Reflux for Maple Syrup

[Ugly]

I was checking out some dairy storage tanks for another project when I came upon a used reverse osmis unit that they use to pull water out maple sap before they finish boiling it down.

I was thinking I could use a reflux (could easily build a large unit for this) column to make maple syrup... Just distill out the water until the syrup gets to the 90 per cent point and then boil like hell on a charcoal fire to add that tang of particulate ash that helps give it character.

What led me to this thinking is I often wonder how much of that boiling vapour I give off in the spring is carrying away maple flavour into the wind.... I was thinking a four inch column on a 40 gallon plain metal drum.... continual feed via pump for the sap... I'd get my fourty gallons of syrup fast this year if it worked. I suppose if it didn't work out I could use the column for fuel and sell my three inch to someone else for fuel...

Any reason this is bad or a good idea vs a traditional boiling ? (we usually use 20 gal cast kettle on a fire).

[Dnderhead]

Do not thank it whould work very good, with a still you are separating water/ alcohol with what you want to do is evaporate off water .
works at different temperatures/purpose. something that mite help is a vacuum evaporator.

[Ugly]

I could build a vacuum still just as easily, I build my own refrigeration equipment and if if Zeolite A3 wasn't so easy to use for drying alcohol I would have done it already.

I don't really get your point though, a still can be used to distill water. So if I distill water from maple sap, what's left in the boiler is the minerals and sugars that compose maple syrup. oui?

[Husker]

I seriously think you are over (or under) thinking the situation.

What you are trying to do is drive off the water. What purpose AT ALL would you have for usage of a reflux still?? A pot still, possibly, at least if keeps the kettle covered. However, there is no reason at all to boil and re-boil the water coming off the syrup dozens of times. That is the purpose of a reflux still, to re-boil the ethanol over and over again.

I really think dunder's suggestion of a vacuum still is your best choice. 2nd best, is simply a boiling kettle. 3rd best, a simple pot still, and worst choice a reflux still.

The vacuum still would take the least power, and operate most quickly. Also, you would not have to use such high powers to boil the water out. I am not sure if that is a good thing or not? I do not know if the syrup needs heat to 'change' it properly, or if you simply need to remove the water. If simply removing the water, then vacuum boiling would do it most efficiently.

H.

[Dnderhead]

I was not thanking of a still I was thinking of a vacuum kettle, Iv Thought of one to do sauce in. could be "cooked down" at lower temps
as not to burn

[Ugly]

Stupid me, missed the word "evaporator" and filled it in with still. Yes that would work nicely since it does already work in syrup production for the large producers.

Husker, I distill a little water for purity now with the pot still, figured I'd get some very clean water by high output reflux but if that's not true, no point in trying for a double win (syrup and pure water). I have commercial grade water softeners (four big resin tanks) for ion exchange, injectors for iron removal, filters for sediment removal and UV sterilizers... the output water goes into soaps and body products with the biodiesel processing giving me all the pure glycerin I can handle. I try for complete cyclical reuse of all ancillary products for everything we make ... it makes me happy. We make a little syrup every year (40ish gal or more) I was just thinking of the ~1600 gallons of water vapour that goes away when I do it. That much super pure water would refill the hydronic heating and storage tanks once a year at no cost for processing except the charcoal we make. It would be cheaper than testing the water and rebalancing it with boiler additives.

Only column I have now does my methanol runs, I've never made water nor ethanol with it so figured I'd bounce it off someone else.

Not looking good so far.

[Husker]

Husker, I distill a little water for purity now with the pot still, figured I'd get some very clean water by high output reflux but if that's not true

A reflux still have produce less product for the same amount of power input. This is due to the refluxing action. The reflux happens due to removing the heat from the vapor, condensing it, and having this liquid returned to the column. Most reflux stills use 3 times (or much more) the amount of power per liter of output as a pot still. The pot still is pretty close to the same amount of power to evaporate reduce as simply boiling in a kettle.

Note, when you are distilling water, you are not going to get it much more pure, than you do when run through a pot still. The reason you need a reflux still when producing booze, is that you start out with a mixture such as H2O and ethanol, when you distill, both solutions will boil off. When you pot still once, you end up with a water/ethanol mix. When running, the pot still starts off stronger in ethanol than what was in the boiler, and slowly the % of ethanol reduces, and when all of the ethanol is gone, all that is left is water. So, if you take that stronger output from the beginning, and re-run it, again, it is stronger in the beginning. What a reflux still does, is to allow this process to be repeated over and over again (dozens of times possibly). Thus, running a reflux still will produce a stronger ethanol % (up to azeotrope 96% or so). However, if you are simply boiling tap water, this multiple distillations simply is not needed to get pure water.

H.

[Ugly]

OK, I'm convinced. The refluxing of the sap/water won't give me much if anything at all in terms of a benefit /energy input ratio. Makes sense given the nature of the components of the sap.

A big ass pot still would give me the water and the syrup without the wasted energy of the reflux action... I use charcoal by the way, we produce enough charcoal to run the gassfiers and sell in the store and I always have a bunch left over so it gets used for everything that requires heat these days..... Benefit with sap is it's not dangerous around open flame.

I'm going to compromise since I dont' know how fast it will be and try it in my exisitng ethanol pot still. If it works well I could always scale it up enough for next years run. Sap will be running as soon as snow gets down in the bush. I'm thinking it might be quicker than the kettle since it's enclosed and I'm wondering what the effect might be on the final quality as the cooked syrup will have been sheltered from the atmosphere.

Thanks gents, appreciate the thoughts.