Stovetop Thumper

[Usge]

hmm...it's 1/2 inch coming off the head. That's one of the drawbacks with all of the Colonel's designs (small lynearms). The Ga Ridge head I have uses 3/8" and that head is a monster! (tall, big).

Again, I'm wondering why this would not be a problem for running low-wines...but is for running wash? (confused). If it's boiling too hard for the wash...would it not also be for low-wines..which would require even "less" heat/energy to get it going? So, just to be clear...are you saying just make the current lynearm extension from the gooseneck head to the inline thumper 1"? (ie., 1/2 to 1".....the 1" to 1/2" back into the thumper head). Or are you saying make everything from the gooseneck head down to the bottom of the thumper 1"? (ie., make the inline thumper 2" over 1" instead of 1" over 1/2")?

Would another option be...to put some kind of diffuser in the bottom of the outlet on the thump head...to break up the air into smaller bubbles? Maybe put some copper mesh up in there to make it fizz more than burble out the slant cut end?

Here's what I'm thinking (since I'm restricted to stove top)...buy a 7.5gal HD pot from brewhaus that has a 2" tri-clamp fitting on the top. And start making different heads for it. I see a plan coming after my vacation.

[LWTCS]

Again, I'm wondering why this would not be a problem for running low-wines...but is for running wash? (confused). If it's boiling too hard for the wash...would it not also be for low-wines..which would require even "less" heat/energy to get it going? So, just to be clear...are you saying just make the current lynearm extension from the gooseneck head to the inline thumper 1"? (ie., 1/2 to 1".....the 1" to 1/2" back into the thumper head). Or are you saying make everything from the gooseneck head down to the bottom of the thumper 1"? (ie., make the inline thumper 2" over 1" instead of 1" over 1/2")?

Kinda went cross eyed tryin to read that .

Please keep in mind that I don't really know shit. Just thinking out loud more than any thing.

Again, I'm wondering why this would not be a problem for running low-wines...but is for running wash? (confused).

Wash temp is hotter (which is an initial concern that you didn't have enough heat) but that will also mean that within the primary boiler, It will be more active/agressive/bubbly and therefore produce more pressure through the smaller diameter lyne arm.

The larger diameter to the thumper will allow for more vapor/heat to get to the thumper, but at a more relaxed pace. Thus reducing the likelihood of turbulance within your thumper smearing your vapor.
I think a defuser would help but the larger sized tubing would be best IMO.

Or some shit like that there.

I certainly can't coment on what tubing sizes should be.

[Barney Fife]

What's that thing(larger copper, with the smaller copper 'loop' under it?) on top of the boiler? I just now also noticed that everything flows down and away from the boiler as soon as it leaves the boiler; you're missing out on some reflux there.

On my pot still, I have about a foot of 2"(my lyne arm) going straight up from the boiler, and then it goes into my liebig(1-1/2" over 1"). I can play around with the heat a bit, and can use a fan on the lyne arm to create a bit of reflux when it's time for cuts, if I'm making a spirit run using the pot still(rarely do, but I can). I collect way faster than you do, also, looking at your charts. Not sure how the designer figured your still would be run, but it looks to me that he's got some things backwards, as well as being undersized in the lyne arm department. A 3/4" pipe has a little over twice the area of a 1/2" pipe, and 3/4" pipe and fittings are still pretty cheap and are available everywhere. If money's tight, I'd say try replacing all the 1/2" from the boiler to the keg with 3/4", and make it run uphill to the keg(raise the keg). This way you've slowed the vapor speed, and any natural reflux will flow back to the boiler instead of the keg, leaving more oils and tails in the boiler, and you can induce more reflux if you want to by blowing a fan on this new lyne arm, either throughout the run, or just at the start and/or end(I'd try it the whole run so the thumper only gets high ABV). I bet even without the keg, going to 3/4", uphill, to the condenser would improve the performance of your rig a whole bunch. If money's not short, I'd go 1" all the way to the keg, or add a couple feet of 1" or 1-1/2" straight up from the boiler, then come down with 3/4" to the keg(or condenser). Or.... Lotsa ways to build a still, and since I've never run a thumper setup, read the above as just my thoughts on what I'd try if I had your setup, based on my experience with those that I've run in the past.

[goose eye]

look at that first picture. why aint you blockin your doublein keg up to plane an savein some of them pipes?
do that type of condencer call for that


so im tole

[Usge]

Kinda went cross eyed tryin to read that .

Wash temp is hotter (which is an initial concern that you didn't have enough heat) but that will also mean that within the primary boiler, It will be more active/agressive/bubbly and therefore produce more pressure through the smaller diameter lyne arm.

The larger diameter to the thumper will allow for more vapor/heat to get to the thumper, but at a more relaxed pace. Thus reducing the likelihood of turbulance within your thumper smearing your vapor.
I think a defuser would help but the larger sized tubing would be best IMO.

Or some shit like that there.

I certainly can't coment on what tubing sizes should be.

Sorry Larry.... (for confusion)
I understand now what you are saying about reducing vapor pressure with larger diameter while still carrying same amount of heat. All the confusion above about what diameter, was more about asking "where" it needs to be bigger. At the head of the pot? (ie., replacing the lynearm from the potcap) Or would just the lynearm extension that attaches to the top of the thump head do it? Or does the inline thump head "also" need to be 1" flow down into the barrel to match from there? OR all 3?

I was just thinking before I go carving up this gooseneck head, or reworking this all the way from scratch......I might be better off just starting with a new pot and building something from 2" tubing that I can play with.

[Usge]

What's that thing(larger copper, with the smaller copper 'loop' under it?) on top of the boiler? I just now also noticed that everything flows down and away from the boiler as soon as it leaves the boiler; you're missing out on some reflux there.....

That's the Colonel's gooseneck design. And yes..."all" his designs are choked at the lynearm (very small lynearm tubes for their relative size). The loop over the cap..is the lynearm tube. It exits below the very top dead center of the cap..and then curls up and over to form a liebig (which is too short to really work properly). The 1" tube coming straight up off the top of the cap is simply a brace..to hold the liebig/lynearm. The cap is sealed under it.

Lots of good advice Barney. I know most people are using 2" (or larger) column's that come straight up in one form or another off the pot/keg — which also allow them to be packed. But, most of the takeoff's I've seen from there...reduce down to 1/2 inch. ...particularly for anything 10gals or under pot size. Hell, popcorn used a 1 or 1.5 inch worm...but his still was two hundred gallons and was pressure/gasoline fired. I'm understanding what you are saying. But it sure seems at first glance a bit overkill for a 5 gal potstill. The pot is actually 8 gallons or so in volume. But, the fill level is just to where it starts to taper. You only fill the bottom part. I know you are right in regards to lynearm diameter. My little 5 liter alembic (which flows easily) has a lynearm (gooseneck) that's larger diameter than the one on the head I'm using now is. But, it tapers down to 1/4".

I also have another still head (the Ga Ridge), which is tall, straight through from the top of the same pot, that tapers with inverted cones and has CM system inside the head. The problem it has...is a 3/8" lynearm But, I could control the vapor speed with the CM, or simply low heat...given it's height. Don't know. I'd like to get this figured out (at least why it's not working) before moving on if I could. But, part of me thinks I'm probably better off just punting here...and making my own build off a new pot using 2" tube.

[Usge]

look at that first picture. why aint you blockin your doublein keg up to plane an savein some of them pipes?
do that type of condencer call for that


so im tole

Truth is goose...that wasn't my main thought at all (saving copper). In my small space...my first thoughts are safety and logistics/space. Get it out of the way...so anybody tromping through isn't going to trip over anything or knock anything over. So, I was mainly trying to fit it in the space I had....and the 10' of 1/2 inch was only 7 bucks. That was the cheap/easy part. I just had to plumb it to fit. The liebig condenser does need a certain height to clear the counter on the other side and have enough downangle to still work — which is why I made the thumphead..the height it is. You are right...the whole thing could come "up"..and I could make the thump head shorter. If the problem is related to vapor speed/vs diameter...I'm not sure moving it up would have solved the issue though. I might have even made it worse (shorter pipes..more pressure).

[LWTCS]

Would be nice to figger out just to help dial in and confirm some understanding.

Be to bad (maybe not) to have to build a whole new shootin match.

As an aside, I wonder why the Colonel chokes it down like that? Tryin to save a few bucks?

[Usge]

I agree LW. That's why I'm trying to figure out a way to figure this out without having to carve up my heads. (I paid more for this one head than it would cost me to rebuild an entire stlll from scratch) But, if it comes to rebuilding the entire thing from the pot to the thumper....not really worth doing it...given the limitations of the head. Be easier to work out on a different pot that allows for use of 2" pipe straight up. From there...can do anything.

To fix this...I'd have to cut the stop of the cap off...(which is 16 ga copper welded), cut the liebig/lynearm off and cap it, then try to soft solder some kind of pipe or connector into the top.

[Barney Fife]

I know most people are using 2" (or larger) column's that come straight up in one form or another off the pot/keg — which also allow them to be packed. But, most of the takeoff's I've seen from there...reduce down to 1/2 inch. ...particularly for anything 10gals or under pot size. Hell, popcorn used a 1 or 1.5 inch worm...but his still was two hundred gallons and was pressure/gasoline fired. I'm understanding what you are saying.


Usge, you're confusing the lyne arm/column for the condenser. Popcorn's worm is a condenser; once the vapor reaches that, all the work's been done, and you have what you have. Even OD was using a 1/2" condenser off his 4" 'flute' column for a while. It's the column/lyne arm that defines the ABV and speed you'll collect at, as well as flavors. We can choke off a large lyne arm/column when going into the condenser; no problem there. But with your still, there's no lyne arm/column, since that entire thing on top of the boiler shoots downward, so any and all reflux that is happening runs down to the condenser(or your keg, in your case) instead of going back to the boiler for further refining.

Have you asked this Colonel what his thing is up there, as well as what he thinks it's supposed to do?

[goose eye]

you put your tester in that juice after a charge. if it been boilin good wont test much

so im tole

[Usge]

Usge, you're confusing the lyne arm/column for the condenser. Popcorn's worm is a condenser; once the vapor reaches that, all the work's been done, and you have what you have. Even OD was using a 1/2" condenser off his 4" 'flute' column for a while. It's the column/lyne arm that defines the ABV and speed you'll collect at, as well as flavors. We can choke off a large lyne arm/column when going into the condenser; no problem there. But with your still, there's no lyne arm/column, since that entire thing on top of the boiler shoots downward, so any and all reflux that is happening runs down to the condenser(or your keg, in your case) instead of going back to the boiler for further refining.

Have you asked this Colonel what his thing is up there, as well as what he thinks it's supposed to do?

Barney...I'm sorry. It's might fault (for confusion). I understand what you are saying about the lyne arm — as it being narrow/diameter and that it's position..non-vertical...is not providing reflux back the pot. But, I was referring to your suggestion to run the same 1" through the condenser. Yes...I talked to the Colonel about the restricted lynarms, extended run times, etc. as well as his use of plastic tubing for distillate take off. If you've ever talked to the Colonel...you know about how it goes. You ask a question. He answers back something totally different. You ask the same question again. He answers something else.

You ask him what time it is....he says...."yes". If you asked him should you do A, or should you do B. His answer would be....that C is very good. When I asked him about the small lynarme and how I was seeing extended run times, etc., ...he suggested I could add a 2nd liebig and maybe it would run more like I wanted. I asked him about my 12+hour run times on the CM head..and he said that was unusual. Everybody I've talked to...who runs one of his CM head designs..says the same thing (takes forever). So, I don't know...I think the Colonel spends more time building them...than he does running them. I'm not saying anything bad about him...cause he was very straight up otherwise to deal with. But, it is what it is.

Not much good crying over spilt milk now. But, for what I paid for these things....I'm not likely to carve them up just to experiment with. I could build an entire new still for less than what "one" of these heads cost me. I bought them as a set...cause I thought it was a good solution at the time (other than building something that I had no experience with) and would give me more flexibility, room to experiment with 2 different head designs...than just buying a larger copper alembic would.

EDIT: Barney, after thinking about (looking at) it some more...the loop lynearm on the gooseneck does in fact go up hill out of the cap...and does not turn downhill until it loops over the top. As I said before, point taken on it the lynearm being too small, and that obviously restricts flow-rate without smearing. But, the cap and pot sides all run down to the pot...and anything that refluxes naturally out of the lynearm until the loop turns over head..will also run back into the pot. Still not an optimal design...but as the Colonel built it, the original liebig starts right at the apex of the "upward" turn of the lynearm. So as it was originally designed to be operated...(using original liebig), the lynearm (despite being too small) is in fact turned "uphill" as it were...up and and to the point of the liebig. There just isn't anyway for me to change this out for 1" to test to see if that's what's causing the problem. I'll need to build another head to do it.

[Usge]

you put your tester in that juice after a charge. if it been boilin good wont test much

so im tole

That makes sense goose. But, where's the alc going? It's not coming out the other end? (liebig). It's not leaking out of the barrel (that I can see). Where does it go if it's boiled off in the barrel?

[Usge]

And btw guys...thanks so much for sticking with me and following this along. And happy labor day!!

[goose eye]

i aint sure im follerin your problem right. but im guessin it keep getin refluxed just like
one of them upright outfits. have you put your tester in your thumper juice after a charge.
have you used a mirrer at your bulls dick to see if it all getin condenced.

col aint gonna say this or that is the problem cause that kinda jams him up with the law.

so im tole

[Usge]

Yes goose...I checked the liebig end...and didn't see anything comin out. (no obvious vapor). That doesn't mean it ain't sneakin through. I did not put my hydrometer to the thumper juice. Should have thought of that.

Yea..I guess it makes sense about the Colonel. Like I said...he's a straight up guy...will do what you want as far as build. But, if you are looking for anwers/advice...you might as well use one of those crystal 8 balls.

Again: thanks to all (LW, Barney, goose) for trying to see me though this. But, at this point...in order to really do whats needed to get to the bottom of this...I'm going to need to build a new head — something I can play with, change, and re-test, etc. It's kind of pointless for me to keep going without being able to really change/test the things that have already been suggested. I plan on getting started with it as soon as I get back from vacation. I'll update this thread...when I have something built that addresses what's been discussed already. I think it will be really good for me anyway...just in general..since I've been using nothing but these designs for 2 years now.

[LWTCS]

(Kiwi says this all the time) As a matter of intrest,,,,,,,,,,,I would really like to see how a conventional (thumper) vapor path copes with a more upright cylindrical thumper.
I'd like to get more feed back on how well a thumper would perform/behave with a more "columm shaped" vessel.

Just thinking out loud. But I'm wondering (based on my rig) if an elongated single thumper will do a better job of separating a wash.

Charge the thumper with flavored liquid and let the fractions stack within the thumper is what I'm thinking. Reduce the smearing on the single run washes.

This concept works great with the dephlag and a return line.

[Usge]

Yep..I see people getting good results with those LW. I'm giving up on the thumper. It worked fine/great with low-wines. But, once the abv gets down well below that...it just falls completely down. I'm going to build out 2 heads...one a straight up pot/stripper based on 2" short column over to a liebig. And one based on a 2" column with deplag at the top (1" inside 2"), but using packing instead of plates in the column. I'm hoping it might be a more "tuneable" system. I also thought about going 3" instead of 2", but I think with 7.5gal pot...probably 2" is more than enough — and the parts are a LOT cheaper.

I just got back from vacation...so just getting started collecting parts, etc. But, I figure its about time I built my own rig so I can play and not feel like I'm hacking up a $$$ part to change things up.

[Usge]

It's "baaaack". Stovetop Thumper II.

So, built myself a rig that I can play with. Here's the new model taking into account most of the comments/advice given here. First, I started with a 8gal pot, with ferrule. That's a 2" pipe about 8" up and over to 1" pipe, then down to 1/2" at the connection. No more loop-d-loop over the top thang (as per several persons mentioning issues with the design). Then, I raised the thump keg up and shortened the distance as much as possible to the stove to drive more heat (as per goose). I shortened the thump head a few inches as well. I ran higher abv low-wines instead of water (as per Dunder)

So, how did the adjustments fare?

Single run on 6 gals of All-Bran at 11%, 1 quart of 45% low-wine (corn) in thumper.

The Good: heat up time was definitely shortened. Within 3 mins of the lynearm heating up, the first drips started coming over. That quickly built to a kind of broken stream. It was outputting at 40ml per min, but in a sort of broken/dribble/stream. Im not exactly sure how much each thing contributed to the shortened warm up time.

The Bad: it made no difference as to heads/tails compression and reflux when single running wash. Results were the same (ie., basically a potstill run that starts out a small percentage higher in abv and falls linearly as it goes.) "The magic" never happened.

I'm coming to the conclusion, based on this and other experiments, that there is a threshold amount of volume of alc that has to be present before that kind of compression/reflux can occur and be sustained (ie., for the "magic" to occur). I've got another thread going in the Theory Section to discuss some of those findings. I already know from previous experiments that increasing the abv of the thumper charge..would not affect this. It might make the run start out a few points higher...that's about it. So, I would like to find out exactly what abv still charge in the pot...it would take to break out of the linear, falling abv/rising temp and flatten it out..ie., maintain constant abv for a good portion of the run. Secondly would be to find out if this holds regardless of which reflux system I use (ie., bubble cap, boka, CM, thumper), or whether it varies ..and by how much. But, that's for another thread The "theory" would suggest that no matter what you start with in the pot, that it should do this reflux "magic" the same way....perhaps the only difference being that if you start out wiht low abv, it would sustain a lower average abv over time. But, this has not been what the empirical data suggests! That's enough to know that it has an impact on the use of a thumper. I'll leave the rest for further discussion in the other forum.

Here are the run results of the run on Stovetop Thumper II.
1:40 from heatup till first drops. Flow-rate was average of 200ml per 5-6min range for first 1/2 run...and that expanded to about 8-9mins per 200ml towards the end of the run as it slowed down.

150ml 81% (fores)
200ml 80%
200ml 79%
200ml 78%
200ml 75%
200ml 73%
220ml 70%
200ml 67%
200ml 65%
200ml 62%
200ml 59%
200ml 55%
200ml 52.5%
200ml 50%
200ml 46.5%
200ml 45%
Flushed out rest down to 35%

A final note on the above: As you can see from the data, I'm not "loosing" alc (ie., vapor leak, etc). What's going in, is coming out. The thumper is only working in terms of raising the abv perhaps a point or two.
Late addition: The thumper juice volume seemed to be about 1/4 the volume of the barrel. I think that's lower than before (used to end up about 1/2 full I think). Don't know if any got sucked back up during cooling off.
But, the thumper juice measured 5%. So, again...didn't leave much behind.

[rad14701]

Usage, the only way to attain and maintain a high %ABV for a majority of the run is through the use of a rig that produces a high amount of reflux... A pot still with a thumper will produce somewhat higher %ABV across the range but it will diminish progressively just as a standard pot still run does... Reflux and slow collection rates are the only way to hold the %ABV of the spirits as high as possible... But then you will also be stripping more flavor as well...

Gotta commend your desire to continue experimenting...

[Usge]

Thanks Rad

You might want to look back a few posts/pages in this thread then....cause I've already done thumper runs on low-wines vs wash...that produced a dead flat abv curve most of the way through the run maintaining higher abv through the middle. This is the subject of my other thread and the results that were posted there, were taken from runs listed here.

[ptech]

... I'm giving up on the thumper ...

WOW. When I first heard of the Thumper concept, I imediately realized that I'm a thumper kind of guy...it was love at first sight. So I've been searching and searching and reading and reading to learn as much as I can about thumpers...then my search turned up this thread where Usge gave up on the thumper.

I feel so deflated now. I mean if Usge gave up on thumpers then why would I have any reason to think that I'll be able to make a properly functional thumper rig that does the suposed magic and works right.

I know Usge said that two years ago....and maybe things have changed for Usge over after he gave up on thumpers. So if you're reading this Usge, please let me know if you've had any recent success with thumpers?

...or even if you haven't, would you please point me in the right direction as to which book has the most to say about thumpers or which articles or forum posts would be most useful for me as I contemplate my first still. I was planning a pot still with a thumper. But now I don't feel so confident about thumpers....help salvage my dream of thumper

ptech

[LWTCS]

Naw he didn't give up. His sails were only temporarily deflated. He likely realized it was time to scale up past the stove top to make this basic system work best.
He built another.
This thread is old and the dialog within is certainly time stamped.

Thumpers are very useful and I would not do with out mine.

[Usge]

Ya. It was more a combination of understanding how they work (adjusting expectations) and making some significant adjustments based on these experiences where I had constantly smeared runs with small tubing, etc. You aren't going to get a flat abv run on a thumper when single running wash. It's may increase the abv slightly...but then fall through the run just a potstill run does. Once you add enough alc to the equation (ie., low-wines) things start to change.

The things I've learned:
Input side and output side of thumper each have different functional needs. The input side needs to be "open" (not reduced diameter) and it needs to be short and direct in order to more efficiently transfer heat/vapor to drive the thumper.

Output side is no different than any potstill. It needs space/open area to keep the vapor from smearing. Putting a small tube here is no different than running a 1/2 tube on your kegger and wondering why everything is smeared together.

I documented my new build and thoughts here:
http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... &start=168

[ptech]

...open area to keep the vapor from smearing. ...wondering why everything is smeared together.

1) what exactly does the word "smeared" mean.
2) what is the oposite of smeared

the word "smeared" should be added to the glossary because I see that word a lot but I can't find the exact technical definition of it. I have no clue

kind thanks,
ptech

[Usge]

The opposite of smeared is "separated"

When you run more heat...the various fractions of a run (heads, tails, and the parts that make that up) tend to run together more. Sometimes that brings more blended flavor to the run. But, at the extreme..it "smears" all those fractions throughout the run such that you can't find anything that doesn't taste heavy of heads/tails. That's a smeared run.

I use two different words. Blended...is when you've run just the right amount of heat (output rate) to achieve the flavor profile you want to cut from. The various fractions combine smoothly for a range of flavors/taste that you want to cut from. When you run at very low heat, the various fractions of a run based on boiling point...are somewhat in order and more cleanly separated. Sometimes that leaves some rather unpleasant jars which otherwise might seem ok if they were blended more. Smeared is when you've gone too far with the heat...and the entire flavor profile is contaminated with heads/tails such that you can't make a cut on it.

Normally, running too fast (too much heat) will produce a noted "tails" flavor through the middle where you would normally cut. Some people also call this "pulling tails" or pulling tails early. There are diagrams in the new distiller reading lounge under novice guide to cuts by kiwi that clearly show what happens on a potstill under varying heat loads.

With thumpers...all the vapor from first pot is going directly into the liquid in the thumper to be condensed. There's a certain amount of inherent "mixing" that occurs here that you can't take back. This is also something inherent to plates designs (liek bubble plates and sieve plates) where there is suspended liquid at varying heights of the column (like a bunch of inline mini thumpers). There are other thermodyamic actions taking place on a plate, but you get the general idea. Its quite well known here..in the "Flute" threads...that those stills produce a high alc spirit that is "also" embodies a flavorful (grain) taste. So, mixing vapor through liquid in that particular way, tends to infuse a certain amount of flavor(s) as well.

Smearing, is a common problem with thumpers for many reasons. One is, if you screw up your input design...you'll be pushing a LOT of heat to get the thumper in order to heat it enough to get it to start producing vapor. By the time the thumper heats up...if it takes too long...you've got half your run already pushed into the thumper before anything starts to come out. This can also happen if you overfill your thumper from the start, (particularly with water). You want your thumper to come online (meaning start producing distillate) from within 15-30 mins tops from the time you start hearing it thump (bubble). If it's taking longer than that, it's gonna muff up your run. Th'ats my experience anyway.

As to smearing on the output side...this is no different than the concept of any potstill head/lynearm. Larger, open spaces..allow the rising vapor to slow and separate more cleanly. Small tiny tubes..(given the same amount of heat) increase the velocity of the vapor and run it all together. (ie., smeared). You have to remember, you are separating things (although not purely) by boiling point. This produces numerous compounds or fractions through the run as the temp rises. Cooler vapor is higher in purity of ethanol. Warmer vapor is not. Pushing the heat...will collapse those fractions to varying degrees. It can be both a good and bad thing. (ie. the difference between "blending" and "smearing"). So, it is somewhat subjective. But, given the thumper takes a certain amount of heat just to operate/drive it...there is always some inherent "blending" and infusion of flavors that goes on to start with.

Which brings me to my last point about smearing....the thumphead I was using. The outer tube where the vapor was escaping...was being heated constantly and increasing in temp by the input tube coming in. As the vapor separated from the mixture in the thumper...it the higher proof (lower boiling point) vapor...was met by a super heated tube at the highest point before it was to be taken off. This was also contributing to the smearing issue in my opinion.

I have more details on this in the stickie thread on thumpers, including some early run numbers/stats.