paper above.

Influence of the Production Process on the Key Aroma Compounds of Rum: From Molasses to the Spirit

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/acs.jafc.6b04046

Quote

(E)-β-Damascenone showed by far the highest OAV (3280) in rum. Although this compound was determined already in molasses, its concentration increased significantly during distillation, indicating a thermolabile precursor.

Perhaps the specific pathway?  Xanthophylls naturally occurring within sugar cane, as well as in corn.

Thermal degradation of a neoxanthin-like xanthophyll to the potent aroma compound beta-damascenone

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/295324888_Thermal_degradation_of_a_neoxanthin-like_xanthophyll_to_the_potent_aroma_compound_beta-damascenone

Potential microbiological basis for carotenoid precursors in cane and rum can potentially be due to Rhodotorula.  This has been implicated in Cachaca and Tequila/Agave spirit as well.

beta-Carotene production in sugarcane molasses by a Rhodotorula glutinis mutant.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11571614

Quote

Several wild strains and mutants of Rhodotorula spp. were screened for growth, carotenoid production and the proportion of -carotene produced in sugarcane molasses. A better producer, Rhodotorula glutinis mutant 32, was optimized for carotenoid production with respect to total reducing sugar (TRS) concentration and pH. 

EFFECT OF SOME SUGARS AND AGRO-INDUSTRIAL BY- PRODUCTS ON CAROTENOIDS PRODUCTION BY SOME YEAST STRAINS OF RHODOTORULA SPP.

http://srv4.eulc.edu.eg/eulc_v5/Libraries/UploadFiles/DownLoadFile.aspx?RelatedBibID=ODQ2ZDQ0NDAtM2U0OC00ZjMzLTkyMTgtOGU5MWQ1MGI3NGZkX2l0ZW1zXzEyMTIwNzM3XzM1Mjg5MV9f&filename=1097.pdf

Quote

Several microorganisms, including bacteria, algae, moulds and yeasts of the generaRhodotorula, Rhodosporidium, Sporobolomyces and Phaffia are able to produce carotenoids naturally( Frengova and Beshkova, 2009).

Microbiology and physiology of Cachaça (Aguardente) fermentations

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1023/A:1010225117654

Quote

Cachaça (aguardente) is a rum-style spirit made from sugar cane juice by artisanal methods in Brazil. A study was made of the production, biochemistry and microbiology of the process in fifteen distilleries in Sul de Minas. Identification of 443 yeasts showed Saccharomyces cerevisiae to be the predominant yeast but Rhodotorula glutinis and Candida maltosa were predominant in three cases

Did Fahrasmane and Ganou-Parfait simply miss it in "Microbial flora of rum fermentation media"?

On the degradation of β‐Damascenone during fermentation:

Investigation of the β-Damascenone Level in Fresh and Aged Commercial Beers
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/pdf/10.1021/jf020085i

Quote

This study investigated the increase of β-damascenone content during aging in a variety of commercial Belgian beers. Quantities detected in fresh beers were generally low (from 6 ng/g to 25 ng/g). After 5 days at 40 °C, the level increased (to as much as 210 ng/g) in most of the beers studied, according to the type of beer. Further experiments showed that wort initially contains large quantities of β-damascenone (450 ng/g), but that degradation of the compound during fermentation accounts for the low concentrations observed in fresh beers. Production during beer aging can be partially explained by acid hydrolysis of glycosides. 

Just reviewing some of the literature on β‐Damascenone formation.

Clearly not something unique to rum, it would be considered the most significant constituent of Bourbon as well (by FD/OAV), as well as in Shochu.  However, it's OAV is so stratospheric, it merely has to exist at all for it to top the chart.  So you have it existing across three very different fermentation feedstock: grain, cane, and potato.  Not to mention three products produced in very different ways, especially the koji fermented sweet potato.  Found in both wine and beer as well.

The Shochu paper seems to be incredibly insightful, since β‐Damascenone  exists as a component of sweet potato, but does not even remotely account for the total β‐Damascenone  in the distillate.  It appears that β‐Damascenone is not at all formed during fermentation, and is actually negatively impacted by fermentation.  However, it's not the β‐Damascenone in the feedstock, or the production process, but the necessary (Carotenoid?) precursors to be available during distillation to form it by acid hydrolysis.

The Formation of β‐Damascenone in Sweet Potato Shochu - Yoshizaki - 2011 - Journal of the Institute of Brewing - Wiley Online Library

https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/j.2050-0416.2011.tb00464.x

The researchers found that:

"most of the β‐Damascenone  in Shochu is formed by acid hydrolysis during distillation."

"As the distillation period lengthened, β‐Damascenone  levels increased moderately, suggesting that lengthening the distillation period is one method that may be used to increase B-damascenone"

"Furthermore, whether the β‐Damascenone  level in shochu was affected by the pH of the second mash during distillation was investigated.  The β‐Damascenone  level in second mash at pH 3.5 was greater than in the second mash at pH 4.0 and 7.0."

You don't charcoal filter gin.

If you want to treat your neutral with carbon first, go right ahead, but you simply can not do it after you infuse the alcohol with botanicals.

This thread has gone way too long, so some random thoughts.

1. Try using the top jacket for heating, and the bottom for cooling.  It's highly likely that the corn was sitting on the very bottom of the tank, despite the mixer running, insulating the tank contents from the undersized bottom jacket.  The top jacket will not see the same kind of insulated blinding that the bottom would.  Undersized jackets work fine, they just take longer.  By reversing these, once you've gotten to the point of needing to cool, you'll have solids well into suspension with lower viscosity - so the tank should mix better.  Honestly, at start up, I bet that mixer is just pushing the corn around on the bottom.

2. My comments about replacing the incorrect plumbing the top jacket port MUST BE DONE, whatever the approach.  PRV, Vacuum Breaker, Air Vent, Gauge.  No Chinese stuff, get the appropriate parts from a reputable steam trim manufacturer (Armstrong, Spirax Sarco, etc etc).  Honestly, I'd replace the traps too, but that's just me.  PRV - Vented to Safety, Air Vent - Vented to Safety, Vacuum Breaker, Gauge - on every jacket - this means 2x for the mash tun.

Thanks Paul, I'll go ahead and make the change.

One side is the PRV and inlet, the other is the Vac breaker, air vent, gauge, and also my pressure sender for the controller.

Sits around 12 at the boiler.

Looking to upgrade our boiler and our steam guy is recommending going to 50psi - high pressure territory.  Says the eductor really needs pressure to shine.

We are using a single 3/4" Jacoby Tarbox TLA Eductor in a 600g mash tank.  16hp boiler, going through a 2" 5 micron Spirax Sarco CSF16 Clean Steam filter.

The injector is slightly undersized, but we would likely top out the max flow rate of the filter going any larger.

Sure, as soon as I get in later today.

This is the Bible of steam kettle plumbing.

https://www.armstronginternational.com/files/common/technical/864-EN.pdf

22 hours ago, Georgeous said:

We have the boiler guy coming out this monday to do just that.

Ask them to install proper air vents and vacuum breakers at the tops of both of those jackets.

Installing vacuum breakers without corresponding air vents will cause significant inefficiency in heat transfer.  Depending on the jacket geometry, air can get trapped in a way that's not easily pushed through the trap.  I would not trust those jackets without vacuum breakers, and you will not maximize jacket efficiency without air vents.

Looking at the bottom jacket, with the steam port and condensate drain at the bottom of the tank, it's highly likely that you are trapping air at the top.

Paul said something before that was interesting, about insulated tanks.

I know other folks that have had issues with bad tanks from China where the welds between the steam jacket outer wall and the insulation were bad, and when they poured in the two part insulation mix, the insulation expanded into the steam jacket area.  Likewise, steam was able to escape into the insulated area.  Pressure test ain't going to catch it.

That's why I asked about the insulation before.  Hoping you don't have insulation, and this ain't the problem, because they ended up scrapping the tank.  They were able to get a bore scope into the steam jacket, but based on those triclamp elbows, I'm not sure that's possible - maybe from the top.

Why did you write all of that when you could have just said you agree with me?

Mashing, fermenting, and distilling in a single vessel?  Bottleneck.  Reconsider.

Distilling is far more forgiving than brewing with regards to negative bacterial contribution and need for sanitization or sterilization.  This is evidenced by the lack of a tradition of boiling wort or wash to sterilize, antibacterials (hops), and distilling's longer tradition of open fermentation.  What brewers are only today beginning to embrace about wild yeast, bacterial contribution, open fermentation - these have been standard procedures in distilling, whether the distillers knew the benefits or not ... or even knew why.  Keep in mind, though something like an acetobacter infection is a disaster in beer or wine, it's a nuisance in distilling that results in a larger heads cut (lower yield).  What might be applicable to brewing or wine, might not be to distilling, and vice-versa (brettanomyces comes to mind, which I think is a disaster for distillers).

The exact same procedures for wild yeast capture for brewing directly apply to distilling, spend some time with brewing communities like Milk the Funk (Facebook Group).  While it's easy to isolate the yeast strains out of these, it's very difficult to match the bacterial strains.  There are some brilliant, brilliant, backyard biologists involved there (and plenty of PhDs too).  Like Lloyd says above, and he's right, replication becomes very very difficult.  During fermentation, bacteria will die out, certain yeast strains will dominate, others will die.  

We've fermented with lots of yeast that you would never find in the traditional distilling world.  Torulaspora, Metschnikowia, Hanseniaspora, and others.  We have a few test batches that were co-pitches of the above plus traditional yeasts alongside some interesting bacteria that I absolutely love.

Two things I've learned that are a bit of a disappointment.  Distilling is a rather coarse process, it's very easy to lose some of the subtle flavors created during fermentation.  Esters tend to bunch together, meaning if you take a heavy heads cut, you lose everything you worked to create.  I concur about acetic acid and ethyl acetate being a major problem.  It's very easy for high ethyl acetate to "crowd out" the other esters during distillation.  You are forced to take a wider cut, and by doing it, you cut away too much of many other esters.  I too tend to review the literature on specific bacterial strains to understand which tend to be the lowest acetic producers, this is really really important.

The other is that aging is a double-edged sword, and probably the most disappointing - subtle flavors tend not to survive aging.  Almost three years back I did some incredible higher-ester whiskies using English ale strains.  Fruity, floral, very interesting.  By the two year mark, it became very difficult to distinguish between traditional whiskey strain batches.  Based on the glide path, by year 4 it might be completely indistinguishable.  They may evaporate off, they may form other more complex compounds or longer chain esters, but they don't stick around.  I've considered doing test batches with miniscule heads cuts, in order to create aged blending stock that hopefully retains some of these flavors after maturation.  Again, too many projects, too little time.

That said, blending is key key key here.  Especially talking high ester and heavy rums, back to the original topic.  Keep in mind the goal of these processes IS NOT TO MAKE FINISHED RUM IN ONE SHOT.  It is to make blending stock, to be blended with other, lighter, cleaner, other rums, to produce a finished product.  Hell, even if high hogo funk town is your goal, you are still blending.  Nobody is drinking Hampton DOK and enjoying it.  The other factor that favors blending, it's very difficult to establish tight consistency with some of these bacteria.  Certain strains of clostridium are strict anaerobes - good luck managing strict anerobic starters, purging with nitrogen to eliminate all dissolved oxygen is a requirement).  Consistent starting cell counts would be very difficult outside a lab.  The end result is going to be a fairly wide range of ester concentrations.  Creating a wide range of mono-culture (bacterial) aging stock is probably the safest approach - eg. Lactic acid ester based blenders, propionic blenders, butyric blenders.  Same could be done with heavier alcohols in the tails (isoamyl alcohol makes beautiful esters).   Want a rum that tastes like buttery, nutty, banana bread?  Lactic esters are your friend, as are the isoamyl alcohol esters. - Go ahead and build it from the ground up.  Again, no lack of projects, complete lack of time.

Steam doesn’t need baffles.

Is there an air vent on the topmost port of that jacket?  

Air is a very good insulator.

The port locations do not appear condusive to forcing air our the condensate drain.

Is the mash tun insulated or not?

And keep the mt jacket on when the hot water goes back in.  This will help keep temps up, hopefully long enough to gel that corn fast.

Order a pizza it’s going to be a long night.

Dump the water - or pump it over.  Heat water to boiling in the still and pump it back over.

Ball trap, dang.  Ok well I was really hoping for an easy fix.

Really think that trap is backwards..  Bucket traps haven't changed in decades.