Meeting time Boka and brain guys.

[mash rookie]

Jumping Jellybeans thread has inspired some fresh silly thoughts in my pumkin. Hang with me here a minute and I will get there.

First let’s look at commercial plated stills. They are similar for alcohol or petroleum. On a continuous petroleum column different products are taken off at different levels.

I will make an assumption that on a commercial continuous alcohol still heads are taken off above the product take off in at least a minimum effort to remove them. Different fractions should be available at different levels.

Okay, Okay. Here we go. I am seeing a slant plate in similar fashion as a perf plate in that it holds a certain volume of distillate. No, it is not purifying it with boiling action but it is holding distillate purified by adjacent packing.

Picture this. Ten slant plates per side. Stuffed with packing like a vacation suitcase. Full plumbing. Upper take offs deliver product. Lower take offs return to boiler or? Reflux condenser only. No product condenser.

Can we take off fractions at different levels?? Take off at levels 8,9,10 for neutral. 6,7,8 for whiskey?

Super Boka? Crazy idea? Pile on guys!

[Prairiepiss]

I see a problem with separate fores/heads and hearts takeoffs on a batch still. First we need to look at why it works on a continuous still.

A continuous still is fed with a never ending stream of fermented beer. In that beer is a mixture of all the different alcohols. So the column is being supplied with a constant supply of all the different alcohols. Now most of the drawings of continuous stills I have seen have a huge amount of plates. This give the separations better accuracy by splitting them in smaller portions. Anyway the column is being fed with all these alcohols and they have a certain place within the column to migrate to. Those that make up what we call fores migrate all the way to the top. Those that make up the heads just below those. Then the hearts below that. And the tails are way down close to the inlet of vapor. So you are pulling off fores at the upper most takeoff heads at the next down hearts down one more and tails at the bottom. The reason they continuously flow their respective cuts is they are being continuously fed enough of those alcohols.

Now let's look at a batch still and why it won't work. You are heating all the beer at the same time. So the column will get stacked with the different alcohols. But this is where its different. Most if not all the fores of the hole run will stack at the top of the column then the heads below it. So now you open the fores valve to start taking it off. What happens? The fores are depleted and there isn't any left at the top of the Columbus to maintain the temp equilibrium to hold them there. Because you removed them. So now the heads have migrated to the top. And your fores takeoff is no longer a fores takeoff. So now your taking off heads and depleting them and your hearts area of the column is slowly moving up as you takeOff the heads. With out the constant feed of equal amounts of fores or heads. It can't maintain the separation sections.

Think about it like this. On a plated still. Does the top plate ever go dry? No because the temp gradient is always moving up the column and so do the respective alcohols. So when all the fores are depleted the heads have moved in to take their spot. And so on and so forth.

So I say on a batch still. Separate takeoffs for the different cuts won't work. Because the temp gradient is ever changing. In a continuous fed still it doesn't change much if any at all. So it does work to a certain extent. The fores and heads still have to pass through the hearts takeoff section. So the hearts will always be tainted to a certain amount.

Just my two nickels.

[Kas]

+1 PP
Also:

Lower take offs return to boiler or?

No point having lower take offs return to the boiler as this will just be the same as having a plated column with only one takeoff at the top. (Since liquid that accumulates on the plates will run back down to the boiler, or further down the column anyway).

[Bonjimmi]

pp... But what if you didnt open plates 8,9,and 10..... and opened plates 5,6, and 7.. to take out the hearts, keeping the fores and heads at top of column and then just make your tails cut.... while being in full reflux..

[flyingdutchman]

Hi Mash,
Let me say I am not an expert on this by any means. It is certainly an interesting idea. However I would have to completely agree with what PP said. I don't see it working on a batch basis for exactly the reason he laid out. Even if we tried to say, not draw off the heads and foeshots leaving them at the top of the column then...
1) It would first be rather tough to calculate (best guess you need a MS or phD in chemical engineering) and even then..
2) The volume of foreshots/heads would probably vary depending on batch size and composition (ie would 2 different batchs might not have exactly the same amount of foreshots and heads)
Sorry

[Frosteecat]

Couldn't you use some sort of pressure plate system or valve that would close off the top section when full, thus trapping the early distillate there? Then you'd just have to have the bottom 2/3rds of your column act like a "new" column for subsequent takeoff...with its own vent, etc. of course. You'd need inline condensers at each stage or maybe your plates themselves can be cooled at will (which I mentioned in the Packed or Plated thread somewhat flippantly~packed, plated columns that were individually cooled.) allowing individual "capture areas". Maybe a plate with a lid...basically a internal cylinder with drain open and close and cooling option. If you had enough of these "chambers" it would look similar to industrial tower distillation columns....

So basically you'd have a "3 in 1" column (you'd have to have a fair idea of end volumes) with a heads, hearts, tails section(s) that work initially as one unit but can be closed off and then run in 2/3rds & then 1/3rd mode. If your column was tall enough I imagine you could even figure out a way to adjust the amount of collection cylinders (each like a mini thumper?)...with some sort of segmented in and out capability...

[LWTCS]

Couldn't you use some sort of pressure plate system or valve that would close off the top section when full, thus trapping the early distillate there?

haha getting close there. Need to "shift" the fraction into a dedicated chamber,,,,hmmmm how can we do that ?:mrgreen:

[mash rookie]

Your points about continuous distillation are correct. With the same beer in, fractions would be dependable. Lets move past that. We do batch distillation.

Lets think about it. I have not run a Boka but know that Boka guys are able to take off heads before commencing their run. There are gone.

We also know that the taller the column the more clean the neutral and that pot stills use a low rise taking flavor congeners.

Now let's look at a batch still and why it won't work. You are heating all the beer at the same time. So the column will get stacked with the different alcohols. But this is where its different. Most if not all the fores of the hole run will stack at the top of the column then the heads below it. So now you open the fores valve to start taking it off. What happens? The fores are depleted and there isn't any left at the top of the Columbus to maintain the temp equilibrium to hold them there. Because you removed them. So now the heads have migrated to the top. And your fores takeoff is no longer a fores takeoff. So now your taking off heads and depleting them and your hearts area of the column is slowly moving up as you takeOff the heads. With out the constant feed of equal amounts of fores or heads. It can't maintain the separation sections.

As you state the temp gradient rises. Hearts will migrate up after heads are taken. That is exactly why this design would work as a multi purpose tool. Nobody is saying you can only use the top plate for heads. It would function like any packed column. The more flavor you want the lower you take off

Think about it like this. On a plated still. Does the top plate ever go dry? No because the temp gradient is always moving up the column and so do the respective alcohols. So when all the fores are depleted the heads have moved in to take their spot. And so on and so forth.

A packed column and a plated column work on different principles

[LWTCS]

If your column was tall enough I imagine you could even figure out a way to adjust the amount of collection cylinders (each like a mini thumper?)...with some sort of segmented in and out capability...

Whu whu whu whu that is genious

[LWTCS]

We only care about one fraction more often than not.....Isolate that fraction...that is the way to go.

[Frosteecat]

Whu whu whu whu that is genious

Coming from you, Sir I take that as a major compliment. Ironically enough I spent a few hours watching your Youtube videos just last night in search of a good thumper method for the column I am working on. Hopefully that isn't facetiousness on your part...
I'm still in the Honeymoon phase where everything seems possible, just limited by my very rudimentary skills. Doesn't mean I can't dream though!!

[LWTCS]

for the guys that are familiar with their recipe and know what their typical yield is it is pretty easy to do.

[LWTCS]

Hopefully that isn't facetiousness on your part...

Not at all Frostee.
I think you are dead on......

[Prairiepiss]

A packed column and a plated column work on different principles

Not really. Same principals. Different method of executing those principals.

And I would say what I had said already about either a packed or plated column. Same temp gradient happens in both types of stills.

And capturing the higher alcohols at the top and not taking them off. I pose the question. Why not take them off and get rid of the chance of them tainting the hearts? They are there. Just go ahead and remove them. Get rid of them.

[LWTCS]

I'll not bore the forum yet again with my approach and certainly not step all over Mash's thread even more with my smart arsed attemp at being a criptic internet likker geekin jerk off.....

[LWTCS]

+1 PP..

[Frosteecat]

haha getting close there. Need to "shift" the fraction into a dedicated chamber,,,,hmmmm how can we do that ?:mrgreen:

I have to head to work but I think isolation/shift doesn't sound like too huge a challenge to me (the guy who can't even keep his parrot from leaking). If you did a series of segments/cylinders that were self filling thumpers and went inline with a female/male threaded union at bottom and top of cylinder, you could, in principal, have an infinite amount of these cylinders in series to the top. I don't relish the idea of unscrewing them during a run but why bother? Just be able to close them off, turn the next one down in the series "on" (i.e. cool in sequence from top to bottom) and so on and so on. You'd just have to calibrate cylinder sizes for each stage of expected or desired removal from the run. I can totally see it in my mind's eye...a series of cylinders with threaded unions and reducers and ball or gate valves, with a big ass pump and lots of hoses spiderwebbing to each segment.


Always send the laziest man to do the hardest job.

[LWTCS]

So I guess I will step on Mash's thread a bit more.

Too much un-needed work there Frostee.... But your aggregate theory is good. All you need is a series of inline chambers that can hold the entire amount of collectable alcohol that is contained within the boiler charge. The very bottom chamber should be large enough so that no previously distilled alcohol can drain back to the boiler......All distilled alcohol stays within the apparatus....

Then then simply cycle the material within the chambers till all of the water is walked downward. As the lighter constituents must occupy the highest chamber(s)

So if we know that a 25 liter boiler charge @ 10% gives us X amount of yeild,,then your apperatus needs to be constructed to hold X amount of liquid plus the amount of discharged waste water that will get displaced to the bottom of the apperatus after the cycling period has run its course.

A thermo placed at each chamber level will allow for a reasonable estimation as to when the yeild is ready to collect at break neck speed,,,,or a site glass at the liquid level of the lower/largest plate liquid level drain.

In essence,,, do all of the distilling before you collect one drop,,,,,of hearts.....Ya gotta pull fores before this bulk cycling operation...............Hey that sounds like my still????

Needless to say this is a batch approach

[Prairiepiss]

If your going to make the chambers big enough to house the different fractions. Why not just run it in full reflux till each chamber equalized to its respective temp. And all the alcohol was in the column. Then just shut it down and cool. The alcohols are already collected in the chambers for you and separated. Just drain each chamber separate after shutdown? Because as soon as you take off any at any point. The one at that point and the ones below it will change. Altering what's in them. If you don't remove them and you get it to the right spot in the run. They will ne right where you want them.

[Frosteecat]

Ah ok. Well that's why I'm in the air conditioned R&D dept and you're stuck out in the shop I guess. We all have our role to play...
I'm willing to help finance such a build!!

[mash rookie]

And capturing the higher alcohols at the top and not taking them off. I pose the question. Why not take them off and get rid of the chance of them tainting the hearts? They are there. Just go ahead and remove them. Get rid of them.

LOL Your not getting it PP. Of course take the heads first. That is obvious. We batch distill. Who the f would want the heads.

Not really. Same principals. Different method of executing those principals.

And I would say what I had said already about either a packed or plated column. Same temp gradient happens in both types of stills.

Yes, in a perfect world with a twenty foot column. In our world NO. 4-6 plate stills behave and are run more like Larry's super thumper. There is very little fractioning going on. Alcohol is held back until water is removed. They work to raise ABV but will not fraction. Packing does a much better job of mimicking a taller still. More HETP's per inch or foot allowing a gradient of fractions. In a short flute style column there is no opportunity for this to happen.

I think you should read frosty's thread asking about plated VS packing.

[Prairiepiss]

And capturing the higher alcohols at the top and not taking them off. I pose the question. Why not take them off and get rid of the chance of them tainting the hearts? They are there. Just go ahead and remove them. Get rid of them.

LOL Your not getting it PP. Of course take the heads first. That is obvious. We batch distill. Who the f would want the heads.
Sory I wasn't clear on that reply. It wasn't towards your proposal. I was answering this question Bonjimmi had .

pp... But what if you didnt open plates 8,9,and 10..... and opened plates 5,6, and 7.. to take out the hearts, keeping the fores and heads at top of column and then just make your tails cut.... while being in full reflux..

Not really. Same principals. Different method of executing those principals.

And I would say what I had said already about either a packed or plated column. Same temp gradient happens in both types of stills.

Yes, in a perfect world with a twenty foot column. In our world NO. 4-6 plate stills behave and are run more like Larry's super thumper. There is very little fractioning going on. Alcohol is held back until water is removed. They work to raise ABV but will not fraction. Packing does a much better job of mimicking a taller still. More HETP's per inch or foot allowing a gradient of fractions. In a short flute style column there is no opportunity for this to happen.

I think you should read frosty's thread asking about plated VS packing.

I have read it. Good discussion.
All I'm saying is if its a plated still or a packed still. It will still stack and have a temp gradient. Higher temp at the bottom then at the top. And both systems rely in the same principle that alcohol boils off at a lower temp then water. So rising vapors cool going through the temp gradient leaving water behind and taking alcohol along with it. Plates the vapors travel through a pool of liquid. Packing the vapors move around surfaces that are wet with the liquid. I wasn't trying to say one is better or as good as the other. Both are creating vapor liquid contact. I was gust trying to say they do the same job.

It would be much like me trying to separate the gravel from the sand in the load I just got for my driveway. Using a bucket loader (plated Colum) or a shovel (packed column). I'm going to get more sand with the bucket loader when I try to pick up just the gravel. With the shovel I can be more selective. Both are doing the same job. Just one does a more accurate job of it. And it takes longer. But damn I wish my buddy would get his damn bucket loader over here. This shoveling crap is for the birds.

[mash rookie]

Well, we certainly are all over the board here. Larry wants to see it from his style of stilling, collecting and mixing all alcohol before take off, which is directly opposite from my original concept.

PP is close behind him only considering raising ABV by removing water.

Plates the vapors travel through a pool of liquid. Packing the vapors move around surfaces that are wet with the liquid. I wasn't trying to say one is better or as good as the other. Both are creating vapor liquid contact. I was gust trying to say they do the same job.

Yes the job of raising ABV but not fractioning.

The same way vm guys do heads trap. But instead multiple traps for each fraction. Once depleted the trap would shut down and move to the next most volitile.

Now your talking Rock. You ay be closer then I am conceptually on exactly how it would perform.

My concept (right or wrong) is that because packing will allow or cause actual fractioning (separation of alcohols regardless of water content) that maybe we can collect them as they occur with boka style take offs instead of waiting for them to take their turn up the column. They are all there and we know how to collect them in separate jars (or in one big bucket like Larry)

A pessimist says "it will never work" An optimist says "How can I make that work"

Enough BS. I have to go to work.

[LWTCS]

Larry wants to see it from his style of stilling, collecting and mixing all alcohol before take off,

Not mixing at all. But rather completely isolating with a metal chamber (or chambers) that has been sized according to the amount of good drinkable yield within the boiler charge.

[mash rookie]

I'll not bore the forum yet again with my approach and certainly not step all over Mash's thread even more with my smart arsed attemp at being a criptic internet likker geekin jerk off.....

Huh? WTF does that mean?

Not mixing at all. But rather completely isolating with a metal chamber (or chambers) that has been sized according to the amount of good drinkable yield within the boiler charge.

Larry, You are a smart guy but, I was trying to start a dialog with a theory of how we might seperate fractions on the fly, (alcohol types & flavor congeners, for those not listening google it.) Frosty was doing well to particapate. I welcome his particapation.

I certainly welcome your input on the subject but your still system is completely oposite of the subject I have put forward. I am not talking about ABV. I am talking about fractions and sugesting we might find a link betweenn known commercial distilling practices, some well known home grown devices and the possibile adaptation of our equipment. Come on, think ouside the thumper. I know you can be helpful.


To others that think we are smarter then the commercial master distillers, consider what they might do with a quality batch distilling system.

Yeah Yeah, we are all that and a bag of chips. To quote my Georgia girlfreind.
I think I will pour another.
MR

[mash rookie]

You are not far off Rock. You are open minded and following the concept. Consider packing as Two steps up. One down. Two steps up. One down. Like backing up on your escalator. You will get there but not easily. Only the strong will survive. Weak fractions we will be left waiting at floor four, five and six. etc. well kind of.

Think about a twenty foot tall twelve inch diameter column with plates every six inches. power consistent reflux condenser absent. Every plate has a drain or take off. What do you get at different levels?

My question with this post is can we separate fractions using packing and boka style take offs. What if we made it twenty foot tall? Three foot tall?

[flyingdutchman]

Ok what if you look at say, the coffey patent still or the continous fractionating still both covered in Nixons the compleat distiller pg 62&63(He also covers column length for this type of still very briefly on pg 64). Maybe the word continous is open to interpetation because I dont believe they ran these things 24-7 365 till the end of eternity. So maybe you could adapt it to do 1 or 2 or 3 etc batchs in sucession. from those here is what I see/interpet....
1) The first thing I see is that the wash enters the column/columns somewhere near the middle.
2) The energy source that drives the distillation is seperated/isolated from the wash container.
3) Now the wash can be metered into the column so that the input rate can match the takeoff rate (problem with heads volume in the column reduced)
4) The coffey still takes a multicomponent/column approach to help with the height problem (its still looong but broken into sections).
5) While the coffey still doesnt appear to have a dedicated condensor the continous fractionating still does (so either would work but one may be more efficient)
6) I would venture a guess that you would want a thermowell at every takeoff point because when dealing with subtances of varying boiling points (not just water or ethanol) then the temperature of the distillate might tell you alot about the Mol Fraction and components of the distallate at that given point (so were not just taking about percent alcohol).

There could be alot more there that I dont see or that i interpeted wrong so look for yourself and say what you all see...

There are books that cover this exact subject probably available from your library. Unit Operations of Chemical Engineering, Warren McCabe is one that is helpful because he works out representitve problems for the reader but there are many others and it is a free resource. There are calculations that tell you exactly what diameter column, length where the feed needs to enter, what the reflux ratio should be etc. Building by trial and error can be expensive when copper is involved.

[Frosteecat]

Can you rephrase the hypothesis in a bit more simple terms? Am I understanding that you want to run a slanted plate column with many plates so that each plate will hold a specific segment of the distillate, allowing you to take off the best product where and when you want? And that the challenges inherent in batch distillings are that the batch is mixed so separating flavors is harder to do in general...that good high % ABV distillate has power but bad or off flavor and that good flavors are knocked down the ladder and hard to reclaim...?

[flyingdutchman]

hi Frost,
I am not sure if you are asking me or Mash?

[Frosteecat]

Oh sorry...I'm asking anyone who knows what the hell is going on in this thread to explain it in as simple terms as possible to me.
Thanks!