Hydroseparation

[castleclr]

I just tried hydroseparation and I do think it worked out well. The pot run on apprx 5.5 gals came out tasting nice.

Is there anything good I can do with the remaining 11 gals of 27 abv. Run it? Dump it?

Is it worth while to run the heads and tails from the run through a column?
ty
c

[LWTCS]

Will you describe your process?

What final aggragate abv did you acheive?

[castleclr]

I had about 15 gallons of UJSSM strip, fresh and the now cleared, colored stuff I wrote about awhile back. In glass carboys, diluted to under 27 abv, sat for 3 days or so, siphoned the middle third from each carboy, ran that third on pot still, taking only down till I felt the tails were tasting too stong, was about 50 abv, where I then ran down to about 15 abv, shut down.

The remaining 2 thirds wash are sitting on the bench in the carboys, along with the heads and tails from the run.

[castleclr]

By aggregate abv,,??,, I kept a gallon of spirit that started at about 70 and ended just above 50. Total collect spirit was about 2 1/2 gal, started comming out at apprx 75, ended about 15.

Is that what u asked?

[Husker]

ethanol is miscible with water, so I am not sure just wtf you are trying to do. Water/alcohol will not separate based upon their S.G., ever. It sounds like what you did was simply distill 1/3 of the low wines you had, which does not make any since at all. Distill it all.

H.

[myles]

You can either use a bigger hydroseparator so that the middle third is the right size for your still charge, or separate and store untill you have enough. Just chuck all the feints back into the separator and keep going. Eventually the crap stuff will accumulate so much that you just dump it and start again.

Are you diluting your stripped low wines with wash? That seems to be the usual way to do things. I have a lot of wash in storeage at the moment as I am so busy, but my normal routine is to strip everything and store the low wines till I need them.

The hydroseparation works for me - its a way to stop some of the heads and tails ever getting into the spirit still in the first place.

[castleclr]

Husker,
I tried a method posted here by myles and another or 2,,, refers to a book,, scotch thing,, shows up in a search.

myles,
I used water to dilute for separation.
How can a body tell when the separation vessels should be dumped? Smell, visual?

OK,,so in go the feints, use wash to dilute strip for separation, have another go.

Will keep trying this.
ty
c

[Dnderhead]

if you add feints back to stripping run at some point you git more and more heads/tales.
but on the other hand both this and diluting low wines with wash can add flavor.
of course if your making a neutral this all goes out the window.

[Husker]

I am going to have to read up a bit, it sounds. Looking for the original post now. Not sure exactly what is trying to be achieved, since getting water / ethanol to separate will not happen due to settling, but requires distillation. So it sounds like a readup is in my near future to try to figure out just wtf yous are doing.

H.

[The Baker]

I am going to have to read up a bit, it sounds. Looking for the original post now. Not sure exactly what is trying to be achieved, since getting water / ethanol to separate will not happen due to settling, but requires distillation. So it sounds like a readup is in my near future to try to figure out just wtf yous are doing.

H.

Suggested by Harry on Distillers/New Distillers and probably in his Library.
tastylime I think.
Some of the stuff you don't want
(and maybe rum is different; 'rum oils' or sth. like that are apparently valued for flavour)
floats on the surface of the (watered down to) 27% low wines (hence the name fusel OILS ?)
so if you draw from below the surface they are left behind.

[The Baker]

if you add feints back to stripping run at some point you git more and more heads/tales.
but on the other hand both this and diluting low wines with wash can add flavor.
of course if your making a neutral this all goes out the window.

Thanks for that, Dunder.
I wasn't thinking of the cumulative effect, just that it is an easy way to keep using up the feints without having the quantity on hand increasing until you do a dedicated feints run.
I am doing sugar washes in my pot still at the moment but am trying to get onto some fruit again.

[Dnderhead]

fusel oils- a non specific name for complex rang of the heaver alcohols .these have higher boiling points than ethanol
some times can be seen on the surface of distilled.(butyl,amyl,furfural but you would not fiend them on a ferment.Id say more likely
some sort of vegetable oils. from what Iv seen on here "rum oils"(see Pugis rum) he used what I would call "backins"
these are late tales or after tales,it is more like distilled water with a bit of flavor or sweetness.

[Bushman]

I know this is an older post but just spent an hour researching this topic. Seems like we tell people for safety to rerun feints at no higher than 40% and I have always recommended 30%. This has dealt with the safety aspect but there is another consideration. If you run your charge at near 27% at least below 30% then it is possible to get a better separation of fusel oils. Of course if you are making rum this might not be the best way to go as you are separating a lot of the flavors.

The following is taken from
"Whisky: Technology, Production and Marketing"
Alcoholic strength of the charge of combined foreshots, feints and low
wines should not exceed 30 per cent ABV; strengths in excess of this lead to
blank runs, when the demisting test fails to indicate potable spirit. In such
circumstances the demisting test protects the previously collected potable
charges from an influx of non-potable spirit, which, with its high concentrations
of higher fatty acid esters and long chain saturated carboxylic acids,
would impart a ‘feinty’ note to the spirit. The demisting test should always
be available, even if foreshots are collected on a timed basis.
Low wines and feints receivers and chargers act as separating vessels. The
last runnings of a spirit distillation contain the heavy oils or esters that are not
readily soluble in water. Such oils have an affinity for alcohol, especially at
164 Whisky: Technology, Production and Marketing
high strength. At a strength of less than 30 per cent ABV these compounds
undergo a phase separation, where the esters float on top of the aqueous layer
while a small proportion are dissolved in the aqueous layer. If the concentration
of alcohol is allowed to exceed 30 per cent ABV, these floating surface oils
migrate into the higher alcoholic strength aqueous layer, being completely
dissolved. This effect eventually impacts not only on the demisting test, but
also on the whole spirit distillation – potable spirit cannot be collected as the
charge of low wines and feints contains a disproportionate concentration of
heavy oils, making it impossible to have a turbidity-free demisting test result.
With low wines and feints charges at less than 30 per cent ABV, it is still
possible to attract distillation problems. Presentation of the floating surface
layer of heavy oils or higher fatty acid esters as a charge to the still (by
completely emptying the contents of the charger into the still) will result in
an episode when the collection of potable spirit (as determined by the demisting
test) is unachievable. The whole spirit distillation system will have been
contaminated by these esters, and it can take several distillations before satisfactory
spirit is again obtained.
To avoid such scenarios, when the low wines and feints appear to be
approaching higher strengths (or have even reached this situation) the charge
can be diluted with water, aiming for a combined strength of less than 30 per
cent ABV and thus stimulating hydroseparation. The surface phase must not
be allowed to enter the spirit still on charging.
Adherence to these principles will ensure a consistent product, both on nose
and analysis. The low wines and feints components reach a steady concentration
state, maintaining equilibrium during subsequent distillations.

[heartcut]

Makes sense- thanks for the info and reference.

[Dnderhead]

been doing similar for a number of years.does not work well if doing small/diferant batches.
works only if doing the same over .i have a corny keg with a drain on bottom.

[Bushman]

been doing similar for a number of years.does not work well if doing small/diferant batches.
works only if doing the same over .i have a corny keg with a drain on bottom.

That's interesting, I obviously have more research as I didn't read that but interested in the topic and going to do more research. Problem is most of my google search brings up products for fuel separation products.

[Dnderhead]

a crony keg works as its tall and makes better separation,as it cools the "oils" comes to the top and then you can draw the "good stuff" off the bottom.
you mite have about 1/4 in (15mm)of "oils" each time you add new,so you can keep adding for many generations before draining.

[Bushman]

a crony keg works as its tall and makes better separation,as it cools the "oils" comes to the top and then you can draw the "good stuff" off the bottom.
you mite have about 1/4 in (15mm)of "oils" each time you add new,so you can keep adding for many generations before draining.

Again good information on vessel shape, I knew you drew from the bottom but tall and narrower makes sense. May have to get something different to use to make the process easier.

[Boda Getta]

Sounds all very nice and scientific. IMHO, if pot stilling and if you make a good wash or mash keeping the % ABV reasonable and don't stress your yeast. Then do a proper stripping run and most important, a good slow spirit run with good conservative cuts and then age/char properly all this new age stuff I've been reading about on this forum just ain't worth the effort. Just my opinion, but I could be wrong.

BG

[Odin]

Just sharing my knowledge on hydroseparation:
1. The Scotsch do it in their single malt whiskey making;
2. Feints (mostly tails) are collected and diluted to 17% with water;
3. That way, they "break up" in heads, centre and tailsy oils;
4. The heads sink to the bottom, the tails form a film of oil on top;
5. They syphon of the centre part;
'6. And add that to the next wash.

They continuously repeat this process. The more feints, the better the separation.

Odin.

[Bushman]

Just sharing my knowledge on hydroseparation:
1. The Scotsch do it in their single malt whiskey making;
2. Feints (mostly tails) are collected and diluted to 17% with water;
3. That way, they "break up" in heads, centre and tailsy oils;
4. The heads sink to the bottom, the tails form a film of oil on top;
5. They syphon of the centre part;
'6. And add that to the next wash.

They continuously repeat this process. The more feints, the better the separation.

Odin.

This is exactly what I read about this morning when I decided to do a bit more research on the subject.

Boda gotta its more about the feints and what you add back to the next run to prevent having to collect and separate again.

[Odin]

Good thing you revived this, Bushman! Yeah, for the Scotsch its about getting as much out of their feints as possible. How I got "in contact" with this method, is that I read an article on how master distillers in Scottland judge the drink coming of the still. They poor a bit in a glass and dilute that to 20% before they smell it. The article said something that it wasn't good. 20% didn't sound right to the researchers (University of Edingburg?), because "the full organoleptic blablabla" only comes out at 17%. 'Cause that's when the alcs are ALL no longer soluble in water and (hence) give of their taste.

When I dived in deeper, I think I found the "17% for hydroseparation" comments. I felt I wanted to dive in, because the statement that they cut for feints and add ALL of them back to the next run just didn't make sense.

With hydroseparation all of a sudden I understood how they could add all of their feints back (well, allmost all ...): they hydroseparate and only the good centre part of the solution goes back into the still.

This method, in pot distilling, might help us forward. Remember the discusions between pot distillers about adding feints or not? Some say "do" others say "it just makes heads and tails fractions bigger". With hydroseparating feints, prior to adding them back to the boiler, a "best of both worlds" might be found.

We could also use it like this: strip run, dilute to 17%, syphon off the centre, redistll NOT making cuts. Not saying we should. Just saying we could. Curious what it would do to results. Heads & tails might "stack" pretty well, after you added a few generations to the ... hydrosepartion chamber?

Haha, a new chapter to "Cuts for beginners". It might start like this: "On cuts for beginners ... do not make cuts. Let the water do it for you!"

This chemical reaction also explains why Single Malt needs a bit of water in it ...

Out of solution means into the nose.

Odin.

Edit: The more I think about it, the more I feel we should investigate this further. Do we have a pot distiller around who is willing to strip, hydroseparate and distill without making cuts and telling us how it is? Bushy, you might be on to something here!

[Stonemull]

bumping topic as I am just researching this and wondered if there is any new input. I am considering trying it with just the feints in a future run. Diluting down to 27% or less is going to knock down the abv of the spirit run to about 58% from the phase diagram, thats the start of the run. average will be somewhat lower especially if the tails have been knocked on the head, you would collect a lot lower hearts than normal I guess.

So you would need a third distillation to get up to cask strength for ageing surely ?

The demisting test sounds a bit useless on a quick google, its part if the tails of the last run.
also raises a few interesting points especially down the bottom on the rerunning a 'blank' run.
http://bostonapothecary.com/?tag=demisting

At the chemical level, the demisting test is slightly counter intuitive. What is louching is not even from the heads of the new distillate, it is rather residue left in the condenser from the tales of the previous distillate. These congeners from the previous distillate are not so soluble in water therefore as the proof is lowered, they start to come out of solution and louche. If the still is too clean and you essentially have no previous distillate, you cannot perform a demisting test.

The demisting test is therefore like a timer. The heads contain congeners you do not want and you use the ability to visually test for removal of the long chain fatty acid residue from the previous distillation (which you also do not want) to time the whole process. Luckily they coincide fairly well, but often these days the heads cut is pushed beyond the point of demisting clarity to make a relatively lighter spirit.

[Seb_2]

Good thing

............ Lots of text........

. Do we have a pot distiller around who is willing to strip, hydroseparate and distill without making cuts and telling us how it is?

I have read the same about hydroseparation in the book mentioned above and figured it would be easy to give it a try if it benefits the result. So I did, but only to the extend that I syphoned from the bottom leaving the oily surface layer in the low wines container. The book does not suggest also leaving the bottom part behind.

I currently still have the spirit collected in jars as I was confused by the result. I had difficulty identifying cuts, especially having no heads at all, and would have kept almost all based on my previous experience.

I consider myself a beginner who has a lot to learn to master the skill so before continuing and possibly doing stupid things, I wanted to do some more research. It could be that I prefer wide cuts but it could just as well be that my perception of heads needs adjusting.

The low wines consisted of 3,5l (recycled) feints combined with 15,5l of fresh strip. I charged the still with 15 liters of this mixture @29%.

This is how I stumbled upon this tread and also some other discussion related to the same subject. Although it was posted some time ago, I thought it is worth sharing.

Does this fit your expectations regarding your proposed technique?

Verstuurd vanaf mijn moto g(6) met Tapatalk

[The Baker]

Many years ago on another forum Harry suggested reducing the alcohol content to 28% before the spirit run (maybe before the stripping runs too) and letting it sit for a fair while (maybe a day or two?) and then drawing from below the surface layer.

Geoff

[metalsmith]

Glad this was brought back to the top. Very Interesting!

[The Baker]

Many years ago on another forum Harry suggested reducing the alcohol content to 28% before the spirit run (maybe before the stripping runs too) and letting it sit for a fair while (maybe a day or two?) and then drawing from below the surface layer.

Geoff

Couldn't be before the stripping run, that wouldn't make sense.
It's a long time since I read that...

Geoff

[NZChris]

I tried hydroseparation.

I discovered that if you wait long enough, nothing will happen.

[cayars]

I think some people have a misconception of how Scotch whisky is made or what hydroseperation is (as normally referred to in industry). It's used in mineralogy to separate from ores usually using salts normally, it's used in fracking shale oils and gases, etc.

In whisky production the Scots collect nearly down to nothing left in the boiler which makes the feints lower ABV. The lower the ABV of your feints the better chance for separation (cleaner cuts) on the next run, ESPECIALLY in full copper pot stills. That is what some people seem to have dubbed "hydroseperation".

What it seems like many people want to try and do is separate the oils that float up after a strip run. Nothing wrong with that if you want to do that. You can wick it with a cotton ball in your tails collection jars, from a feints container or just siphon it off. You could also drip through cotton right off the still as well to reduce some of these oils.

But I don't think there is any magic to be chased as talked about earlier in this thread.

[Seb_2]

I figured out why I had difficulty identifying the cuts. I had bought a parrot and used it for the first time. My goal was to have ABV measurements without having to do anything but I did not realize what I do now.... the parrot mixes what you collect thus ending up with a less clean product.

The parrot is alright for stripping, I won't use it for spirit runs again though.

The upside is I'm no longer confused [emoji482]

The separation of oils at lower ABV is visible by eye, I can accept this is helpful in obtaining cleaner cuts. This is also exactly what was mentioned in the book as quoted above. However I'm not convinced on hydroseparation to the extend suggested in the OP.