sterlingchap wrote:But please, next time you cite that something (different) will work provide a clear statement that you are referring to a different layout. It would also help if your URL takes the reader DIRECTLY to the page you cite, rather than leaving him/her to root through so many pages, guessing all the time which diagram to look for.
(Anyone else wanting it, it's on page 23 of the post!)
Truth be known there is no way to link directly to page 23 as I have just verified... Now, let's drop the tone being presented and get back on topic... Comparisons of concepts are what move this hobby forward and I haven't seen any problems with the information discussed...
And just to throw out some advice to novices reading this topic, don't even consider putting the concepts presented here into practice until such time that you have a full understanding of the manual processes and have become proficient at them...
Let's keep it civil... While I'll never be a proponent of these techniques I'm still following along with an open mind...
The title of the thread is auto/preplan cuts? (using bottles & airpressure). You will find that I did say that idea was used by Riku and Cheshire looked at pages 23 and 24 and agreed this was the concept he was trying to get across.
If I have offended you I apologise there was no intent; I would have attached Riku's drawing but I had not asked his permission for that so I had to link and try to describe it.
The comment on the syphon was to avoid misleading information being distributed, and I agree it was not your comment.
As far as I am aware Riku used to use this system on low wine runs when making neutral. His system would suppress tails and he knew within a very small amount, by calculation and experience, where his heads cut would have to be made.
I could see some value in it when distilling smaller amounts of macerated neutral eg ouzo etc when you know the flavor profile of the output.
I have no interest in ruffling any feathers, and have removed all of my posts on this subject that i'm able to remove.
The bottom line is that Cheshirefool's diagram will not function, as he postulated it.
That is no big deal because he published it questioning us as to its viability. Note that for his trouble, it was suggested that he was a troll!!!!
Indeed, not very nice. And that suggestion remains posted......
I think we all agree (now) that his proposal won't work as described.
A somewhat modified set-up (originator: Riku) CAN be made to work, with reservations from the experienced distillers here - especially regarding safety and "smearing".
Which rather underlines the value of the discussion which Cheshirefool originated: if safety and smearing can be properly accomodated, is there benefit in automating pre-set, successive volumes of distillate?
I think there can be if the operator so desires.
Anyway, I'm now moving on to think about something else, for now at least!
Chap
if the air outlet hose was fitted with some kind of floating ball valve, it would reliably cut off at the preset level.
if the subsequent jar(s) sat uphill of the first one, the the path of least resistance would be to the first jar until it locked, then onto the second until it locked, so on and so forth. could be usefull with set 100 ml jars or something, and make the cut later from set portions.
but id still have to play with the reflux levels to keep the purity up. hmmm. maybe go all high tech and fit some kind of sensor to a parrot beak and electrically control the reflux levels?
im in a tiny little shoebox apartment, so i can see the still, the thermometer, and the collection jar from the sofa. as such this whole thing would not work out any easier (and would also rob a man of the pride involved in a job well done...) but i might have a bit of a play anyway!
idiot ideas multiplying.....
j
It's much easier to cut a bit off than weld a bit on...
