Latch selenoid valves on closed loop cooling system in case of power outage

[jocko]

I am designing our closed loop cooling system and would like to build in some protection should the power fail and the pumps stopped pumping water to the still.

I am thinking that putting a latching selenoid to automatically bring in city water should a power failure occur.  Latching valves/selenoids automatically open (or close) when the power goes out.  To keep city water out of my cooling loop (dilute glycol or change the water chemistry that might be set to keep bacterial growth out, etc.) I could even have check valves (or a "normally open" selenoid to shut off when power fails) to keep city water purely going to the still, then back to the drain once it's been through the condenser/dephleg, keeping closed loop cooling water intact. 

Thoughts?   Anyone done this?  Seems like a very inexpensive way to address concerns about what happens when the power fails, as the still will have enough energy to keep producing vapor for a while after the power fails, even if the boiler shuts off. 

[SlickFloss]

Unless you have some absolutely crazy gnarly set up the likes of which the industry has never seen or maybe a wicked vacuum set up realistically as soon as you lose steam generation your still is going to stop producing vapor rather soon after. Almost immediately.

 

Valves of all types can be purchased to fail open and closed. Keeping safety in mind during facility design is great.

[jocko]

In a closed loop cooling water system, the pump is a single point of failure.  Pump fails and you've got the still cranking out ethanol vapor. What are people doing to protect against a failure?  Two pumps?  On separate circuits?  

[Bier Distillery]

Don't leave the still unattended.

[jocko]

So my insurance company and fire dept can rest easy if I promise not to ever leave the still unattended. 

[Kindred Spirits]

You really never should leave a still unattended, that is just asking for trouble. I know some still manufacturers claim to be fully automatic, but if something fails you still lose a day of production at the best and could kill people at the worst.

If anything were to happen, it would also negatively craft distilleries in general.

[jocko]

Not sure why the assumption is that this is intended to allow you to leave the still unattended. It’s intended to demonstrate safety-first thinking to the fire department, the insurance company and to guests and employees.

Why would desireng to have redundancy imply a desire to leave this still unattended? 

 

[Bier Distillery]

 

24 minutes ago, jocko said:

Not sure why the assumption is that this is intended to allow you to leave the still unattended.

Call it deja vu.

The simplest, cheapest, and best solution for a coolant pump dying is to shut down the still.  The only reason you'd want a redundant pump is if there is no one around to notice the pump died.

There are hundreds of things that could possibly go wrong, a pump dying is just one of them.  Maybe a hose burst, maybe water main pressure failed, etc...

I do have two pumps, but not for redundancy.  One runs during spirit runs, the other during stripping runs.  If both fail I could run off of city water.  But again, that's not for redundancy, it is for efficiency.

BTW, a spare pump is a perfectly good idea.

[SlickFloss]

Yeah operator should turn still off. If your power fails how would a second pump help unless it was air driven or manual etc? Or unless you have a genny. But if you have a genny why do you need a redundancy for power failure?

SOPs presented and explained to authorities coupled with proper training should be enough for your local municipalities. Realistically size scale and scope matter too. How big is the still and how many square feet is the facility and how high is the ceiling?