overflow Vs pipe reflux return

[vicenn92]

Hello.
have some questions concerning the ideal point for reflux to be returned to column on a LM VM combo.
is it better to A) have reflux returned as a function of LM collection overflow, above the position of the VM takeoff?
or
B) for all the liquid being collected to drain from the collection cup through a tube that goes on to direct reflux back to column, below the VM takeoff position (but at top of packing)?

i understand reflex centering rings are now recommended against... rather my thinking with "option B" is more to ensure that product removed when using VM is as close to same as possible as from lm, as im not sure to what degree the overflow coming down would interact with the vapour coming up below it around where the ball valve is, given there is no packing in that part.

[Yummyrum]

This was my version
viewtopic.php?p=7481508&sid=5f53529e875 ... f#p7481508

[Dancing4dan]

I played around with this idea for a while by using the stainless steel tube from a keg to extend the throat area down below the VM take off. That SS tube just slides inside the throat with a snug fit.

Not sure that having reflux return going past the VM take off or below it made any difference.

2” column with 1” throat VM/LM Combo head.

[Salt Must Flow]

There's nothing wrong with a "centering ring" as long as it is designed properly and used properly.

Originally people thought that they needed centering rings to direct reflux to the center of the column. People thought that the reflux would eventually channel against the column and required multiple centering rings throughout the column. This thought was easily disproved once people started using glass packed columns. Considering that centering rings are not required, improperly designed rings caused choke points and causes the column to flood.

I use a centering ring between my VM tee and my sight glass. The centering ring directs all of the reflux straight down through the sight glass. That's all I use it for and it works great.

[vicenn92]

was thinking of something like this : download/file.php?id=51693&mode=view

but with the reflux return bending back and coming in above the vm section, and the the internal section extending down past the VM take off port inside the column

[Tammuz]

Bit confused here. Is this bypass past the VM takeoff to stop liquid from entering the VM takeoff? It would seem with the vapor speed we use that wouldn't be a problem.

[Salt Must Flow]

This is about a simple as I can imagine. Modular and removable.

LM Module.png (2.25 KiB) Viewed 1516 times

[googe]

Blast from the.past yummy

[Setsumi]

I would opt for the bypass tube, just remember the vapour lock.

Do not make a seperate LM collection tube, use the bypass as a reverse LM. Place your needle valve on lower part of the bypass and colect above the valve. To collect product close the valve to reduce reflux return.

[Yummyrum]

I would opt for the bypass tube, just remember the vapour lock.

Do not make a seperate LM collection tube, use the bypass as a reverse LM. Place your needle valve on lower part of the bypass and colect above the valve. To collect product close the valve to reduce reflux return.

Setsumi , that is the reason I made mine the way it is ….. so I could easily modify it for Reverse LM .
LOL , after using VM , I never bothered.

[Setsumi]

I would opt for the bypass tube, just remember the vapour lock.

Do not make a seperate LM collection tube, use the bypass as a reverse LM. Place your needle valve on lower part of the bypass and colect above the valve. To collect product close the valve to reduce reflux return.

Setsumi , that is the reason I made mine the way it is ….. so I could easily modify it for Reverse LM .
LOL , after using VM , I never bothered.

True. Nothing wrong with LM, fact it has a lot of positives. But on our scale VM just make (more) sense.

But LM on one of Alex Bokakob design is a solid choice.

But then DAD gave us CCVM.

Sory OP, way of topic here.