Lenticular Filter INSTEAD of a Velo?

[fastricky]

The idea of a filter with less moving parts to break (well, actually none!) that can perform various levels of filtering is appealing to me more and more...

Is there any reason to not consider a lenticular filter instead of a 5sq ft Velo? (We're talking filtering 30bbl's btw). All comments welcome.

[BrewinLou]

It is all about time. If you have the time to wait for your yeast to fall out to the point where a Lenticular can polish it to the desired point. The yeast load is key to how much a Lenticular can take before a back flush is needed. You have to back flush with water. With a Velo I shake it down and recirc with no exposure to water. I currently use a Velo for main filtration and am about to start using a Lenticular for polishing. With the speed we run our Velo at(which is about as slow as we can run it) we have to use a fairly coarse grade module in the lenticular.

[fastricky]

Thanks for the reply... It'll be used to filter ales and lagers, so I reckon it won't be up to the task.

In a related question... is there a DE filter made in North America? Or an alternative to a Velo/Italian machine that has parts that are easily sourced?

[Filter Milt]

Lenticular Operation

** Disclaimer: I work for Pall Corporation / Seitz Filtration, and we make Lenticular Filters **

Brewin Lou is correct about yeast load, using clean water to backflush, and using it to polish, HOWEVER, there are many breweries that are using SupraDisc II lenticular filters as a primary, instead of DE. The biggest factor is batch size.

As for the water to backflush, yes, it is needed, but before resuming beer filtration, brewers should push out any residual water with CO2 in order to empty the vessel and ensure that there is no oxygen to come in contact with the beer.

If anyone has any questions, feel free to E mail me at Milton_Leland@pall.com

Thanks!

[HinduKush]

** Disclaimer: I work for Pall Corporation / Seitz Filtration, and we make Lenticular Filters **

Brewin Lou is correct about yeast load, using clean water to backflush, and using it to polish, HOWEVER, there are many breweries that are using SupraDisc II lenticular filters as a primary, instead of DE. The biggest factor is batch size.

As for the water to backflush, yes, it is needed, but before resuming beer filtration, brewers should push out any residual water with CO2 in order to empty the vessel and ensure that there is no oxygen to come in contact with the beer.

If anyone has any questions, feel free to E mail me at Milton_Leland@pall.com

Thanks!

Milton,
What kind of throughput can I expect on a three 30" cartridge filter housing, running 1 micron filters after a 5 micron DE/Perlite filtration?

[Filter Milt]

Throughput on 30" 1um filters

Hindu(?),
It is a good question, but I need a little more info before I can answer.
Also, it may be better to start a new thread so that others can chime in.


1. If it is a "stick" filter, is it "depth", "pleated", or "pleated depth"? Is the 1um rating absolute or nominal? What percentage is the rating? 90% 98% 99.99%

2. How much bypass / bleed are you getting on the DE filter? Even the best DE filters bleed a little.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Generally, in a trap position (post DE) we recommend a depth or pleated depth filter. Certain styles of pleated depth (Profile Star*) are also backflushable. I know it doesn't answer your question, but you may need to e mail me so that I don't fill this post with a bunch of overly technical stuff.

2. Have you tried anything post DE yet? What life are you seeing now?

E Mail me if you would like. Milton.Leland@pall.com or Milton_Leland@pall.com (there is an underscore there, don't know if it shows up)

Thanks!

[fastricky]

Hey Milton, let's assume an average crash on ales for 3 days, and lagers for a month.

30bbl size.

Will the lenticular work? Seems to me if it needs to be backflushed once (if at all) during a filter that isn't that big a deal (which sounds like it wouldn't take longer than 20 minutes) compared to breaking down a Velo, precoating the plates, purging and getting back up to speed which is easily an hour if not more...

Also, post filter, all that needs to be done is a hot water backflush? No caustic to really get all the crud out? Thanks!

[Filter Milt]

I will have to check on the crash and get back to you.

As for backflushing, typical time is 20-30 minutes for rinse, soak, and restart.

We typically size the systems a little on the large size for a couple of reasons:

(* Note: SDII is short for SupraDisc II, a Pall product. Not all lenticulars are backflushable, many aren't).

1. Unlike plate & frame and filter sheets (which we also sell, so there is no bias), you can store and reuse the SDII. What that means is that if you a go a little bigger than you need, you aren't going to waste anything.

2. The SDII comes in 2 sizes, 12" & 16". The 12" has 1.8 m2 of surface area per module, the 16" has 5.0 m2 per module. Especially in a primary role, the more filter area you have, the longer you can go between backflushing.

3. Because the SDII uses sheets as its filtration media, the lower the dP when you backflush, the more effective it is. We normally recommend 1 Bar (15psi). You can go above that, but at that point you start forcing the yeast / DE / whatever deep into the filter, and it is harder to remove.

4. If you oversize the system a little, at the end of the batch, you are still under dP, the filters regenerate more effectively, the filtration is over faster, and they last longer.

As for the procedure for backflushing, low concentrations of caustic can be used as well, but typically brewers will only use clean water. I can't tell you how much better caustic cleans due to differences in beers, crash time, speed, etc.

The most important thing is that you NEED a cold rinse before going to hot. The cold rinse buffers the temp so that you do not cook the contaminents onto the filters (almost like carmelizing sugar). If you burn them onto the SDII, there is no way of getting them out :-(

DE definitely has its advantages and uses, but speed and ease of use aren't among them. System setup, cleaning, and storage of the SDII is quick and easy.

I know this now sounds like a sales pitch, so what I typically do is refer you to a brewery that is using the technology, and let you ask him the important questions.

Thanks!

PS. For a 30 bbl batch in the primary role, we would typically recommend a 4 hi 16" SDII, which gets you 20 m2 of filter area.

[fastricky]

Great answer, thanks Milton!

[HinduKush]

Hindu(?),
It is a good question, but I need a little more info before I can answer.
Also, it may be better to start a new thread so that others can chime in.


1. If it is a "stick" filter, is it "depth", "pleated", or "pleated depth"? Is the 1um rating absolute or nominal? What percentage is the rating? 90% 98% 99.99%

2. How much bypass / bleed are you getting on the DE filter? Even the best DE filters bleed a little.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Generally, in a trap position (post DE) we recommend a depth or pleated depth filter. Certain styles of pleated depth (Profile Star*) are also backflushable. I know it doesn't answer your question, but you may need to e mail me so that I don't fill this post with a bunch of overly technical stuff.

2. Have you tried anything post DE yet? What life are you seeing now?

E Mail me if you would like. Milton.Leland@pall.com or Milton_Leland@pall.com (there is an underscore there, don't know if it shows up)

Thanks!

Pleated, nominal, 98%, never used a trap on this system, hence the question. Some bleed as we find a small bit of Perlite in the empty BBT, not a significant amount.

[Filter Milt]

Typically we suggest a 1.5um absolute rated Pleated Depth Profile Star filter in the trap position. The reason for this is that the Profile Star is backwashable, and so extends the life.

That being said, there are brewers who use depth filters as a trap. I don't have the info in front of me right now, but will make some calls and get some figures for you.

As for using a pleated filter, I don't have anyone using it in the trap position. The reason for this is that although it has a higher surface area than a depth filter, it has very little media depth to catch particles. Because of this, it is normally not worth the extra cost.

I will make some calls and get you a ballpark figure next week.

Thanks!

[Filter Milt]

HK,
I can't give you a definitive answer because there are too many variables, mostly what the absolute rating on your nominal filter is. I can tell you however that I spoke to my brewers, and they typically get 800-1000 bbl's through a set of five 3um, 40" filters, which translates to 40-50 bbls per 10" of filter. This varies greatly depending on A. your Velo B. Bleed through C. What style filter, and D. What the ACTUAL absolute rating of that filter is, but this should give you a head start.

Sorry I couldn't be more specific. Feel free to E mail me if you want to go into more specifics. Thanks!

Milton.Leland@pall.com

[HinduKush]

HK,
I can't give you a definitive answer because there are too many variables, mostly what the absolute rating on your nominal filter is. I can tell you however that I spoke to my brewers, and they typically get 800-1000 bbl's through a set of five 3um, 40" filters, which translates to 40-50 bbls per 10" of filter. This varies greatly depending on A. your Velo B. Bleed through C. What style filter, and D. What the ACTUAL absolute rating of that filter is, but this should give you a head start.

Sorry I couldn't be more specific. Feel free to E mail me if you want to go into more specifics. Thanks!

Milton.Leland@pall.com

Thanks for your efforts. It worked like a champ. That is some shiny beer.