I just visited a Gin Distillery and something got my attention.
My column still has its column right above the pot, these one has a side column.
Here's some pics:
A few questions for those who have better understanding/experience:
- the head cut is contained at the column? Since there are scape valves for each plate;
- at the bottom of the column there is a return valve to the pot, does it keep closed or open during the distillation?
- for gin making, are there any benefits using the column or should just pass it by?
Hi aflosi. Imagine how tall that thing would need to be if they stacked it like your still.
The few distilleries I have spoken with about their similar stills tell me they take their cuts at the end, and not from the middle of the column. I don’t know about what “most” do.
My understanding of Gin making is that the alcohol used is already “cut”, so no need for additional fractioning.
Attached is a diagram of a local still that is similar. Note the sillouets on the bottom, showing the different configurations based on the product being produced. Their Gin process bypasses the platted column.
1- the head cut is contained at the column? Since there are scape valves for each plate;
2- at the bottom of the column there is a return valve to the pot, does it keep closed or open during the distillation?
3- for gin making, are there any benefits using the column or should just pass it by?
Naturally there is more than one way to skin the cat.
However:
1-Heads cut would typically be done by putting the column into 100% reflux mode(or as close as possible)for a period of time. And then drawing off heads in a slow and measured manner.
2-That valve remains open during distillation. I really don't know why its there unless the drain back was not engineered correctly?? Dunno? If the drain back straw that enters the kettle and then drops well below the liquid level,,,that valve is not needed.
Drain looks a little underwhelming. In order for the system to run at optimal collection speeds, the drain should be sized so that it can at least drain as much liquid as the kettle can reasonably produce in vapor during a spirit run. In other words, don't let the drain be the bottle neck. I'm sure the system otherwise makes a lovely spirit.
3-Botanicals can reveal their goodness at different ABVs. Some distillers pre-rectify everything first. Some will install botanicals into the vapor path during rectification. some just keep it old school and drop em in the kettle charge.
Uh, speaking of valves, isnt that thing a bomb as shown in the first pic? Both valves are closed so vapor can not go anywhere... or is there an unseen path out of the onion? Looks like a fail danger to me.
zapata wrote:Uh, speaking of valves, isnt that thing a bomb as shown in the first pic? Both valves are closed so vapor can not go anywhere... or is there an unseen path out of the onion? Looks like a fail danger to me.
Think you are very observant and probably quite correct assuming the valves work as we would normally expect
Here's hoping the guy who runs the still has a "safe operating proceedure " that he follows that would pick up on that .
BugHunter wrote:The return line can be quite a bit smaller than the vapor line coming out of the boiler. Remember, vapor takes quite a bit more space than the liquid.
Sure.
I wasn't that clear but my point is that based off of the pipe sizing (vapor and drain) a smaller diameter column can likely run just as well with no real quality of separation issues.
No matter. I'm sure the outfit makes a good spirit.
PRVs take care of the potential pressure issues but don't see any.
yeah the valves are a problem. i'd interlock them so you have a fail safe.
the valves on the plate sections are for the CIP system.
the copper on the left is the PC, you can see the parrot in front of it with the output going to the spirits receiver. (the SS tank that is underneath the columns?)
heads come off this still the same way they do on any other still.
HDNB wrote:yeah the valves are a problem. i'd interlock them so you have a fail safe.
It probably would have been better to use a 3-way valve instead of the 2 on-off valves, unless I'm missing a use case for having both valves closed (cleaning or ???).
LWTCS wrote:
PRVs take care of the potential pressure issues but don't see any.
+1 that's a nice looking column still
A boiler PRV would be a good idea, especially when there's valves between the pot and the atmosphere.
It doesn't take much for a PRV, just give the boiler the option to blow bubbles, instead of blowing up
