Home Distiller

Bolverk wrote: ↑Thu Nov 28, 2024 6:05 am 300ml/m = 4.755 gph thats more like it!
1350w at 4.756 gph = 282w g/h fucking hell thats great!

Congrats man! Those are the numbers I was hoping you'd hit!

I appreciate all your help with this. I definitely wouldn’t have tried it in my own.

Now that it’s built and at least tested on water, I’m a lot more confident that it’ll actually work as intended. Now I can get on to getting it tweaked and dialed in and doing useful work.

(In case anyone is interested, virtually every part of this other than the copper has been chosen so that if this thing was a complete failure I’d still have a lot of usable parts.)

I made a slight modification to the effluent pipe. Added a hard line out to the front of the cart, then an elbow to let the tubing drip straight into a collection bucket. I was having issues with the effluent overflowing when a trap formed in the tubing, so this solved the problem. The other thing I did was to cut it shorter so that the end stays another liquid level in the bucket. With that done, it was time to test. First on water, and then some sugarhead that’s been sitting around waiting to be stripped.

I’m in love with this thing!!!! In the short time I had free, I stripped about 3.5 gallons. Total time from pulling it out of the garage to out to putting it back was under an hour and a half, and that’s including some testing and stopping a couple times to check things out.

The feed was about 7°C, and roughly 10% ABV.

I tested at feed rates between 100-250ml/min, all of which worked. I had some issues with foaming below about 150ml/mon, but nothing too serious. I found that 150-175ml/min was the sweet spot today, holding a steady 50% ABV out. At over 250ml/min, I was seeing north of 70% ABV out, but the effluent temperature was struggling to hold 98°C. At least when feeding it ice cold beer, it seems that 200ml/min is about the top of the range as built. As you can see in the photos, that’s at 1310W at the element.

There are a few changes I’d like to make, but I’m very happy with this as it is. It works!!! I owe Bolverk massive thanks for both the inspiration and the help along the way in getting this thing designed and built.

Can't wait to see how it does with a more reasonable beer temp, that 40f beer was killing your performance/speed.

Bolverk wrote: ↑Sat Dec 14, 2024 12:11 pm Can't wait to see how it does with a more reasonable beer temp, that 40f beer was killing your performance/speed.

Yeah, it’s been in the garage where it’s pretty chilly. On the plus side, natural cold crashing! Next time I’ll try my usual strain and drain routine, and let the beer come up to room temperature. More data to come!

Rough numbers (because I already had some stuff on hand, and because I make a point of not doing careful accounting on hobby projects), I figure I have about $500 in this still. It gets up to working temperature on about 3 pints of water in around 10 minutes and runs on standard US 110V without needing any special wiring or controls. The only control other than two power switches is the speed knob on the pump. Shutting down uses another 2 quarts of water to thoroughly flush out the system, and I can go from collecting to put away in ten minutes. There is no cooling water, so neither tap nor drain are needed.

Even before minor improvements I plan to make, it’s quiet and efficient, convenient, simple, and not horribly expensive. Best of all, I can run for a few minutes at a time whenever and wherever life permits and save my very precious stilling days for spirit runs. I am over the moon with how well it works, and I would absolutely do it again given the chance. This will make it far more practical for me to keep a fermenter busy.

To anyone who’s considering building something like this, do it!

That's awesome man, congrats on getting that up and running!

I have a question for the stripping column still users. When I do a pot still batch (for whisky) I strip down to around 25% abv. This gets me more flavour and a final abv after blending of around 60% which takes little or no proofing down to reach "barrel entry".

The stripping still here produces 70% and after the strip. By the time I've proofed that down to even 40%, that's a lot of flavour gone... or so it would seem.

Is there some magic going on which helps keep flavour levels high? How do you tune the output of the column? Change the packing? Input speed?

I could see this for making neutral, but I'd want to go the whole hog and have it push 95% clean alcohol from the off. A bit like the MyVodkaMaker on steroids. I have some 120Litre barrels for fermenting and I like the idea of dumping a sack of ground wheat, water and YLAY I to a barrel, then just dropping a dip tube into the cleared wash and collecting neutral and firelighting fluid straight from the other end.

NormandieStill wrote: ↑Sun Dec 15, 2024 10:49 pm I have a question for the stripping column still users. When I do a pot still batch (for whisky) I strip down to around 25% abv. This gets me more flavour and a final abv after blending of around 60% which takes little or no proofing down to reach "barrel entry".

That's been my process as well. Since this is my first time messing with a continuous still like this, I will be learning as I go. I admit, the question of flavor has been one of my biggest concerns, and It's the one thing that I can see at the moment which would keep me from using it for everything I make. It may be that I decide there is some quality difference, but the convenience is more than worth the compromise. Or it may be that the differences are slight enough that I don't worry about it. This is unexplored territory for me, and it doesn't seem to be something that many folks here have messed with either.

The stripping still here produces 70% and after the strip. By the time I've proofed that down to even 40%, that's a lot of flavour gone... or so it would seem.

The numbers I've seen have said it should be closer to 50%, and that agrees with the first run I did. I was able to hit 70% output, but that was by running the pump too fast and leaving a fair bit of alcohol in the effluent stream. It might be good for making neutral, but not how I would do a flavored spirit. Admittedly, 50% is still not 25%. My current plan is to save some of the beer and blend it back in to get the right ABV for a spirit run, which should also help bump the flavor back up where I want it.

Is there some magic going on which helps keep flavour levels high? How do you tune the output of the column? Change the packing? Input speed?

The advice I've been given is that a column stripped spirit and a pot stripped spirit could have a slightly different flavor profile. So it may be that the tools determine the product to some degree. In my case, changing the input sped definitely has an effect on the output. I have not played with different packing levels yet. That's definitely in the cards, now that I have the basic unit up and running and tested. It seems that I'm in somewhat new territory trying to do this in such a small size, and on marbles instead of plates.

You will have a different flavour profile between column and pot - it's a different tool and process. I think one of the big differences is going to come from the time that the wash spends being heated. In a pot, everything is boiled for quite some time, and you get all sorts of reactions - maillard etc. In a stripping column this barely happens so you're going to be getting something cleaner in flavour.

A '1.5' run would be one way to address' this - e.g. spirit run in a pot still, with a blend of stripping column low-wines and undistilled wash. Tweak the ratio to go more heavy/light as you want.

I think with this reboiler (not steam injection) method one could slow down their beer feed to a point where you are boiling over more of the water in the beer so you "could" get 20-30% low wines, but I've not seen or heard of anyone doing this professionally so it's hard to say.

I was hoping Steve could get his feed rate lower so we could test this theory, but he hit a wall due to the beer being so cold.

Effectively diluting with sending over more steam won't bring over more flavour in the same way that stripping longer on a pot still would. Recirculating a percentage of the bottoms back into the wash feed might have a similar effect though.

Hard to say i think.... if he were using live steam injection from water I'd 100% agree, but he's got an element in the bottom reboiling the effluent to create steam i can't see how that would not carry over some flavor.

I mis-read and thought you were talking about a system WITH steam injection, my mistake! Yeah I agree that on a reboiler setup you would be sending over more flavour if you boil the effluent as you suggest.

Steve Broady, just curious, what packing are you using? I scanned through this thread and didn't see any mention of what was used.

Would insulating the column help to contain heat?

Is anybody kinda disappointed that this isn’t a nightclub stripper pole thread? Asking for a friend.

Like your friend this was my first thought when I saw the thread title.

8Ball wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 1:27 pm Is anybody kinda disappointed that this isn’t a nightclub stripper pole thread? Asking for a friend.

I seriously debated getting a Barbie doll and letting her hang upside down by her legs around the pole, just for pictures here. But I can’t be bothered to go buy one just for the joke.

Salt Must Flow wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 12:11 pm Steve Broady, just curious, what packing are you using? I scanned through this thread and didn't see any mention of what was used.

Would insulating the column help to contain heat?

I’m sorry, I thought I posted it here. I meant to, at least. The column is packed with glass marbles. From memory, they’re about 10-12mm, but it’s been a while since I bought them.

Yes, I want to explore the results of insulation. To be honest, partly I was just excited to play with my new toy, and too cheap to buy the insulation already. So I justified it by saying I’ll be able to collect data on how it runs with and without insulation and see if there’s any benefit. I can only assume it would help.

Steve Broady wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 2:17 pm

Salt Must Flow wrote: ↑Thu Dec 19, 2024 12:11 pm Steve Broady, just curious, what packing are you using? I scanned through this thread and didn't see any mention of what was used.

Would insulating the column help to contain heat?

I’m sorry, I thought I posted it here. I meant to, at least. The column is packed with glass marbles. From memory, they’re about 10-12mm, but it’s been a while since I bought them.

Yes, I want to explore the results of insulation. To be honest, partly I was just excited to play with my new toy, and too cheap to buy the insulation already. So I justified it by saying I’ll be able to collect data on how it runs with and without insulation and see if there’s any benefit. I can only assume it would help.

My bad, you did mention 12mm marbles. I searched the term "packing", "mesh", "scrubbers" and didn't see any of those terms. That's why I missed it.

I know pretty much nothing about continuous stills but what keeps the marbles from getting plugged up over time on a run? Unless it's crystal clear wash I imagine as the beer flows down it's going to be leaving behind a lot of gunk?

squigglefunk wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2024 6:15 am I know pretty much nothing about continuous stills but what keeps the marbles from getting plugged up over time on a run? Unless it's crystal clear wash I imagine as the beer flows down it's going to be leaving behind a lot of gunk?

In my case, I’m running (mostly) clear wash. I figure the marbles are non-porous and have a fair bit of space around them, so I don’t worry too much about a few small particles. And I flush it afterwards as well.

squigglefunk wrote: ↑Tue Dec 24, 2024 6:15 am I know pretty much nothing about continuous stills but what keeps the marbles from getting plugged up over time on a run? Unless it's crystal clear wash I imagine as the beer flows down it's going to be leaving behind a lot of gunk?

The gaps are consistent and the solids work their way down.
.with mesh there are dense parts that pack up with solids

After running off the rest of my test batch (bourbon sugarhead) I pulled the still apart to see how things look inside. In particular, I wanted to know how the marbles and screen had done with a very unclarified, occasionally chunky beer. The marbles themselves looked pretty good. A few pieces of grain here and there, but nothing too stuck or that wouldn’t rinse off easily. The screen on the other hand.. The graininess actually packed in tightly enough that it was holding those marbles in place and nothing fell out when inverted.

No worries, I kind of expected that. This whole thing is a bit of a journey of pushing the limits and seeing what works. Time for an upgrade. I had this sink strainer basket sitting around: As you can see, it does not quite fit into the 3” pipe. So I cut the cylinder off, leaving just the flat base. I then took a tapered drift and opened up every one of the holes. That increased the open area a little and also made the whole thing dished. Perfect! It now fits into the slightly modified 3” PTFE gasket I made for the screen basket. Clamped in place, this is the view from the top. I did manage to break through on of the webs connecting two holes, but it’s still too small a hole to let the marble fall through.

Hopefully this change will let stuff flush out more effectively. One of the things I plan to try here is a 5% beer of pure rye. And I might also try grinding some grain to flour and running everything, grain and all, and see what happens.

When you ran the sugarhead did you have filter on the end of the pump suction hose?

This one might plug up too fast
I have a basket that I use to dry hop beer that might be modified for a longer run.

I have tried a filter very much like the first one you showed, Zach. And yes, it clogged way too quickly. Realizing that this thing can handle a few small pieces of grain, I tried just making a well in the grain bed (I ferment on grain) using a pasta strainer. That worked, but it might have been a bit too open. Next time I’ll go back to straining everything through a brew in a bag bag. Since I’ll have to do that to get the liquid out anyway, I might as well.

I recently decided to try pushing the limits of what this can do. The whole thing is a test and a learning experience, so I wanted to see what would happen if I ran a completely unfiltered mash through it.

To that end, I made a very basic mash of 5 lbs of whole wheat flour, 3 gallons of water, and enzymes to convert the starch. Conversion and fermentation were uneventful, so it was time to try stripping it.

First up, I modified the boiler by adding a taller sight glass. I wanted to be able to see what was going on. I also made some changes at the top, adding another sight glass and slightly rearranging things to keep the height as low as practical.

I have the mash a good stir with a paint mixer to get everything suspended, got the still primed with water and preheated, and started pumping in some very cloudy mash. For a while, it was working fine. I really liked the flavor that was coming over, and it seemed like it might be a complete success. The hope was that the boiling at the bottom would be violent enough to keep everything suspended and prevent scorching.

It almost worked.

After a while, I started to notice a faint toasty aroma that was leaning heavily towards scorch. Then it got worse, and I started to notice that the low wines coming out had an amber color to them. Then I started getting smoke.. The funny thing is that despite all that, the low wines didn’t taste all that bad. At worst, they had a hint of bung popcorn to them. I decided to just keep going and see what happened. I emptied the bucket that I was using as a fermenter, then started adding water to flush the system out. Somewhere about that point I noticed that the boiling had stopped, which I at first assumed was due to the water and full flow on the pump crashing the boil. Then I noticed the meter reading zero amps.

Some disassembly later, I found this. The element got hot enough to melt the copper sheath, and you can clearly see the layer of burnt flour on there. I’m glad it lasted as long as it did, but I can’t say that I’m surprised.

So I’ll be replacing the element with a new one, slightly higher power and significantly lower power density to hopefully prevent that happening again. I also learned that running through this is not ideal, but it also does not require absolutely crystal clear wash to work.

I was afraid this was going to occur. There is little velocity to carry the particles out the effluent heat exchanger. Boilers traditionally have a mud leg to accumulate the sludge. I'm afraid a redesign is going to be more productive than lower heat flux element.