One column or two?

[winnipegleg]

I've got a Chinese Vevor 8 gallon system. I'm obviously new to this and I want to go from a closed system to an open one. Don't have enough cash for a 3" column but I have enough 1.5" copper pipe to make two 4 foot columns.
From what I've gathered, people think that a 1.5" column could take up to 12 hours to complete a 5 gallon mash. So I'm wondering if using two columns side by side as in the attached pic (not my best skill) would half that time or how long it might take and if it is practical to try this. Any ideas or help is more than welcome.

[Salt Must Flow]

Two risers would make no difference. The rate product exits is determined by the input of power. Even if you had four risers, the exact same amount of product would exit at a given amount of power. Think of it like boiling water. The higher the power, the more steam and therefore the more steam that is condensed. More power = more steam.

Just for clarification, a 'column' refers to a column that is full of packing like for a reflux still. A 'riser' is for pot stills and do not contain packing.

What is drawn appears to just be a pot still connected to a worm (product condenser). A stripping run would not take long because those are done hard and fast. A spirit run is done slower, but still shouldn't take anywhere near 12 hrs for 5 gal.

[Steve Broady]

Would 2x1.5” columns behave like a single 2.125” column? Both having the same cross sectional area. While as noted above, production rate is a function of power input, isn’t the optimum power input a function of column diameter?

[Salt Must Flow]

Would 2x1.5” columns behave like a single 2.125” column? Both having the same cross sectional area. While as noted above, production rate is a function of power input, isn’t the optimum power input a function of column diameter?

By "column", do you mean two 1-1/2" packed reflux columns? I suppose you could, but I'd rather just increase the diameter of the reflux column rather than installing multiple reflux columns. That would require two reflux condensers, two outputs & product condensers (unless they are connected) and you would have to operate & monitor both columns individually.

Also if you compare the cross-sectional area of different pipe sizes you'll see that there's an advantage to just going a size up. For instance 3" has nearly 3 times the area of 2". Below are Tri-Clamp ferrule measurements based on their ID.
2" = 2.78 sq"
3" = 6.38 sq"
4" = 11.58 sq"

[Steve Broady]

I agree with that, Salt. But the OP said he has excess 1.5” pipe, which I gathered was the reason for the question. Having wondered about something similar just from a theory point of view, I figured I’d add my question in there as well.

[Yummyrum]

Would 2x1.5” columns behave like a single 2.125” column? Both having the same cross sectional area. While as noted above, production rate is a function of power input, isn’t the optimum power input a function of column diameter?

Steve, the OP is talking about a Pot still riser not a reflux still packed column . This is where using the wrong terminology can cause confusion.Luckily the OP drew a picture so we could see he was clearly talking about a Riser , not a column .

So yes , you are correct that input power is a function of diameter ( actually its cross sectional area) , but relevant to a packed column reflux still .

However , in a Pot still , the diameter of the riser is not as related . The product condenser diameter is more the limiting factor .It doesn’t matter how big you make the riser, you can only run as hard as the Condenser can handle . If the condenser is too small in area , it causes the vapour to speed up . It is passing through faster than it has time to give up it’s heat .

[Steve Broady]

An. I thought I’d seen another post if his where he mentioned some form of reflux, so that and the word column had be thinking reflux still. Yeah, for a pot still, there are better ways to go about it. I’ve probably got the same (or a clone of the same) 8 gallon pot, and have modified it to be a pretty nice little pot still. More upgrades are in the works not so much for function, but for ease of cleaning. And definitely no large columns!

[Steve Broady]

C999A0FD-471B-4CE1-9F9C-321635C0D0EA.jpeg

If it helps, this is what I’ve done with mine. Nothing fancy, but it works well for me.

[winnipegleg]

Hey Steve, that looks like my Vevor one. How did you get the copper pipe attached to the lid. Details would be good.

[Steve Broady]

I used a step drill to make the right size hole, then soldered with lead free solder. Just use a good liquid flux and a MAPP torch and you’ll be fine.

With that said, last time I ran it I discovered a small crack in the solder joint. It would be easy enough to reflow that solder, but I’ve been planning an upgrade anyway, so I’m going to be adding 1.5” ferrules instead.

[winnipegleg]

Just to be clear, I am thinking of filling the pipes with marbles (because they're cheap). I didn't realize I should have put that in the pic. It sounds as this will make a difference to using the two pipes.

[Steve Broady]

I’m no expert, but from what I’ve learned here, packing and a reflux condenser pretty much go hand in hand. Neither one is all that useful without the other.

Now, this did get me daydreaming about how I could design a twin column reflux setup and keep it balanced. I have some ideas, probably goofy… but I’ll point out that you will have to do some soldering and plumbing and probably need a few more parts than you have on hand.

May I offer a humble suggestion? Work on improving the pot still you have. Feel free to pm me if you want to know more about what I’ve done with the same one. Then cut your teeth on that, until you’re ready to move up to a reflux still. I can tell you that I have learned just how much I don’t know since trying to get good at using mine. I know I’m not ready to play with the big boys just yet.

[Saltbush Bill]

I am thinking of filling the pipes with marbles (because they're cheap).

They ain't pipes ....you need to start using the right terminologies otherwise things start to get real confusing really fast around here.
Secondly, marbles or any other type of column packing wont make a scrap of difference unless you park a reflux condencer on top of it.
There is a lot to read here and learn from....I found the best way is to try n read every new post each day.....you will soon learn the answers to questions you've yet to think up.

[greggn]

I've got a Chinese Vevor 8 gallon system. I'm obviously new to this and I want to go from a closed system to an open one.

Can you tell us why you feel your current rig is a "closed system" ?

[Steve Broady]

There is a lot to read here and learn from....I found the best way is to try n read every new post each day.....you will soon learn the answers to questions you've yet to think up.

+1 This! The more threads I read, the more I learn. It’s sort of like randomly walking into every imaginable classroom, from kindergarten to post-graduate level, but it’s certainly interesting!

[winnipegleg]

Thanks Saltbush Bill, I realize that as a newbie I might be using the wrong terminologies but I haven't had a chance to read all the posts in this forum yet so thought I'd try asking a question. I left out the fact that my system has a thumper or whatever the right terminology is for that. I wanted to turn this into an open system for safety and wanted it to work efficiently and reasonably fast. Wanted to try something in the vein of fractionating? columns or reflux? columns using two 1.5" copper pipes? or tubes? and putting marbles or copper scrubbers? or whatever. I thought this would be the place to ask a question of people who have far greater knowledge than I and who have read all the posts. I admit it is laziness on my part but thought it would shorten my search for an answer to what I thought was a fairly simple question. I'm not sure where to find the answer to my problem but will try other resources. By the way - in the pic I made the pot on the right is meant to condense the vapor coming off the pipes?. I did not know that they needed reflux condencers on top of them and not sure what that terminology refers to.

[Salt Must Flow]

If you are interested in a reflux column then I assume you want neutral product (odorless, colorless, tasteless) essentially vodka. There are different designs to choose from. I prefer VM (Vapor Management). Here's the first link I found that appears to explain them a bit.

You may have a bunch of 1-1/2" pipe, but generally the smallest people go with is 2" unless they're making a really small micro still. I wouldn't go with two columns on the same boiler. I think there's more reasons not to than there are to do it. The smaller the diameter, the slower it can produce.

You heat the boiler. Once it is up to temp vapor starts to rise up through the packed column. Vapor his the reflux condenser, condenses and rains down onto the packing. As the hot vapors continues to rise up through the column it interacts with the falling reflux. Eventually the most volatile vapors (lightest vapors) accumulates at the very top and the column becomes stabilized. You can see this happening with a digital thermometer reading the vapor temp, ideally one that reads in 1/10th degree F. Once stabilized you start taking foreshots off very very slow. Heads come off a little faster. Once your into the hearts you can take off as fast as your rig can without destabilizing the column.

[winnipegleg]

Thanks salt, you've hit on my problem. I just need to know the pros and cons of using two 1.5" pipes as opposed to one 3"column. I was hoping that the
problem would be speed and that problem would be solved by using two smaller columns. Can you tell me in what way my logic is wrong when I think that two 1.5" pipes should be somewhat similar to one 3". As you can tell I'm not well acquainted with physics or chemistry.

[Yummyrum]

If you have two packed columns , you need to have two reflux condensers , one for each ….. or you need to equally split the reflux from one common reflux condenser to feed both columns with exactly the same amount of liquid .

Both columns need ti be packed exactly the same . Marbles would be better here than scrubbers exept that scrubbers are better packing .

So what I’m talking about is that both columns need to be operated with exactly the same reflux ratio so that the product at the top of each is the same .
Otherwise , you would have one that is processing pure hearts while the other is producing heads and contaminating the good stuff the other is making .

Nit saying it can’t be done , but rather its less than ideal .

[Salt Must Flow]

1-1/2" ferrule = 1.47 sq"
2" ferrule = 2.78 sq"
3" ferrule = 6.38 sq"
4" ferrule = 11.58 sq"

Above is the cross-sectional area of Tri-Clamp ferrules. If you went with two 1-1/2" columns, the combined cross-sectional area is 1.89 times that of 2". It's a little less than 2". You're always better off going larger diameter. A 3" column would be 4.34 times more area than a 1-1/2". Now it might not seem like a big leap, but if you went with 4" that's nearly twice the area of 3" and would require two 240V heating elements. I like my 3" VM and it runs like a champ.

I'd recommend studying and comparing different reflux designs, understand how they work, choose one and don't try to invent something new (yet). Plan the build well and will come out nicely. Plan how you intend to do your stripping runs. I use most all of the same parts of my reflux still for the riser and only a couple of other fittings to make a pot still head.

[Sporacle]

http://homedistiller.org/forum/viewtopi ... 15&t=52975

realize that as a newbie I might be using the wrong terminologies but I haven't had a chance to read all the posts in this forum yet so thought I'd try asking a question.

Nothing wrong with asking questions, the link above has some great information and should start you in the right direction, nobody expects you to know everything but as Bill said terminology is extremely important as discussion is generally based on written content

[Steve Broady]

Can you tell me in what way my logic is wrong when I think that two 1.5" pipes should be somewhat similar to one 3". As you can tell I'm not well acquainted with physics or chemistry.

Actually, this is neither physics nor chemistry. It’s just simple math. The cross sectional area of a pipe (which is the size of the hole that the vapor had to flow through) is proportional to the square of the radius. The formula for the area for a circle is pi*r^2. Thus, the area of a 1.5” diameter circle is 3.14*.75*.75, which is a little over 1.75 square inches. Two of those would be just over 3.5 square inches, which is the same area as a single 2.12”circle. In other words, two 1.5” pipes have (very roughly) the same cross section (and therefore output volume for a given pressure and speed) as a single 2” pipe.

[winnipegleg]

Once again, thanks Steve. Question answered. I've known pi r squared and never had reason to use it. My ignorance knows no limits. It's a load off to know that my intuitive answer that two times 1.5" volume had to be nearly as large as 3". Always happy to learn and tanks for being my source. I can give up on that and move on to something else.

[Steve Broady]

I've known pi r squared and never had reason to use it.

You would be surprised how much stuff you were taught in school is actually kind of useful, especially if you’re trying to understand what’s going on with distilling. One of my big gripes with education is that too often people are taught something like pi r squared, but never given any real real world applications that make it relevant. It’s just a thing you’re supposed to know to pass a test. Maybe if more high school kids were taught about making booze, they’d enjoy going to school!! Believe it or not, not only did I make distilled alcohol in high school chemistry class, but we even took a field trip to the Jack Daniel’s distillery. No tasting, unfortunately…

[winnipegleg]

Wish I'd gone to that school. At 13 I had been thrown out of about 4 schools and started working. I agree that schools could teach the basics of life and prepare kids for the nightmares in which they are about to partake.

[still_stirrin]

… It's a load off to know that my intuitive answer that two times 1.5" volume had to be nearly as large as 3" …

Not exactly correct.

Using two 1-1/2” pipes (risers or columns) will give you slightly more flow area (pi x R x R) than a single 2” pipe, not a 3”. A 3” pipe gives slightly more flow area than two 2” pipes, or said another way, two 1-1/2” pipes is roughly 1/2 the flow area of a 3” pipe.

Pipe diameter, or rather vapor flow area directly relates to vapor speed which will actually regulate “quality” of distillate production, ie - “clarity of cuts”. Faster vapor production (possible with greater heat input) will give more “smearing” proportional to the vapor speed through the pipe. So, the larger pipe (or vapor flow area) will allow greater product mass flow with less smearing when compared to the lessor flow area pipe(s).

For a 15 gallon (50 liter) boiler, or larger, a 3” vapor port would work well in terms of runtime for a strip. For a spirit run, a 4” column would give slower vapor speeds which would assist the reflux, producing better separation of the fractions.

If your boiler is 5 gallons (20 liters) to 15 gallons, then the 2” vapor port would work well for a stripping run and also for a packed column for reflux.

But if your boiler is smaller, like a stock pot, then a (single) 1-1/2” vapor port would work quite acceptably for both stripping and reflux.

So, pipe size also can relate to the boiler size as well as heat input (energy source).

Bottomline for your original question is that two 1-1/2” pipe will not provide the same, or nearly equal flow area (production rate) as a single 3” pipe. It will better approximate a single 2” pipe. But the thing to consider is cost of materials and labor to attach multiple pipes to a boiler. One pipe is much easier and less likely to be troublesome (leaky). And the cost of fittings for multiple pipes is not inconsequential either, as copper is expensive.

Ultimately, vapor production rate will depend on the product condenser design such that if you’re planning to use a worm condenser, the diameter (and length) of the tubing will be a critical factor on the production rate potential. A 3” riser (potstill) would be best matched with a 3/4” worm (or larger). A 2” riser would work with a 1/2” worm. And you should never use a 3/8” worm, even for a 1-1/2” riser because the vapor velocity through the worm would impede effective condensation.

I hope these general design considerations assist you along the path.
ss

[greggn]

I wanted to turn this into an open system for safety and wanted it to work efficiently and reasonably fast.

I'll ask again and then move on ...

Why do you feel your still is a "closed system" ?

If you have safety concerns those should be prioritized over things like increasing the diameter of your riser and/or trying to make a reflux column.

A photo would really help. I know some of the Vevor stills are marketed as being combo fermentation vessels and stills. If you have a ball valve in a position where the boiler becomes closed to the environment then that needs to be addressed before ever operating the still.

[Saltbush Bill]

I might be using the wrong terminologies but I haven't had a chance to read all the posts in this forum yet so thought I'd try asking a question.

Couple of links here that may help you get up to speed on Distilling lingo.
viewtopic.php?t=58100
https://homedistiller.org/wiki/index.php/index.ph ... y:Glossary

[LWTCS]

I wanted to turn this into an open system for safety and wanted it to work efficiently and reasonably fast.

I'll ask again and then move on ...

Why do you feel your still is a "closed system" ?

If you have safety concerns those should be prioritized over things like increasing the diameter of your riser and/or trying to make a reflux column.

A photo would really help. I know some of the Vevor stills are marketed as being combo fermentation vessels and stills. If you have a ball valve in a position where the boiler becomes closed to the environment then that needs to be addressed before ever operating the still.

Said he has the outfit with a thumper. He is assuming (I assume) that any back pressure created by the thumper is a safety issue I assume?

[winnipegleg]

Many thanks to all who tried to enlighten me. Some of it stuck. I'm now going to try to put the worm into a larger plastic pail and maybe just go straight from the still. And so I'll have fun just klutzing around with this stuff.
Thanks again.