So I am looking into purchasing three 15bbl single skinned serving tanks. Floor space is at a minimum but we can go up the way. The narrowest that I've seen is 110cm (43"). Does anyone know if you can get narrower or does it start to become a structural/top heavy issue? Thanks
Announcement
Collapse
No announcement yet.
Narrow Serving Tanks
Collapse
X
-
Thank you for the advice. The idea was to shave off 5cm and thus give me just enough room to fit three in.
Having lagering style tanks is a possibility. It would be interesting to see comparisons in CO2 pick up between vertical and horizontal.
Comment
-
ok, i will once again stand up for the humble serving tank.
temp stratification is a red herring. you serve from the bottom. unless your cooler's mechanical is crappy you should have fairly good consistency in temps near the ground and temps 10 feet up. the air needs to be moving. and not sure about your setup, but any long draft runs outside the cooler should be in a glycol trunk anyways so your final serving temp is dictated by that.
if you worry about settling, you arent using finings, etc then you can always just filter. but it is a bit of a pain. thats dependent on how fast you're trying to turn things obviously, we've gone to finings almost exclusively with good results.
our SVs are about 3feet wide for the tall skinny 15s. not sure they get much skinnier than that. but if you have free and clear space in front, you can always stagger them against each other.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Hirsty View PostHaving lagering style tanks is a possibility. It would be interesting to see comparisons in CO2 pick up between vertical and horizontal.
To BrainMedicine's point, you would not be likely to see stratification make a noticeable difference in these size tanks, but it is a real fact in all tanks. I noticed it only to be significant in 30bbl or larger tanks, although I can see it happen in the 7's we have at our pub. Since the density of water is highest at 4*C (39.2*F), convection is important for getting below that point. That means your bottom of your tank is not the coldest point in most cases. Stratification of dissolved co2 will happen as well for these same reasons, but again not so noticeable until you get much larger. Again he is correct in saying you should have trunk lines chilled offering a perfect serving temperature (if not a direct draw through cooler wall).
5cm of size difference shouldn't be enough to make much difference, however it may cost you a lot more in terms of manufacturing. Depends if tanks are prefabricated or not.bStaggering them would probably be your best option for cost savings in the end. Just make sure you have room to open your manway doors.
Comment
-
"It would be interesting to see comparisons in CO2 pick up between vertical and horizontal."
If you CO2 top pressure is in equilibrium with the dissolved CO2 in the beer, then surface area is irrelevant - so get the correct TP, temperature etc and you will not suffer CO2 loss or pickup.
Re material savings - you probably won't save anything as the steel comes in standard size sheets, and if they have to cut those, then normally it costs more than if using a whole sheet, uncut. And particularly if they can't use the offcuts, then you are likely to be charged for the total materials used and wasted, not just the materials used to construct your tank.
Personally, I hate horizontals, for rough beer in particular, as they are more difficult to clean due to poor scavenging, so use of high pressure jet heads and automated control of burst delivery cycles to optimise scavenging are preferred in any sized horizontal, but definitely required in big vessels (OK yours will be anything but big - but still can be a pig to clean)dick
Comment
-
Originally posted by dick murton View Post"It would be interesting to see comparisons in CO2 pick up between vertical and horizontal."
If you CO2 top pressure is in equilibrium with the dissolved CO2 in the beer, then surface area is irrelevant - so get the correct TP, temperature etc and you will not suffer CO2 loss or pickup.
Diffusion of aromas was the main point of the increased surface area mentioned. Bladder tanks eliminate any issues cleaning. I don't particularly advocate for the horizontals, but there are advantages to both designs. Settling times and aroma are the big two for me.
Comment
-
Have you not considered upping the flow rate to that tank, upsizing the co2 supply line and possibly the secondary regulator for that tank? Or maybe your entire supply header needs upsizing.
Maybe im missing some details but 7 is not very big and you should be able to supply nice even head pressure pretty easily id think. We have a 5 that gets about half emptied in a day for special events and stays plenty carbed. Only a 3/8 header supply.
As for bladders, the idea is interesting but haven’t seen them in US, only Europe. Would be interesting to see the economic of buying bladders vs typical cleaning and co2 push. Id think in SF it could be close comparison. Its high rent/labor/co2 area. But in Mexico the labor and co2 are cheap. Chems fairly cheap.
Comment
-
Originally posted by brain medicine View PostHave you not considered upping the flow rate to that tank, upsizing the co2 supply line and possibly the secondary regulator for that tank? Or maybe your entire supply header needs upsizing.
Maybe im missing some details but 7 is not very big and you should be able to supply nice even head pressure pretty easily id think. We have a 5 that gets about half emptied in a day for special events and stays plenty carbed. Only a 3/8 header supply.
As for bladders, the idea is interesting but haven’t seen them in US, only Europe. Would be interesting to see the economic of buying bladders vs typical cleaning and co2 push. Id think in SF it could be close comparison. Its high rent/labor/co2 area. But in Mexico the labor and co2 are cheap. Chems fairly cheap.
I use a high flow regulator to feed the 7 secondary (tap rite) regulators, but it is here the bottle neck occurs. The secondary does not have the volume flow at the desired pressure setting. Upping the pressure will balance the draw rate (we serve two restaurants with these SV's), but then it wastes gas once the draw stops (bleed off). Since Hefe has to go into the first available tank, it moves between the six and I cannot really afford to put in 6 high flow secondary regulators for one style of beer. (First they're not cheap, second I would probably have to fly them back in my suitcase). The best solution I can think of would be to add a gas buffer tank between the secondary lines and the serving tanks to buffer the rapid pressure drop. Space is an issue however. I just live with it. Point is, equilibrium is a "perfect" state that is rarely an actuality in serving vessels.
I have not seen the data myself, but a few people here (Bangalore) swear the bladders are cheaper when factoring chems, labor, co2, and time. I know Mexico is cheap for labor, but India can't be any higher. A skilled employee might see $3000 a year and the average per capita is $1600 annually. Average labor cost here is $0.94 per hour. Mexico is about double that average around $2 per hour (even at their all time low). Chems are relatively cheap here too. They manufacture more pharma products than China, and so base chemicals are in abundance. I'll ask the next time I meet one of these brewers as I am curious to see the cost of bladders and factor it myself. Of course this is something you would have to factor from the beginning.
Comment
Comment