External-wrap dephegmator?

Fittings, parrots, packing, tooling and so on.

Moderator: Site Moderator

Post Reply
ruminant
Novice
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 3:46 am

External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by ruminant »

I've been reconstructing the still head on my pot from the hideous funnel-and-mixing-bowl contraption I came up with before discovering these forums into a tri-clamp set-up with a chamber for my copper Raschig rings and other goodies. Rebuilding gives me an opportunity to tinker, so I wanted to get some advice on this idea (to be used for rums and whiskies).

Has anyone worked with an external-coil dephlegmator? I'm talking about wrapping 1/4" copper tubing around the outside of a tri-clamp spool, to be attached at the top of the still head. Would I be able to add a bit of reflux to my pot without going full column? Should I choose a 3" pipe or a 1.5" pipe for the inner spool? Copper or stainless?

(Ozark Still Works sells one they call The Shocker, which looks cheaper and prettier than anything I could build, but why spoil the fun? https://ozarkstillworks.com/product/?the-shocker-)
User avatar
still_stirrin
Master of Distillation
Posts: 10337
Joined: Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:01 am
Location: where the buffalo roam, and the deer & antelope play

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by still_stirrin »

Can you put packing in the riser turned column?

The coil over the vapor pipe solution is not very efficient at knocking down much vapor, but will cool the pipe enough to create some condensation on the inside wall of the pipe. Packing would allow interaction of the falling (cooled) condensate with the hot rising vapors thereby increasing the heat transfer between vapors and condensate. That would help the reflux and help improve separation.

External coils being so inefficient can be improved upon by the classic cross tube coolant pipes. But even those are not really effective. The traditional dephlegmator/shotgun-style condenser (multiple vapor tubes inside a water jacket) is much better for this type of reflux condenser duty. But of course, it is more challenging to build than wrapping your riser with 1/4” ID soft copper tubing.

In the end, it is the packing which actually helps the heat exchange between vapors and condensate and that is required for reflux.
ss
My LM/VM & Potstill: My build thread
My Cadco hotplate modification thread: Hotplate Build
My stock pot gin still: stock pot potstill
My 5-grain Bourbon recipe: Special K
greggn
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1380
Joined: Sun Jul 27, 2014 11:59 am
Location: East Coast

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by greggn »

ruminant wrote: Sun May 28, 2023 4:01 am
so I wanted to get some advice on this idea (to be used for rums and whiskies).

If you're *not* going to be making vodka, and only want a little passive reflux, then you'd save a lot of money by just adding a spool to your existing riser and pointing a small fan to blow air across it.

... but, as SS said, there's not much value in reflux that doesn't have a medium to facilitate heat exchange. Somewhere here are discussions about commercial distilleries and their use of angled lyne arms to influence product. I believe the consensus is that it has no real effect at the hobby level.
________________

I drank fifty pounds of feed-store corn
'till my clothes were ratty and torn
User avatar
Saltbush Bill
Site Mod
Posts: 9675
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 2:13 am
Location: Northern NSW Australia

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by Saltbush Bill »

A dephlegmator doesn't only provide reflux. To do it's job properly it needs to be more than a few coils wrapped around the out side of a column. It's other job is to only allow the more volatile components of the wash / vapour to leave the still at a speed and purity of the still operators choosing.
Quote
"Vapor leaving the device has become concentrated in the more volatile components, while the condensate is richer in the less volatile components."
https://www.thermopedia.com/content/691 ... %20gravity.
ruminant
Novice
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 3:46 am

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by ruminant »

Thank you all for all of the advice. At this point, I'm just going to plan a few experiments with minimal cost, using a six-inch SS conical reducer I already own with a filter plate under it so I can try it out with/without packing and with/without cooling from the external coil. (I'll also be doing more research, though I don't think it'll dissuade me from playing with copper.)

My expectations are pretty low, but I'll report back here with the results in a year or so.
User avatar
Demy
Master of Distillation
Posts: 3084
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2020 1:45 pm

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by Demy »

I believe that such a system does not allow you to make many adjustments ... an internal coil instead can be adjusted by water flow, i.e. you can go from very to little reflux gradually .... this allows you an adjustment that affects the finished product. An external coil does not allow much adjustment and is certainly not very efficient.
User avatar
acfixer69
Global moderator
Posts: 4826
Joined: Mon Dec 20, 2010 3:34 pm
Location: CT USA

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by acfixer69 »

Since energy travels from hot to cold the condensed liquid would channel down the column walls back to the boiler and have minimal interaction with packing. Waste of energy.
User avatar
Steve Broady
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1050
Joined: Thu Aug 25, 2022 9:52 am
Location: NC Piedmont

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by Steve Broady »

This got me thinking.. since copper is a pretty good conductor of heat, would internal fins help to make such a condenser more efficient and controllable? The only real advantage I see is that it makes the construction a little simpler since the water and vapor paths don’t have to cross each other. That, and it might look kind of neat, if that matters to you.
Learn from the past, live in the present, change the future.
ruminant
Novice
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 3:46 am

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by ruminant »

Demy, I agree with you on the inefficiency of external coiling--especially around a SS spool--but I'm not sure how control would be any different, since you'd still be able to modify the coolant rate. Can you elaborate?

acfixer69 you make a really good point, and I nearly abandoned the experiment as soon as I read your comment. But how is that different from the kind of passive reflux you get from a Scotch goose-neck? I'd think that those also have condensate running down the column walls while vapor passes up the center, right? (Now I'm getting delusions of grandeur by inventing goose-necked techniques at a hobbyist scale -- anybody else ever get carried away like that?)

Steve, I do think you're right, and had thought about soldering some of my 1/4" copper Raschig rings to the interior of a copper spool for that purpose. As long as I'm cheaping out by using stainless for my spool, I feel like the conductivity may be so poor that extra surface area of the interior spool might not matter very much.
User avatar
Twisted Brick
Master of Distillation
Posts: 3771
Joined: Sat Mar 09, 2013 4:54 pm
Location: Craigh Na Dun

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by Twisted Brick »

The external-wrapped dephlegmator design has appeared and died previously. Generally, unless brand new, if an idea is legit, (practical, effective, affordable) it will have been adopted and endorsed across a broad number of members (ie CCVM). Same applies with retailers.
“Always carry a flagon of whiskey in case of snakebite, and furthermore, always carry a small snake.”

- W.C. Fields

My EZ Solder Shotgun
My Steam Rig and Manometer
ruminant
Novice
Posts: 13
Joined: Wed Sep 07, 2022 3:46 am

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by ruminant »

Okay, you've convinced me. It looks like building a cold finger would be a more effective way to scratch my fabrication itch -- I can even use a spare 1.5" tri-clamp tee I've got sitting around.
User avatar
shadylane
Master of Distillation
Posts: 10363
Joined: Sat Oct 27, 2007 11:54 pm
Location: Hiding In the Boiler room of the Insane asylum

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by shadylane »

ruminant wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 3:51 pm Okay, you've convinced me. It looks like building a cold finger would be a more effective way to scratch my fabrication itch -- I can even use a spare 1.5" tri-clamp tee I've got sitting around.
A suggestion.
If the coil was on the inside, it would be a dimroth type dephleg and work much better.
User avatar
Saltbush Bill
Site Mod
Posts: 9675
Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2011 2:13 am
Location: Northern NSW Australia

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by Saltbush Bill »

Twisted Brick wrote: Mon May 29, 2023 12:00 pm The external-wrapped dephlegmator design has appeared and died previously. Generally, unless brand new, if an idea is legit, (practical, effective, affordable) it will have been adopted and endorsed across a broad number of members (ie CCVM). Same applies with retailers.
Its pretty hard to re-invent the wheel around here , there isn't much that hasn't already been thought of and tested by at least a few folk.
If it works it works, if it doesnt it sinks to the bottom of the pile.
There was a post here somewhere recently and a link to a fellas site where someone was trying to sell this type of condenser.
Wildcats
Distiller
Posts: 1541
Joined: Sun Jan 08, 2023 5:12 pm
Location: Kentucky

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by Wildcats »

1/4* copper tubing. Filled with salt and wind the coil. A lot of help here on winding you're own. Or buy one already made.
User avatar
Chauncey
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1570
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 1:30 am
Location: NOLA

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by Chauncey »

OP: I have used one of these setups in 1.5"
They work better than expected. I used it to make whiskeys in 1 and done runs using the 1.5 run protocol.
Saltbush Bill wrote: Sun May 28, 2023 1:08 pm A dephlegmator doesn't only provide reflux. To do it's job properly it needs to be more than a few coils wrapped around the out side of a column. It's other job is to only allow the more volatile components of the wash / vapour to leave the still at a speed and purity of the still operators choosing.
Quote
"Vapor leaving the device has become concentrated in the more volatile components, while the condensate is richer in the less volatile components."
https://www.thermopedia.com/content/691 ... %20gravity.
That says to me that CM stills actually make a different product than other types of reflux stills. Food for thought.
<no stopping to corner anytime [] no parking passenger zone>

When people tell me I'll regret that in the morning, I sleep till noon.
NormandieStill
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1738
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2020 10:17 pm
Location: Northwest France

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by NormandieStill »

I always figured that if you could perfectly control the coolant temperature (not temp out, but temp in) then you could in theory selectively condense certain molecules allowing you to trap higher BP molecules. Not sure that this is technically possible mind. Does the condensing point of a vapour mix behave like the BP of a liquid mix?
"I have a potstill that smears like a fresh plowed coon on the highway" - Jimbo

A little spoon feeding *For New & Novice Distillers
googe
retired
Posts: 3848
Joined: Wed Jun 20, 2012 6:53 pm
Location: awwstralian in new zealund

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by googe »

Would add some reflux, might get 70% or so, hardly worth it for the cost. Could build an entire still for $170.
Here's to alcohol, the cause of, and solution to, all life's problems.
"Homer J Simpson"
User avatar
Chauncey
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1570
Joined: Sat Feb 06, 2016 1:30 am
Location: NOLA

Re: External-wrap dephegmator?

Post by Chauncey »

Yea in the end it's better to just do it right. Def attach the coil if you're going external
<no stopping to corner anytime [] no parking passenger zone>

When people tell me I'll regret that in the morning, I sleep till noon.
Post Reply