Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Whirlpool design, ratio, bottom design

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Östersund, Sweden
    Posts
    58

    Whirlpool design, ratio, bottom design

    Hi!
    Trying to read up on WP designs. We are quoting a new system with a seperate WP (3 vessel system with mash/kettle, lauter and WP). We have different quotes some with attached schematics and just trying to figure out the different designs.
    Regarding ration, there are different recomendations. Some say a H/w ratio of 0,8:1, some say 1:2. Total WP volume for us will be about 20bbl. SO, flow rate to the WP we will aim for 3,5m/s.

    Also, the design of the bottom is also a subject for discussion. Some have quite wide angles (wall/bottom), some nearly flat. Some would recomend a very discrete slope to the edge and some will even recommend a convex bottom. The later two alternatives, to my understanding will cause problems in cleaning. Large angle /wall/bottom) will probably be best if the cone is somewhat loose but will also potentially give a bit more loss of wort. A nearly flat bottom will increase wort yield and should work well for trub disposal.
    So. Any comments on this. I've attached a picture showing different designs and two differnt ratios on h/w. Would anyone care to comment this?

    Name:  exempel WP.jpg
Views: 1363
Size:  67.9 KB

    Best regards
    J&B

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Östersund, Sweden
    Posts
    58
    No one has an input?
    best
    J&B

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Kent, WA
    Posts
    338
    Quote Originally Posted by J&B View Post
    No one has an input?
    best
    J&B
    I try not to comment on things I don't have direct experience with, but my understanding has always been that WP bottom design B is preferred, because it yields the most wort, since the cone drains without getting disturbed. I think the cleanout issue you mention is mitigated because there are multiple ports where wort is collected.

    The h/w ratio (for a WP only) I've always read is 1:2, as in the top vessel. And a wider vessel seems like it would be better, but then when you look at how the cone is actually formed, it looks to me like the settling path is longer in a wide vessel. So all I can say, unhelpfully, is I don't know--but I'm curious.

    Regards,
    Mike Sharp

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Lakewood,CO
    Posts
    10

    Whirlpool Design

    As far as the different designs go Wider is better, the cone stays in place. From my experience on a vessel that was tall and narrow the cone crushed under it's weight pushed to the sides and wort loss was a side effect.

    On the shape of the bottom I have liked design (A) the best. As long as you have a side collection port and a port at the edge of the cone you get great collection of wort. The loss of 5 gallons of wort is worth not getting any getting in the fermentor. Even on a wheat beer, it makes cleaning the vessel an easy task.

    We have just ordered a three vessel Brewhouse this way, we did have to ask for the additional port on the side of the vessel. It cuts your whirlpool rest time to 5 to 10 min. instead of 20 to 30. When you are doing 2 or more brews a day it really does help out on time. Also you can add a inline filter to the upper port and start collection once the transfer from Brew kettle to whirlpool is done, but it does add one more item to clean at the end of each brew.

    Mike George
    Director of Brewery Operations
    Blue Spruce Brewing Company

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Östersund, Sweden
    Posts
    58
    Quote Originally Posted by hydromike View Post
    As far as the different designs go Wider is better, the cone stays in place. From my experience on a vessel that was tall and narrow the cone crushed under it's weight pushed to the sides and wort loss was a side effect.

    On the shape of the bottom I have liked design (A) the best. As long as you have a side collection port and a port at the edge of the cone you get great collection of wort. The loss of 5 gallons of wort is worth not getting any getting in the fermentor. Even on a wheat beer, it makes cleaning the vessel an easy task.

    We have just ordered a three vessel Brewhouse this way, we did have to ask for the additional port on the side of the vessel. It cuts your whirlpool rest time to 5 to 10 min. instead of 20 to 30. When you are doing 2 or more brews a day it really does help out on time. Also you can add a inline filter to the upper port and start collection once the transfer from Brew kettle to whirlpool is done, but it does add one more item to clean at the end of each brew.

    Mike George
    Director of Brewery Operations
    Blue Spruce Brewing Company

    Thanks to both of you!

    I am also thinking of alternativ B but I would very much like to avoid alot of angles in the piping. But maybe one pipe on each side would be sufficient (except the ones further up)?

    And Mike George, have you workt with designs both lika A and C (and B). Why do you prefer A Before C? The C option will also have bottom outlets. Is the cone more stable in alt A? We normaly use some kind of flocculant in our brews.
    Best regards,
    J&B

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Minocqua WI
    Posts
    818
    Add a Hop Damm.
    Brewmaster, Minocqua Brewing Company
    tbriggs@minocquabrewingcompany.com
    "Your results may vary"

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Oct 2014
    Location
    Lakewood,CO
    Posts
    10

    Diffrent designs

    I have brewed on all of them. I still like (A) the best. Option (B or C or D) even with a hop dam takes longer to clean, when you are doing multiple turns in a day. Option (D) with a hop dam you get higher turbidity coming out as well. Option (D) just stay away it is the worst as for as turbidity and cone stability. How I rank them is (A) is the best, then (C), then (B) and (D) last. AS far as angels in your piping that should not be a worry. Option (A) has the most stable cone by far, and when you dump all of the trub from the whirlpool it can then be drained into a drum with holes in the bottom with a mesh inside, this acts as a strainer and all of the hop and trub can be added to the spent grain. This will lower your BOD and solids going down the drain, in turn less plumbing issues. I was a engineer prior to being a brewery, so I do like to have the best outcome from the systems I have brewed on. If you take a look at the big guys like COORS, Premier Stainless, Stieneker, Mueller, all of the whirlpool designs are very close to option (A). Coors main whirlpool vessel is just like (A) and they hate waste there, they even take the trub and run it thru a decanter to recover the remaining wort. If you want to get a full understanding, if you can get a hold of a copy of Technology Brewing and Malting, by Wolfgang Kunze which is one of my reference books besides Brewing: New Technologies by Charlie Bamforth and Brewing by Michael Lewis. The information in those three books cover about any questions you could think of.

    Mike George
    Director of Brewery Operations
    Blue Spruce Brewery

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Location
    Rochester,NY,US
    Posts
    49

    fermenter?

    I am also talking to manufacturers about a whirlpool and very interested in everyones opinion on design, my kettle has the same design as option A and I'm not a fan of the cone it creates. But my kettle is also the mash mixer with paddles that get in the way of a good cone. My question though, is I witnessed a brewer whirlpooling in an empty fermenter, resting--then drawing off the racking arm leaving the trub/hops/etc in the cone. Has anyone seen this, or thought about why that would work or not?

    thanks

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Capital Federa, Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    11
    Hi J&B,
    I'm quoting a WP vessel and looking for designs I found your post. Could you comment on your findings and the final result?
    Best regards,

    Ed

    Quote Originally Posted by J&B View Post
    Hi!
    Trying to read up on WP designs. We are quoting a new system with a seperate WP (3 vessel system with mash/kettle, lauter and WP). We have different quotes some with attached schematics and just trying to figure out the different designs.
    Regarding ration, there are different recomendations. Some say a H/w ratio of 0,8:1, some say 1:2. Total WP volume for us will be about 20bbl. SO, flow rate to the WP we will aim for 3,5m/s.

    Also, the design of the bottom is also a subject for discussion. Some have quite wide angles (wall/bottom), some nearly flat. Some would recomend a very discrete slope to the edge and some will even recommend a convex bottom. The later two alternatives, to my understanding will cause problems in cleaning. Large angle /wall/bottom) will probably be best if the cone is somewhat loose but will also potentially give a bit more loss of wort. A nearly flat bottom will increase wort yield and should work well for trub disposal.
    So. Any comments on this. I've attached a picture showing different designs and two differnt ratios on h/w. Would anyone care to comment this?

    Name:  exempel WP.jpg
Views: 1363
Size:  67.9 KB

    Best regards
    J&B

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Chesterfield, UK
    Posts
    1,921
    As stated on a couple of other threads here - one of them current, the EBC manual of good practice is useful. Although Kunze (see one of other threads) says one factor, the EBC manual states 0.7 wort depth to 1.0 diameter for best results. I have worked at a fair number of breweries and the ones that work best are close to this ratio.

    Flat bottom, or slight upward cone would be my preference, for simplicity of build as much as anything. About 1.5 to 2.0% slope. Wort inlet about 1/3 of way up final wort depth. Wort inlet speed 3 to 3.5 metres / second.
    Lowish sidewall outlet switching to edge of base outlet when sidewall outlet about to be uncovered.

    Pellet hops or extracts or a mixture of the two - whole hops give much higher losses.

    Check various other threads on WP design
    dick

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Capital Federa, Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    11
    Thanks, Dick! That's very helpful. When you say slightly upward cone you mean like figure "B"?



    Flat bottom, or slight upward cone would be my preference, for simplicity of build as much as anything. About 1.5 to 2.0% slope. Wort inlet about 1/3 of way up final wort depth. Wort inlet speed 3 to 3.5 metres / second.
    Lowish sidewall outlet switching to edge of base outlet when sidewall outlet about to be uncovered.

    Pellet hops or extracts or a mixture of the two - whole hops give much higher losses.

    Check various other threads on WP design[/QUOTE]

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Chesterfield, UK
    Posts
    1,921
    B or D, but A and C also work, but you may lose slightly more wort, especially with the steeper cone angle of A, because you can't guarantee to drain all the liquid out. With B & D - you maximise the draining of the trub cone.
    dick

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Jun 2016
    Location
    Capital Federa, Buenos Aires, Argentina
    Posts
    11
    Thanks again, Dick! Very helpful!
    Cheers!

    Quote Originally Posted by dick murton View Post
    B or D, but A and C also work, but you may lose slightly more wort, especially with the steeper cone angle of A, because you can't guarantee to drain all the liquid out. With B & D - you maximise the draining of the trub cone.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Palau
    Posts
    2,024

    Regardless of design, add a BOTTOM drain.

    You will never get a clean whirlpool with side only drains. Good for getting wort from trub, but useless to clean up afterward. Same on kettles. Don't know why any manufacturer would make a vessel without a bottom drain.
    Phillip Kelm--Palau Brewing Company Manager--

Similar Threads

  1. Sungood 3BBL Brewery (Hybrid Design) - Design questions
    By SpencerBizzell in forum Electric Brewing Q&A (Sponsored by Wattco)
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 08-14-2019, 12:12 PM
  2. Mash/Lauter Tun Design Question - False Bottom
    By husky in forum Equipment Q&A (Sponsored by Sungood Machinery)
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 02-06-2017, 12:15 PM
  3. Whirlpool design
    By schmogger in forum Equipment Q&A (Sponsored by Sungood Machinery)
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 12-03-2015, 05:38 AM
  4. Whirlpool design help
    By Joe Brewer in forum Equipment Q&A (Sponsored by Sungood Machinery)
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 10-03-2013, 06:00 PM
  5. Whirlpool design??
    By Cougar in forum Equipment Q&A (Sponsored by Sungood Machinery)
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 05-20-2007, 01:56 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •