PeteB

From my observation I find it hard to believe that that was unmalted rye. You may have purchased it as unmalted but it could have self malted in the field. I have been growing and harvesting rye for over 40 years. Very occasionally there can be a week or so of wet weather, after the rye has matured, and the grains will start to sprout while still in the head of the plant. Once saw the grains sprouted so far that the heads had inch long green shoots all over them. If the grain starts to sprout then dries out again it can still be harvested as feed grain, but is no good for malting because it has already malted itself. I suspect you stumbled across some self malted grain.

Surface tension can make it appear as if a very fine filter is blocked. If your filter medium is slightly wet but there is air on both sides of the filter, the surface tension between the water and the fine filter material can "block" the filter. If it is an in-line filter, see if you can pour some liquid into the inlet side and displace the air and I am reasonably confident it will start working. Please let me know if this solves the problem Pete

I agree that the TTB is not very clear until you can get your head around the difference between "Proof gallons", "wine gallons" and "U.S. gallons" To start with you may not realise "wine gallons" and "U.S. gallons" are the same thing. In the example above, if you already have your measurements in "proof" there is no point in dividing by 2 to get ABV then in line 2 multiply by 2 So in your example 17 gallons of 190 proof, 17 X 190/100 = 32.3 proof gallons That can be reported as 17 wine gallons (=US gallons) and/or 32.3 proof gallons depending on which part of the form you are filling in

In Australia all our records and reporting are done in %ABV at 20c. Our local hydrometers cost about $250 each so I purchased some good quality Proof ones from US at about $50 each including freight. They are twice as sensitive as the $250 ones. I set Alcodens input to Proof at 60F and everything else is at ABV at 20. So easy to use, and I won't get so upset next time I break a hydrometer

Steva, I tried a small version of the inline screw filter but found it ground my grain to flour and pushed it out with the liquid. Only husk came out as a solid. Joseph, The press sounds promising, the grain should not get ground to flour. Could you please send me some photos of the setup. In the video it appears to be inside a plastic drum. Thanks

2 sample bottles are on the way. You will probably get them later next week. One of RRR Ginger Hammer and one of my White Rye. Freight was no extra for 2 bottles.

From what I have read, most of the hazzards with wood is in the dust. I don't know if ethanol extracts carcinogens from some woods. http://www.tastimber...erialSafety.pdf See list of timber species at end of article.I know of local woodworkers who got lung cancer from Blackwood dust, but that is not mentioned on the list

Thanks for all the discussion. Steva. I knew copper had a much higher thermal conductivity than stainless but 40 X . No wonder copper takes so long to heat up before welding or soldering. It is currently winter on this side of the equator and my original heat exchanger is working well, but come summer I will clean out and add connect the copper exchanger.

Dave, if your floor scales are accurate to 1 lb in 2,500 that is much more accurate than a hydrometer at 1:1000 It will be accurate enough down to 1000 lb. I assume from your mention of 1/2 lb that it becomes more sensitive at lower weights, that means it should be accurate enough down to 500 lbs Could someone tell me quickly if I have stuffed up the 1:1000 accuracy of a hydrometer at 100 proof !!

In my opinion scales are the only practical way for small distillers to be accurate. "what is the required accuracy?" I will attempt to explain. I don't work under TTB rules but I think USA need to measure proof to 0.1 pr. If a bottle has say 100 proof then that is an accuracy of 0.1 in 100 or 1:1000 If you agree so far, then every other measurement on that 100 pr spirit needs to be of similar accuracy. That means your scales need to be accurate to at least 1:1000 A bench top scale that you might measure a single bottle on, for ease of maths say it reads 1 Kg (1,000 g) would need to be accurate to 1 gram. The scales to weigh a 1,000 Kg cube of spirit would need to be accurate to 1 Kg to get the 1:1,000 accuracy. Most scales that weigh 1,000 Kg are useless at measuring one gram in a bottle. A roughly symmetrical (height to width) tank that holds 1,000 litres would be nearly impossible to measure with a dipstick to a 1 litre accuracy. That is 1 millimeter. The temperature needs to be at 60F or 20C depending on how THE tank was calibrated. Also, how do you read at the bottom of the meniscus. (put on goggles and stick your head under the spirit then subtract the volume of your head ;=) Jessica Jewel's scale that has 1000 lb capacity and measures in increments of .2 lbs. is accurate to 1:5,000 at 1000 lb but if weighing only 200 lb it is accurate to 1:1000, the same as a good hydrometer. If weighing only 100 lb then it is only half as accurate as the hydrometer, probably not good enough for TTB There is also a difference between "sensitivity" and "accuracy" For example a cheap digital scale may be quite sensitive and read out in 1 g increments, but it may be 3 or 4 grams off the true mass = inaccurate.

My distillery is almost 100% rye. I have heard that unmalted rye will self convert to a small degree, but doubt the yield would be very efficient. Strike water plus grist, 3 hours later and my mash is still very solid. Add malted grain and the mash turns to a thin "soup" in a minute or so. That indicates to me that very few starch chains have been shortened to sugars before the malted grain is added. If anyone has information that rye has a very high degree of self conversion I would be interested in giving it a go, but without more information I don't want to risk a whole batch. Pete

Please keep us posted. I am very interested

Thanks for all the suggestions. I have decided to call it "R.R.R. Ginger Hammer" So there will be 2 prizes to send out. Could you two winners PM me your postal details. I think it is Punkin at StillDragon; yours will be easy to post. leftturndistilling may be slightly harder but I am sure I can get it to you. A friend of mine has released a fantastic and very high ABV barrel strength single malt called "Velvet Hammer". I had to point out to him that I did not plagerise his name because the suggestion came from USA. He wasn't overly upset as he has almost sold out.

I don't think you read or understood Mars's question. quote Mars "With that in mind, do you all have a minimum time you rest your proofed spirits before bottling?" I had a look at a screen grab example of "Distillers Toolbox" and as far as professional distilling is concerned it is a load of rubbish. It graphics looks pretty cool but it doesn't say if "units" are mass or volume, and if volume there is no temperature correction. In the screen shot, if we say units are mass, then the calculation appears to be (2,000 X 180/110) - 2,000 = 1272.727 (rounded to 1,272.73) If that dilution is done the final proof will be 120.44 proof which is no where near 110 pr (could someone check if 120.44 is correct, it is a big difference but I can't see a mistake) If we use volumes and assume all temperatures are at 60 F then we get 112.8 proof, a bit closer but still way off. That way of calculating has not allowed for any volume contraction, and certainly has not allowed for the final bit of contraction over the next day or so that Mars has observed. From my observations I agree with Mars, that final proof takes time to stabilise

It is probably unusual from such a high proof, but could your diluted 190 be producing a flock? ie. louching I have seen a white deposit in the bottom of tanks that have dried out after being used to dilute whisky

If a businesses can make money by diluting and repacking bulk spirits that is OK with me as long as it is specified on the label. But don't even hint with words or by omission that it is hand crafted or even "small batch" as the active component was mass produced. The following snips from the article sum it up for me "The hard-core, “grain to glass” distillers grow their own grain and do their own distilling, blending, aging, and bottling. That’s an expensive way to make a bottle of liquor, and the product is priced accordingly. So, understandably, they get a bit grumpy when competitors buy alcohol by the railcar and then repackage it as a “vodka handcrafted in (whererever)” "And some people—people like me, for instance—would argue that when it comes to vodka, the true craftsmen are the marketers, not the producers."

The attached image is typical of the pressure relief system used in most of the distilleries in Tasmania. Same principal mentioned in the above quote but it looks a little more professional It is just a longer version of the "U" trap under a wash basin. At least one side of the "U" is clear to see that it contains enough water

Maybe you had better explain hydrodiffusion as you see it. As far as I know it is just steam distillation with the steam coming in from the top of your botanicals instead of the bottom. Is this what you mean?

I remember reading a thread on this over 2 years ago I think the conclusion then was to rinse your bottles with the spirit you are botttleing. (tip the rinsings back to your tank before the filter--assuming the only contaminant is a small amount of dust) I do that but still get condensation in quite a few bottles. My theory is the spirit still contains a very small amount of oils. This sticks to the glass and acts as a repellent, the condensation can't run off the glass in a thin continuous film so it forms droplets. If my theory is correct then well made vodka won't produce this condensation Rinsing the bottles with detergent may stop the problem, but make sure the bottles are well drained. The same thing happens with a SCUBA mask,in that case divers generally spit in the mask and rinse, that reduces the surface tension and you get no fogging. Maybe you could spit then rinse each bottle

Thanks Sherman. I am using 20% malted rye + 80 unmalted, adding beta-gucanase as well. I know I could search for an online calculator, but could you tell me how many proof gallons 1200 lbs should yield? Do you think the increase in Brix with stepping is fermentable or just an increase in an unfermenable?

I am using a hand held Brix scale refractometer to estimate the amount of sugar in my rye mash. My theoretical alcohol yield per ton should be higher so I am trying some sample stepped mashes and it is increasing the Brix reading quite a bit. They are only samples so I can't easily ferment them out to see if the increase in Brix is actually fermentable sugars. I do know that a refractometer "assumes" that there is only sugar and water present in the sample but there are a lot of other chemicals in the mix that will "obscure" the reading (same problem with obscuration with a hydrometer) If any of you have a good understand the limitations of refractometers, I would like to be educated.

Here is a link to a similar discussion I started a couple of years ago http://adiforums.com/index.php?showtopic=2071&hl=

Buffalo Trace Demonstrates Another Way to Sour A Mash. From early 2011 http://adiforums.com/index.php?showtopic=1637&hl=%2Bbuffalo+%2Bsour

I suspect "airing out" is not just oxidation. It is also evaporation of some of the more volatile components of spirit just off the still. If new spirit is immediately sealed in glass then I assume these volatiles are trapped. If any of you more scientific types can tell us what is happening I would like to know more.

"As always there are many and varied opinions about the type of stills used ------------------------------------------------ 60%+ of all Scotch whiskey is made on column stills. The only industries that typically use pot stills are microdistilleries, batch pharmaceuticals, and college undergrad labs. Cheers. McKee " John, that statement could well be correct if you are talking VOLUME But, I am pretty sure I would be correct in saying 100% of Scotch Single Malt is made in traditional pot stills (Alembic, no column and plates)