Silk City Distillers

I am not an architect, engineer, and most certainly am not a lawyer. Read up on the differences between NEC Class 1 and Class 2. In addition, if you have state variations of the IBC and IFC, search them for references to combustible dust being a trigger for high hazard (H2) occupancy. I've seen versions table 307 that list Combustible Dust as physical hazard. Lastly, review required fire rating between groups/occupancies/incidental use. Could be any number of things. It's a stretch, but I'd also check your local codes for recs and guidance around how other high dust uses are handled (woodworking shops are sometimes very clearly spelled out). I would say the typical argument is that you aren't generating enough dust to represent a hazard or that would require a separation. You might want to check with your suppliers to see if they can provide cracked or milled grain. Run the numbers. What's the payback on the equipment, labor, maintenance, and construction costs? It might not be worth your time or money to mill.

I'd really like to know if folks with relatively decent municipal water are having success with the newer nano filtration systems.

I probably ran into you at Absolutely Fish... All my water chemistry and purification knowledge is from reef aquaria. We are actually still using my old Air Water Ice Reefkeeper RO/DI. The small production high rejection filters tend to deal better with lower waste flow, but the high production units really start to jump TDS fast if you slow the waste. These things used to be so expensive that you worried about ruining the membrane with lower flow, but now they are so cheap it doesn't pay to waste the water.

Seeing that your avatar has a picture of you tig welding. Consider re-purposing a stainless basket filter/strainer. You have 80% of what you need when you run it in reverse (vapor in the exit port, vapor out the inlet port). You may need to rework the basket for a finer mesh, but some perforated stainless sheet might get you close to a good end result. Second to that might be a bag filter housing if you can fashion a basket.

Branding Iron? There are plenty of makers of brands for wood burning, just google it and half a dozen will come up. Big custom brands can get very expensive though, and the size will be limited (modern brands use electric heaters, not fire). Some of the barrel manufacturers do laser burning of logos, this will probably be much more cost effective than getting a large brand made.

Small ribbon that is inserted down the condenser tube to force turbulent flow. Sometimes folks use this approach to eek a little bit more efficiency or headroom out of a heat exchanger. No relation, I just grabbed a google link, but they look like this: http://phinneytool.com/your-source-for-turbulators/

If it's a liebig, putting a turbulator down into the top of the condenser tube can help as well.

Commonly called 'huffing' in the hobby community, typically seen with single tube in shell Leibig condensers. Sometimes due to the geometry of the condenser, where the vapor path is too narrow for the vapor speed, and especially if the coolant is very cold, or the angle not allowing fast enough drain off. Creates a kind of resonance where the vapor rapidly condenses, the condenser sucks air in to make up for the volume, the air is purged and as vapor refills the condenser it rapidly crashes again. In mild situations it'll show up as a slight wavering in the take off speed. Usually poor condenser design but sometimes due to blowing through very cold coolant at too high a flow rate. If it is actually uncondensed vapor, do not run this equipment until you get the problem fixed or adjust your operating method to avoid it.

One more comment, someone passed this nugget of info on to me, so I'll share it here. Feints from a pot still are a different animal than feints from a plated or packed column still. Due to the nature of the tighter fractionation with plates or packing, the concentration of congeners is higher. So while recycling feints from a pot still might have merit, due to the inefficiency of a pot still, recycling feints from a plated or packed still may not. In most cases, if you were to try it, you'd find that it will probably require a specialized still, that can provide even higher levels of separation than your spirit still, and I'd wager a bet that you'll need to take off at azeo to get something usable.

Actually, Ethanol/Water concentrations of 20% are flammable at these temperatures. The fire point of 20% ethanol/water is 136F. Lower yet they will still easily flash and sustained burn given the right temperatures (wine in a searing hot pan). However, your argument is a valid one. Regardless of the wash alcohol concentration, the gases in the head space and column of a still don't typically represent any kind of stoichiometric mixture. To use an engine analogy, it's too rich to burn, too much fuel. The lower explosive limit (LEL) of ethanol is 3.3% and the upper explosive limit (UEL) is 19%. It's pretty much a given that ethanol vapor in a still would be above the lower explosive limit in nearly every case and very likely above the upper explosive limit, in nearly every case (catastrophic failure aside). This would even apply to a pot still filled with a wash, not even a spirit run. Frankly, I'd look at it from an entirely different position. What would happen in this situation if the still boiler were to fail, and the still was to dump the entirety of it's contents? A weld, a ferrule, a seam, flange, clamp, rivet, valve, etc, etc. In a situation where you were loaded with a wash or beer, it would probably be ugly, but in the case where you were loaded with high proof, it would probably be a disaster. There are so many ways this can fail. Imagine looping a hose around a triclamp valve and accidentally tugging at it, perfectly real scenario. Are you going to charge a still drain spraying out hot alcohol to try to shut it off? High temp high concentration ethanol spilled will immediately create a vapor cloud, and chances are, it's going to be between the LEL/UEL. The higher the temperature, the lower the flash points, flame points, and the higher the speed of vaporization (given a fixed concentration). I cringe when I hear about guys doing spirit runs on a direct fire still. If the boiler were to fail, the operator and nearly everyone in the general vicinity would die. All that said, I wouldn't bother, by loading the boiler at such high proof you are gaining, at best, the equivalent of one additional plate. Going from 4 to 5 plates to try to squeeze a neutral out of your feints isn't going to make any real difference. In fact, you could get exactly the same output running your still will a lower ABV boiler charge, slower take off rate, with a higher reflux ratio (higher dephlegmator flow rate or lower dephlegmator temperature overall). There is nothing that 5 plates can do that 4 plates run at a higher reflux ratio can't do (No, really, the operating conditions have a large overlap). You should easily be able to hit 185 on a 4 plate with a 40% boiler charge. But it won't be anywhere near neutral or clean.

I find myself referring back to this page: http://www.hotwatt.com/calculat.htm It's not a calculator, but has the calculations and some reference tables for the values you need to plug in.

I would imagine that trying to lump spirits in with non-alcohol bottling will cause all sorts of equipment and facilities related concerns. Not only equipment compatibility with high proof spirits, but the additional burden of a whole production floor potentially needing to be Class I Div I/II.

I'm pretty sure the last time I was up at that big NY State/Hudson Valley craft distiller, they were storing barrels in containers on their property as well.

The spirit of the law is clearly to curtail nefarious behaviors associated with cheating taxes, cheating the customer, or cheating both. It's was likely written broadly to eliminate the possibility of loopholes (paging Dunbar!). I can hardly believe that the Federal Government would outright prohibit the recycling of bottles, which is what is being proposed. That said, I wouldn't touch it, for fear that the letter of the law would be enforced (and not the spirit). How much is really being saved after you take into account the work necessary for receiving, removing labels (probably a disaster), cleaning/sanitizing, relabel and refill, probably new corrugated too. If this account is looking to reduce the cost by recycling bottles, why not package their product in less expensive packaging? After taking into account the labor, you could probably reduce the package costs by nearly the same amount.

We're up in Clifton if you ever want to chat.

I feel maybe I wasn't clear, I am a fan of the bugs.

And from wikipedia (blech, I know): Budweiser is brewed using barley malt, rice, water, hops and yeast. It is lagered with beechwood chips in the aging vessel which, according to Anheuser-Busch, creates a smoother taste.[clarification needed] While beechwood chips are used in the maturation tank, there is little to no flavor contribution from the wood, mainly because they are boiled in sodium bicarbonate [baking soda] for seven hours for the very purpose of removing any flavor from the wood. The maturation tanks that Anheuser-Busch uses are horizontal and, as such, flocculation of the yeast occurs much more quickly. Anheuser-Busch refers to this process as a secondary fermentation, with the idea being that the chips give the yeast more surface area to rest on. This is also combined with a krausening procedure that re-introduces wort into the chip tank, therefore reactivating the fermentation process. By placing the beechwood chips at the bottom of the tank, the yeast remains in suspension longer, giving it more time to reabsorb and process green beer flavors, such as acetaldehyde and diacetyl, that Anheuser-Busch believes are off-flavors which detract from overall drinkability.

Interesting on the beechwood, but Budweiser themselves state that the beechwood chips are added to the lagering process to increase surface area and prevent the lager yeast from going dormant/settling out early. There are a number of other sources that state the wood chips are sterile. http://www.gotham-imbiber.com/abib.pdf Budweiser’s highly-publicised “beechwood aging process” is a marketing manipulation of part of the brewing process, where sterile beechwood chips, boiled in sodium bicarbonate for several hours to remove any flavoring possibility, are added to the maturation tanks to aid yeast action and clarity.

I had such high hopes for this thread that the two camps could meet in the middle, make peace. Instead this thread needs to be killed, beaten with a stick ... preferably wood ... no, a steel pipe. Years ago, people didn't know what yeast was. It lived on wooden mash paddles, they had no idea that it was there. If you had the magic paddle and could make beer, you were probably a shaman, or at least the most popular guy in the village. Someone finally figured it out, there was much rejoicing. Now we can choose from all sorts of interesting yeast. The other bacteria are just as important, and you can exercise the same level of control. I just don't see why you would leave it up to chance. I'm not saying you can't or won't get a great result, you absolutely can ... but not always.

Check with Watlow or Exheat on the heating elements, I believe they both have operations in the UK and can supply ATEX/Classified compliant immersion heaters and potentially control panels as well. Stilldragon has a European subsidiary, you'll probably find what you need from a parrot perspective there. Nice thing is all their kit is triclamp, so adapting to suit your need is usually as easy as clamps and fittings. They can do larger condensers too, triclamp as well, but they will be stainless tube-in-shell. We had them make us a larger one and it was very reasonable in comparison. I also had them make me a pedestal mount parrot adapter, take a look here: https://www.stilldragon.org/uploads/FileUpload/50/df2a91faece2f0b9b4bd72a85c1442.jpg

Common RO wastewater ratio is closer to 4:1 than it is to 2:1 (4 gallons wasted for every 1 gallon produced). Poor units setup incorrectly can be even higher yet. There are strategies to reduce this, but there are typically downsides to all of them, no free lunch.

I would agree that a thumper acts as an inefficient plate, but sometimes that inefficiency is exactly what you are looking for. What to do when 1 plate is too much, but zero plates are too little? You see similar strategies to exploit inefficient mass transfer in a number of places, whiskey helmet, cooling lintel, true dephlegmation. I don't think it's as simple as this however, take a look back at the old style rum setups with high and low wines thumpers, you have something very different happening. I strongly suspect there are additional esterification reactions taking place, but that's my 2 cents. I'm not sure I follow your note on Cowdrey, if not mass transfer/distillation, what is the mechanism? Look at a thumper and plate comparatively, and you see only a few differences, mainly that "reflux" is preloaded in a thumper, versus actively generated real time in a plated system. All that said, I don't think that's a thumper on the bottom right of the Vendome print. That looks like a standard stripping setup that feeds some holding tanks that run into a batch still.

You want to cry? Check out how much money these guys have raised through kickstarter... https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/263766519/whiskey-elements-customize-your-whiskey-in-24-hour?ref=discovery

Here is an old table I put together when I was just starting to play around... I have a much more expansive table now, but I'm not going to share that one.

If anyone wants a good primer on the topic, read Nicholas Wilson's PhD thesis. Honestly, it's very good and well worth your time. http://www.ros.hw.ac.uk/handle/10399/2260 Simson, Petterson, and Priest do a nice job providing an overview of just how richly complex Lactobacillus really are, looking at 64 different strains in 23 distilleries. To make it all the more interesting, despite the huge array of strains known, they just so happen to find a completely new one, which to me says there are many more to be found. http://mic.microbiologyresearch.org/content/journal/micro/10.1099/00221287-147-4-1007?crawler=true&mimetype=application/pdf Lacto is way more complex than the way it's generally discussed. This applies to many of the other bacteria as well. Simply reducing it to the genus level is a gross oversimplification of what is happening.