Home Distiller

still_stirrin wrote:

Danespirit wrote:...Ultrasonic waves are different and that may actually work with the alcohol and wood molecules.

+1

Agitation and alignment. It's all about agitation and alignment...at aleast in my home, especially when it involves alcohol and wood molecules. My SoH tries to get me agitated so I'll come into alignment with her preference/command.
ss

If the proper alignment can't be achieved with agitation,
she will use "wood molecules" in the form of a rolling pin

You read right thru my well chosen words. Good job Shady.

still_stirrin wrote: You read right thru my well chosen words. Good job Shady.

Don't thank me, my wife, taught me the art of reading between the words
On a side note
I've been experimenting with a Super Sonic Moonshine Machine.
It uses time, heat, reflux and agitating the shine with vibrations.

Wood is a good conductor of heat when its on fire in open air. Its a crap conductor of heat with an electrical current running through it.
However, I do think there is a lot of merit in heating the wood and by proxy heating the distillate (rather than a microwave that targets the water molecules).

The way I'd do it, would be to have oak with one side in contact with the distillate and the other in contact with a heat source. Its just difficult to implement.

SaltyStaves wrote:Wood is a good conductor of heat when its on fire in open air. Its a crap conductor of heat with an electrical current running through it.

I had to stop and reread this a second time to understand what you're saying. Wood is a thermal insulator...have you ever held a hot pot or pan that has a wooden handle? The wood keeps your hand from getting burned. But, once the wood is heated to, or past its flash point, it will flame. And then it becomes exothermic, creating and liberating heat. And bear in mind that different woods have different flash points.

SaltyStaves wrote:However, I do think there is a lot of merit in heating the wood and by proxy heating the distillate (rather than a microwave that targets the water molecules).

The way I'd do it, would be to have oak with one side in contact with the distillate and the other in contact with a heat source. Its just difficult to implement.

So, wood WILL conduct some heat...it does have a thermal heat conduction coefficient, albeit a low one. This property does help spirits aged in wooden casks evolve when exposed to the extreme temperature cycles of the rack house (or your attic, if that's where you age your whiskey).

Another environmental condition which helps spirits "mature" gracefully, is respiration. The pores of the cask enable this. With a wooden cask, presumably oak, the wood grain and density regulate the respiration progress, assisted by the temperature cycling.

While Tim Smith was able to catalyze some of these environmental conditions to "short circuit" his conditioning processes, adding color and buffering the burn and sharpness from the heads in his product, the real maturity of a well-aged spirit cannot be synthesized.
ss

still_stirrin wrote: I had to stop and reread this a second time to understand what you're saying. Wood is a thermal insulator...

I think we are on the same page.
With the poor conductivity, it would take time to be of any real benefit. With enough time, it would no doubt be better than what most people here are doing with passive oak soaking in jars.
24 hours seems like a stretch...

My question about that show is are there really making moonshine? Or just running water through the stills to legally produce and air the show.

rgreen2002 wrote:This might be the longest this show has even been discussed...

Well... I see on Tim Smith's website he is selling some kind of cinnamon moonshine called Climax Fire No 32 which I never saw before...Hmmmmm...

Its shit. Cinnamon and sugar to cover up the smell and taste of tails. Yeah I bought it. Had to mix it with apple juice just to gag it down. At least it wasn't headsy at all.

Deerhunter wrote:My question about that show is are there really making moonshine? Or just running water through the stills to legally produce and air the show.

I obviously can't know the answer. But no, I don't believe they are making true shine. I believe they went legit or were in the process if going legit when the show aired. And the whole show is just advertising for their taxed likker. Jmo

Deerhunter wrote:My question about that show is are there really making moonshine? Or just running water through the stills to legally produce and air the show.

Well, Tim Smith has a license. But I'd doubt any of the others do. So, don't you think the ATF would confiscate the Discovery filmmakers' video data to pursue and prosecute such blatant disregard of federal laws? I certainly do.

That is, unless there was no "prosecutable" evidence....ie, it isn't actually alcohol being produced. But, in almost all of the United States it is illegal to even "possess" a still (without a license, fuel-making, or otherwise). So, some legal protection must be in place to protect the "actors" and even the Discovery channel.

This show parallels another Discovery channel show where marijuana growers produce illegally (with the intent to sell to the medical marijuana market...yeah, right!).

Some episodes even use the "play on discovery" of the operations as the thrill/interest generator.

In the end, it's marketing of public interest, even to the point of shifting political paradigms.
ss

still_stirrin wrote: But, in almost all of the United States it is illegal to even "possess" a still (without a license, fuel-making, or otherwise).
ss

I know that it has never been illegal to own a still in Colorado. I doubt that it is illegal in New Mexico either. Each state has its own rules on the subject. It would be perfectly legal to make 100 gallons of moonshine per year in Missouri were it not for outranking Federal laws. Here is a link to liquor laws by state. Unfortunately the selected legalese seldom if ever discloses the disposition of still possession by state.

http://www.hobbydistillersassociation.o ... s-by-state" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

http://www.clawhammersupply.com/blogs/m ... n-colorado" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

contrahead wrote:

still_stirrin wrote: But, in almost all of the United States it is illegal to even "possess" a still (without a license, fuel-making, or otherwise).
ss

I know that it has never been illegal to own a still in Colorado. I doubt that it is illegal in New Mexico either. Each state has its own rules on the subject. It would be perfectly legal to make 100 gallons of moonshine per year in Missouri were it not for outranking Federal laws. Here is a link to liquor laws by state. Unfortunately the selected legalese seldom if ever discloses the disposition of still possession by state.
http://www.hobbydistillersassociation.o ... s-by-state" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow
http://www.clawhammersupply.com/blogs/m ... n-colorado" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

Interesting perspective...but, since Federal law trumps state law, it IS illegal to possess a still (unless it is registered as legal, ie-fuel producers or beverage license) according to this (US Code Title 26, chapter 5601, paragraph a-1). Reference https://www.ttb.gov/spirits/home-distilling.shtml" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

I don't need or want to argue this point with you, mr. contrahead because it simply isn't worth my time to do so. But, whether or not you acknowledge the law, it is (still) the law. I don't believe I have misstated it, even though we would all like to see amendments pass through legislation.
ss

As I read here I just remembered something..
I once made a coffee table out of wood.
On top of it, I made some Lichtenberg figures.
I simply made the wood "conductive", by putting a salt water solution on it. Then I used a high voltage transformer from a microwave oven to create the figures.
Turned out really nice....WARNING..do not attempt an experiment with high voltage unless you know what you are doing..!
However, alcohol won't conduct the electricity as good as salt water.
So even if they used high voltage (which would be incredibly stupid around a flammable liquid), I highly doubt they would get any good results out of this.
Maybe the scrapyard will give a few bucks for the materials in this "Booze reactor"...or Super Substandard Moonshine Waster.

still_stirrin wrote: I don't need or want to argue this point with you, mr. contrahead because it simply isn't worth my time to do so.
ss

So now presumably, I can say nothing or continue without seeming to be argumentative? I would prefer to get to the simple truth of the matter.
In almost every codification under USCODE pertaining to this subject is the carefully obscure wording “any still or distilling apparatus set up”...

Therefore by a common, realistic interpretation of the English language: an apparatus (even an obvious a copper antique still) sitting in a garage and not filled with wash nor ready for heat – then would disqualify. A still in Colorado then, by the definition of “not set up” – does not need to be registered and therefore is not technically illegal (by either state or federal code). Hopefully it will never be necessary for your attorney to explain these distinctions to a court.

Iv a supersonic moonshine machine. Its called me stomach.

Deerhunter wrote:My question about that show is are there really making moonshine? Or just running water through the stills to legally produce and air the show.

It is highly doubtful that they are making real moonshine on the show for several reasons, and I'm not going to ague legalities as has transpired in previous posts above...

If you have watched enough episodes you would have noticed that when the spirits start flowing they quite often come out like someone opened a faucet and just pour spirits at ridiculous rates for such small boilers... We all know that stills just don't run like that...

Do you really think there is some clause that magically makes video evidence of an illegal activity in progress inadmissible for legal prosecution...??? Do you really think the law and producers that inept...???

If those actors were really making moonshine for sale do you really think they would be slopping it all around like its water...??? They would be treating their product like it was gold...!!!

Now, in this past weeks episode that gal and her father commented on how they wanted to make 600 gallons this season... With a roughly 50 gallon still at best... Fermenting wash in one blue barrel with less than 50 gallons of volume at a time... Some simple math... That 600 gallons of spirits is going to require somewhere around 6,000 gallons of wash... If each batch takes a week to process from start to finish and the blue barrel "might" yield 40 gallons of boiler charge it would take about 150 run cycles over a period of almost 3 years... Even if they could manage to get 2 batches per week it would still take 1.5 years... Now, granted, I'm using 100% ABV figures here so it would take slightly fewer runs if the %ABV blended out of the still was lower... And a bit less if they temper the product down prior to sales... But you get my point...

So, you tell me how much is truth and how much is BS... I'm at 97% BS and 3% truth because almost 100% of what they state as fact is BS if you know what the truth is... That show is just one big batch of disinformation...

I watch just to make sure my blood pressure medication is working... And to pick out every bit of BS being shoveled to the naive public...

still_stirrin wrote: But, in almost all of the United States it is illegal to even "possess" a still (without a license, fuel-making, or otherwise).
This show parallels another Discovery channel show where marijuana growers produce illegally (with the intent to sell to the medical marijuana market...yeah, right!). ss

most states allow possession and use of water and essential oil stills,

you can't just throw that blanket out there without research.

each state has their own laws and it is the responsibility of an

individual to know the laws for their own state.

your reference to growers has nothing to do with this topic and violates rule 6.

Their “Super Sonic Moonshine Machine” may have been pure BS, unless perhaps they were using a piezoelectric ultrasonic transducer of some type that we cannot see.

Aging is a chemical process. Aging brandy or whiskey by storing fresh spirit in a wooden cask, will over time chemically alter the spirit. Aging like this can even be accelerated somewhat by heat. Makers Mark distillery goes to the trouble of annually rotating its kegs, to compensate for the differential in temperatures between top and bottom racks in a storage house. For centuries the vintners of Madeira (a Portuguese island) have been rolling cask of their fortified wines out into the hot sun; deliberately leaving them there to age quicker.

Cavitation or more precisely “the physical process of cavitation inception is similar to boiling. The major difference between the two is the thermodynamic paths that precede the formation of the vapor”.

We pour hot water (seldom cold) onto tea or coffee to extract their flavors. If it were hypothetically possible to boil the new-make spirit within a charred wooden cask, without loosing ethanol or creating hazardous pressure – then some of the chemical processes associated with proper aging should be accelerated. Perhaps non-inertial cavitation by ultrasound can mimic the aging process by facilitating or catalyzing the chemical exchange.

From what I've read today, cavitation bubbles need a proper surface on which they can nucleate. Small bubbles seem to stabilize better on hydrophobic surfaces. Wood surfaces might not be ideal for cavitation inception to occur. White oak though, being less permeable than several other types of wood – might suffice.

Rad , I got to stand your back all the way . It's all unadulterated BULL SHIT !
I'm sure Gooseye wouldn't know nothin about this except what he's been tole .

Ever burn any shine? Pretty blue flame with maybe a hint of orange. Whatever they slopping in the fire burns orange...not like any shine I've ever seen.

I have a reoccurring nightmare that the show morons are lurking here on HD...

ExpatLad wrote:I have a reoccurring nightmare that the show morons are lurking here on HD...

LOL... I think they get all of their plot ideas here for sure!

I was actually thinking the same thing Expat.... they come here for their facts.

ExpatLad wrote:I have a reoccurring nightmare that the show morons are lurking here on HD...

Oh, I'm sure some have been here, whether actual members or not... Who cares... I'm sure this wouldn't be the first ridicule they've received... But they get paid to look like buffoons to us so I'm sure that eases the pain...

To begin experimenting one needs only a holding tank or container, a transducer (underwater speaker) and a sound generator. Hornady and Harbor Freight both market specialized ultrasonic cleaners. On ebay a whole spectrum of ultrasonic equipment from tiny jewelry to large industrial sized cleaners can be found.

TANKS
The tanks or trays used in most “store bought” ultrasonic cleaners are made of stainless steel. Cavitation resistant, buffed and polished stainless steel tanks are best. Surface imperfections or scratches on the tank walls might draw or form bubbles which is undesirable (you want bubbles to form on the dirty item to be cleaned – or on your oak hypothetically). Rubber, plastic or even epoxy paint coatings on the inside of a tank are preferable and less corrode-able than simple steel surfaces. Suspect that glass and ceramic containers would preform admirably.

TRANSDUCERS
Several types including capacitive-micromachined, piezoelectric, Plate-Electric-Ceramic-Sheet, BLT (not Bacon, Lettuce & Tomato but “Bolt-clamped Langevin Type transducers), etc.

GENERATORS
The difference between an ultrasound generator and a simple power board is that the generator rather than being fixed, probably offers variability in both its output frequency and its wattage. The chosen operating frequency is probably a trade-off between surface penetration and cavitation inception. Sometimes a pair or multiple frequencies might be used simultaneously. Adjustable wattage can accommodate power for a variable number of transducers. Low ultrasonic frequencies are desirable for coarse cleansing while Higher frequencies would be appropriate for fine cleaning. Cheap (Raspberry Pi sized) circuit boards comprised of a little transformer and a few capacitors are all that is necessary to create a signal to drive through the immersible transducer. If or when a tank, a horn and an ideal frequency and wattage have been selected then the need for the costly variable generator diminishes.

A small investment in ultrasonic equipment and experimentation would not go wasted. Besides a host of cleaning applications this ultrasonic equipment could in return be put to use for mixing biodiesel, for a building a homespun seismographic ground sonar, for solids separation, for plastic welding, to stop barnacle growth on a boat's hull, to repel birds from an orchard or rodents from a barn or to power a grandkid's experimental traveling wave ultrasonic motor (tiny devices that since the 1980s have been used in things like the autofocus lenses of some DSLR cameras).

If I was bored and idle and had a few neglected gallons of caustic white hooch laying around, then I'd be toying with ultrasound right now.

Do a search. It has been done.

Odin.

Odin wrote:Do a search. It has been done.

Odin.

From my reading you've done some good work with this and I appreciate the time it's saved me experimenting. I tried it tonight for the first time and got very good results. The heating element quit working in the Harbor cleaner that I'm using until the one I got off ebay gets here but the first 2.5L I ran through is noticeably less harsh to the nose and tongue.

I really don't have a lot to add but I sometimes use my 1/2 gallon Ultra Sonic machine not for finished product but to kickstart the process. I believe with adding wood chips it does add color faster and if you use it to mascerate it works a bit faster but It is never an end product for me from here it will be aged properly. The comments earlier about Ultrasonic vs electrical current is spot on.

This is definitely not going to work and I definitely have issues with the material in the apparatus in terms of saftey.

This is an interesting video however of a commercial place using a presure vessel and wood https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NIFvNGkAtrU" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow another link iwht comparison with other bourbon https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WhzhdI8fQ4A" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" rel="nofollow

B

What was happening by some in industry is what got me first interested in Ultra sonic studies. I use mine more for speeding up the process of Tincturing. I think some people are mixing two terms flavoring and aging.

Here is a follow up - after a couple of months - on the topic of ultrasound... It may not be the the equivalent of real time but it appears to be a whole lot better than a poke in the eye.

From Spain where they know a thing ot two about aging brandy. Actually the Spanish are probably more noteworthy for their aging of sherries. The word “sherry” itself is actually an anglicization of the Spanish name ‘Jerez’ - which is an area of Andalusia, Spain (exclusively produced within the "Sherry Triangle", the municipal boundaries of Jerez de la Frontera, El Puerto de Santa María and Sanlúcar de Barrameda, in the province of Cádiz).

A couple of years ago a bottle of 227 year old Sherry de la Frontera sold for $43,500 at a Sotheby’s auction.

A tasting of Spanish brandies reveals their grandeur

Ultrasound Ages Liquor Two Years in Just Three Days