# Removal of Hot/Cold Break and oher Kettle Trub



## wobbly (11/6/14)

What do others do to remove the *absolute maximum *amount of "Break" (Hot, Cold, Hops) in the boiled wort prior to transfer to their FV?

As a few of you will recall I have a Williamswarn Personal Brewery that I use in conjunction with a 20lt Braumeister and one issue I have with the set up is removal of the amount of "Break" material required to be collected in the WW sediment bottle. I need to carry out an extra clarification and empty the sediment bottle a couple of extra times. No big drama I'm just interested in seeing if I can improve my processes and get closer to using/producing a "clearer fresh wort" for use in the system. Other than this minor matter the system is doing everything I expected when purchasing.

I use Brewbrite in the boil, an immersion chiller to cool, and then whirlpool and let settle for about 20 mins. I also use hop pellets and a hop sock.

What I notice is at the end of the boil after adding the Brewbrite the wort is clear with large lumps of "Break" material floating in the wort but by the end of the chill and after the whirlpool and settling period (20 mins) when I transfer the cooled wort it has become quite "cloudy" with little evidence of "lumps" of break material..

I have read that
_"For best trub removal, separation must take place at the highest possible temperature._
_The high temperature maximises the difference in density and minimises the viscosity of_
_the wort. The wort should also be treated as gently as possible in order to maintain the_
_largest size of the trub particles." _
here http://www.daltraining.eu/PDF/4wortclarificationandcoolingandaeration/04.1.pdf

Also somewhere in my research I read that there is a direst correlation between the amount of Hot Break and the amount of Cold Break. ie More HB = More CB 

I have purchased a Blichmann Hop rocket and will use this to both influence flavour and filter the wort on the way to the chiller (CFCW or Chiller plate still to decide)

I have also read that "Boil Vigour" is important in helping form larger Break particles so I will source a SS basin for use as a "Dome" on the BM "a-la" "Dickos" modification. 

What do others do Hot or Cold whirlpool?
What do others use in the Hop Rocket?
Flowers only or pellets as well with some sort of fine screen (Swiss-voile/scrubby) to trap the hop material "a-la" Woolfy's home made HR.
Any one use Rice Hulls or SS scrubbies in the HR 
How do others connect the HR into their "wort transfer" circuit before or after the pump?
Does crushing courser and mashing longer have any impact on the amount of Break Material?
I am aware from another forum that "Dicko" has experimented with a 1.4mm vs 1.2mm crush and mashing longer (overnight). Does this help?
Does "Scooping" the sludge/foam from the top of the wort just as it comes to the boil help reduce the amount of Break? 
I note a number of long time (experienced) posters have moved away from Chiller Plates and back to Immersion Chillers. Any particular reason?
Those that use an immersion chiller how do you agitate the wort_ "gently as possible"_ (as referenced above) to maintain large size trub/break particles? 
Does a different grain maltster (Wyermann vs Joe White) have any significant impact on the amount of Break generated in the boil.
How much Brewbrite (grams) do others use on a typical 23lt brew?
Have others experimented with different kettle finnings to determine what gives the best results.
How do others prep the Brewbrite before adding to the kettle?
I have read that it should be rehydrated and continuously stired for 15 mins before adding to the boil. Who does this and does it improve the performance
Another source I read talked about leaving the Brewbrite to stand over night if possible to ensure effective hydration. Does anyone do this?
Any constructive comments advise would be appreciated

Cheers

Wobbly


----------



## anthonyUK (11/6/14)

There is an interesting article on brulosophy - http://brulosophy.com/2014/06/02/the-great-trub-exbeeriment-results-are-in/
The results may surprise some people but for those that practice 'no chill' this will not be big news 

Fundamentally the trubbier wort produced the clearer beer so I'm happy it is not something else I need to bother with.


----------



## supertonio (11/6/14)

Just read the article linked above and it had some interesting results. Good to see no major flaws have been detected by the tasters. Well worth a read. 

I tend to sometime get a bit cold break in the fermenter so it's put my mind at ease about this happening.


----------



## Bribie G (11/6/14)

Sounds like you are throwing thousands and thousands of dollars at a perceived problem that doesn't actually exist. Sorry if my comment isn't "constructive".


----------



## pk.sax (12/6/14)

It's like asking, my lambo brushed some pebbles, does anyone know a suitable sized bristle brush to sweep roads with so you can go out for a pebble free drive.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Your concern seems to be purely about inconvenience from too much trub in fermenter. I'd be interested to see if the hop rocket fixes it for you (with flowers).


----------



## supertonio (12/6/14)

Again harking back to the article I think the main point is that differences will only be evident if there are two beers compared side by side. Even then it is seems impossible to differentiate between the trub and non trub. 

Sorry to say it but............RDWHAHB.


----------



## wobbly (12/6/14)

Whilst I am aware that there is a lot of brewers out there that claim break material has no detectable impact on their finished beer and therefore don't worry about it that wasn't the question I was seeking comment on.

My, and I'm sure those now considering/starting "pressure fermenting in a corney" are (or will be) very interest is how to minimise carry over into the fermentation vessel as it will result in significant less trub to have to manage at the end of the fermentation phase.

I acknowledge "No Chilling" and then allowing the break to settle before racking to the fermentation maybe one way to achieve this but like a lot of others on this site I am not keen on using a plastic container to transfer hot (boiling) wort into and I am aware that some are now using SS vessels for this process and whilst the WW is a SS conical it is not designed to hold wort at anything higher than 40C 

My post was seeking comments on a whole lot of other potential processes that may (or may not) add those small 1% that can make a difference.

Cheers

Wobbly


----------



## Beertard (12/6/14)

So, how do yall filter your hotset?


----------



## beercus (12/6/14)

anthonyUK said:


> There is an interesting article on brulosophy - http://brulosophy.com/2014/06/02/the-great-trub-exbeeriment-results-are-in/
> The results may surprise some people but for those that practice 'no chill' this will not be big news
> 
> Fundamentally the trubbier wort produced the clearer beer so I'm happy it is not something else I need to bother with.


great read....


----------



## Bribie G (12/6/14)

Trotting this out once again:

2 cubes identical brew
Top clear halves of cubes in one FV
Bottom murky halves of cubes in other FV





Took results to club meeting, blind tasting, little perceivable difference, other than that the cold break beers were considered a tad more flavourful. Maybe slightly different fermentation with CB as extra nutrient?


----------



## manticle (12/6/14)

These side by side 'hot trub = clearer beer experiments never really touch on the main negative of hot break which is beer stability.
Whether chilling or slow/no chilling also has nothing to do with hot break carryover.


----------



## Bribie G (12/6/14)

On reflection at the systems wars brewday the Braumeister hot break was fairly minimal due to the clear wort at the beginning of the boil. I was actually standing next to Pocket Beers when he was draining off and I was quite impressed.
So I'd guess the problem is the limitations of the Williamswarn system if it can't even handle the small amount of trub from a BM.

Maybe a SS conical fermenter would be the go, to remove any carried-over trub that way.


----------



## Dave70 (12/6/14)

Here's what I did with a recent pilsner. 
After all the wirflock and chilling, drained into a cube and chilled overnight, then (gently) racked into fermenter the following day after the floaties had compacted. Came out clear as you might expect. Ad to this it was also crash chilled for a few days before bottling.

Not something I'd normally do with an ale, but since it's only a light bodied, delicately hopped beer that will see extended lagering, I wanted to give it every chance to shine. Or at least be transparent.rather than opaque. 

I somehow doubt the best commercial brewers dump kettle trub into their fermentation tanks, so why do it small scale either if you can avoid it?


----------



## WitWonder (12/6/14)

So what exactly is your objective here? In your OP I can't see the issue you're trying to solve. What is the problem with the finished beer you're producing? In any case, it doesn't follow that clear wort in the kettle correlates to clear wort edit: beer following fermentation. 

That aside, I can relate my personal anecdote in relation to Brewbrite. I typically brew IPAs or APA's (pellet hops with no hopsock) and often had a problem with beer clarity - compounded by the fact I'm usually desperate to get from FV to glass as quickly as possible meant I was often drinking cloudy/hazy beers, some worse than others. After numerous failed experiments with filtering, I've been using Brewbrite with some success where most of my beers usually pour clear from the second pint from the keg. My process is thus;

-Rehydrate brewbrite (12g for ~40L) using the boiling wort or boiling water, whatever. About 5 or 10 minutes before I need to use it. Get all the lumps out
-Dump in brewbrite along with 0 minute hops at flame out, whirlpool
-Leave about 5-10 mins, then start transfer via CFC to fermenter

This results in some pretty clear wort in the kettle and a well defined break at the bottom of the BM, centered around the spindle. Because I want to capture the aroma of my 0 minute hops, I tend to start transfer once the whirlpool has abated.


----------



## anthonyUK (12/6/14)

Dave70 said:


> I somehow doubt the best commercial brewers dump kettle trub into their fermentation tanks, so why do it small scale either if you can avoid it?


I see little correlation between commercial and homebrew processes.
They are typically interested in profit and consistency of product.
Two things that have no interest for me at least.


----------



## wobbly (12/6/14)

WitWonder said:


> So what exactly is your objective here?


Those familiar with the WW know that it was developed for use with extracts which have been centrifuged to remove most/all of the hot and cold break as well as any hop material and the process is basically charge extract into FV and add yeast to sediment bottle and after fermentation is finished in around 4 days chill contents to 1-2 degrees to drop yeast out of suspension into the sediment bottle. Empty settled yeast as it reportedly can react adversely with the clarification fluid (colloidal silica oxide). Add first lot of clarification liquid and leave for 12-18 hours by which time sediment bottle is about 50% filled, add second lot of clarification liquid and after around a further 24 hours sediment bottle will now be 80-90% full. Remove sediment bottle and consume clear carbonated beer.

As the sediment bottle is only 750mils it is not designed to hold the 2 lts of break material that can/does occur/settle in a typical plastic fermenter.

The issue I am seeking to address is that the fresh wort from my BM results in a significant increase in the amount of break material I have to manage at the end of fermentation requiring at times three lots of clarification and emptying the sediment bottle up to 3 times so I am seeking ways to reduce the amount of break material entering the WW in the first place.

From the following I understand that you whirlpool the "Hot Wort" allow to settle for 15 mins and then transfer to your FV resulting in pretty clear wort. 



WitWonder said:


> -Rehydrate brewbrite (12g for ~40L) using the boiling wort or boiling water, whatever. About 5 or 10 minutes before I need to use it. Get all the lumps out
> -Dump in brewbrite along with 0 minute hops at flame out, whirlpool
> -Leave about 5-10 mins, then start transfer via CFC to fermenter


This is different to what I have been doing (I have been chilling first and whirlpooling the chilled wort) and this is the sort of comment I am after

Cheers

Wobbly


----------



## manticle (12/6/14)

I've not chilled very often but settle, whirlpool, settle, chill would be the way I would do it (same as I do now but I currently transfer hot to cube rather than chiller-fermenter).
Could the answer to your query be as simple as this?


----------



## manticle (12/6/14)

anthonyUK said:


> I see little correlation between commercial and homebrew processes.
> They are typically interested in profit and consistency of product.
> Two things that have no interest for me at least.


 Only if your definition is massive megabrewed beer. Small, independent, micro, craft, whatever you want to call it make commercial products and many of those are interested in the same things you and I are.


----------



## pk.sax (12/6/14)

manticle said:


> I've not chilled very often but settle, whirlpool, settle, chill would be the way I would do it (same as I do now but I currently transfer hot to cube rather than chiller-fermenter).
> Could the answer to your query be as simple as this?


I don't whirlpool very hot either, I let it sit for 15-20 minutes hoping for convection currents to settle down and then whirlpool. Often even direct the first lot of cooled wort back I to kettle to chill it further. I however carry some trub out in the end due to past poor pickup/hop management, the first lots of wort transferred however are clear.

Is there some reason to whirlpool while hot?


----------



## anthonyUK (12/6/14)

manticle said:


> Only if your definition is massive megabrewed beer. Small, independent, micro, craft, whatever you want to call it make commercial products and many of those are interested in the same things you and I are.


Not at all. They are still brewing on a scale that far exceeds what most of us make and they have the equipment and processes in place to effectively minimize trub.
For them it would be less beer in the fermenter and for me just less headspace.
I chill anyway but if I do transfer some break material I don't let it concern me.


----------



## WitWonder (12/6/14)

wobbly said:


> Those familiar with the WW know that it was developed for use with extracts which have been centrifuged to remove most/all of the hot and cold break as well as any hop material and the process is basically charge extract into FV and add yeast to sediment bottle and after fermentation is finished in around 4 days chill contents to 1-2 degrees to drop yeast out of suspension into the sediment bottle. Empty settled yeast as it reportedly can react adversely with the clarification fluid (colloidal silica oxide). Add first lot of clarification liquid and leave for 12-18 hours by which time sediment bottle is about 50% filled, add second lot of clarification liquid and after around a further 24 hours sediment bottle will now be 80-90% full. Remove sediment bottle and consume clear carbonated beer.
> 
> As the sediment bottle is only 750mils it is not designed to hold the 2 lts of break material that can/does occur/settle in a typical plastic fermenter.
> 
> ...


Thanks for the explanation. Well, I think you've answered your own question in your OP with what you quoted about separation occurring at the highest possible temperature. I've never heard of whirlpooling whilst cold (before now); to me it's a process that's always been done in the kettle whilst the wort is at or near boiling temperatures. 



practicalfool said:


> I don't whirlpool very hot either, I let it sit for 15-20 minutes hoping for convection currents to settle down and then whirlpool. Often even direct the first lot of cooled wort back I to kettle to chill it further. I however carry some trub out in the end due to past poor pickup/hop management, the first lots of wort transferred however are clear.
> 
> Is there some reason to whirlpool while hot?


For me I want to chill my wort as quickly as possible as, with IPA's, my volatile hop compounds are evaporating into the atmosphere and I want to trap them by chilling as quickly as possible so they end up in my beer.


----------



## Dave70 (12/6/14)

anthonyUK said:


> I see little correlation between commercial and homebrew processes.
> They are typically interested in profit and consistency of product.
> Two things that have no interest for me at least.


You're not interested in a consistent product?

Sure about that?


----------



## Yob (12/6/14)

For me.. I tend to drink it fast enough that it makes no never mind.. That and hot break is left in the kettle.. Cold break, who gives a shit..


----------



## anthonyUK (12/6/14)

Dave70 said:


> You're not interested in a consistent product?
> 
> Sure about that?


Completely. I don' want to churn out the same thing time after time and there are far too many variables to consider if I did.


----------



## Adr_0 (12/6/14)

practicalfool said:


> I don't whirlpool very hot either, I let it sit for 15-20 minutes hoping for convection currents to settle down and then whirlpool. Often even direct the first lot of cooled wort back I to kettle to chill it further. I however carry some trub out in the end due to past poor pickup/hop management, the first lots of wort transferred however are clear.
> 
> Is there some reason to whirlpool while hot?


The only comment I was going to make for the OP was apparently whirlpooling while hot is the go. The key driving force for separation in centrifuges (and whirlpools) is the difference in specific gravity or density. If this is most pronounced when warm, then it does make sense to do this warm.

If you do it warm, you will carry over the cold break into your chiller/fermenter. Not sure if that will be an issue for your 750mL sedimentation thingy.

While apparently a cold whirlpool will encourage cold break to build up in a cone and may mean less carryover (as everyone says above, cold break has no impact on beer quality) I would say that you would only get a decent knockout of hot break if you have a strong boil and use a good flocculant (Kopperfloc, hydrated Brewbrite). If high temperature/density difference is valid then this will obviously improve with higher temperature.

I (haven't measured this...) think I get less hot break from recirculating the mash, and with a hot whirlpool (getting a really fast whirlpool going) I'm able to drain out of the bottom of the kettle and get very clear runoff. This is particularly helpful for the plate chiller I use, but it does get some hops in it and of course cold break material.

Good luck... 

EDIT: Called flocculant something else (too many Paulaner + Ardbeg)


----------



## /// (12/6/14)

Bribie G said:


> Sounds like you are throwing thousands and thousands of dollars at a perceived problem that doesn't actually exist. Sorry if my comment isn't "constructive".


I'm with Bribie, sorry this made my head hurt a bit. Too much going on with 20 or 40l of beer. Can I suggest worrying about having enough kegs, trucks arriving without packed pallets ... pallets ... wanna worry about Chep Pallets ... they charge HOW MUCH for a lost pallet ... HOW MUCH ...

Too much trub, returning to thread, just trub-off in the morning ... works a treat ...


----------



## Eagleburger (12/6/14)

Purely anecdotal and from a noob at that. 

I listened to a podcast a few weeks ago about how trub had little or no negative effect on end product. I happened to brew a coopers eurolager kit with 2 or 3 kg pale malt and a little Saaz just after. And the whole kettle went into the fermenter.

Well it was an anxious few weeks...Dog farts, oh no what did I do. Butter slick feel, oh no what did I do. After a four day crash in the fermenter and a day in the keg it was cloudy, oh no what did I do. A week later, this tastes so good, I keep expecting the police to knock on the door wanting to take it away. The real devastation is it will take 3-4 weeks to brew another and the keg I have is nearly empty and wont last tomorrow night and I have yet to share it.

Added pic.


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (12/6/14)

I would have thought it was logical to whirlpool after the cold break has formed.

But you cant notice it in a Stout....


----------



## Dave70 (13/6/14)

anthonyUK said:


> Completely. I don' want to churn out the same thing time after time and there are far too many variables to consider if I did.


I wont harp on this, but it seems, at least to me, an odd attitude. Ive always believed one of the hallmarks of a good brewer is being able to replicate beers, if for no other reason than to fine tune a recipe. 
Even a hack like me can duplicate his mash schedule and use a thermometer. Unless you purchase your malt, hops and yeast at random and employ your elbow to gauge temperatures, I hardly see what 'variables'there are to consider for the 21st century brewer. 

Guess I did harp on a bit. Sorry.


----------



## mje1980 (13/6/14)

I think I know what he meant. I love milds, love them, but no matter how happy I am with a particular batch, by the time I get around to brewing another, I'm sometimes out of this grain or that, so I'll sub it for another grain similar. Or, I'll just try a different ratio of crystals, or, I'll just add a little black malt with the pale choc, or, I'll try a late hop addition, or, I'll try a different strain of glorious uk ale yeast, or........ The list goes on, which is kind of the beauty of home brewing.


----------



## goomboogo (13/6/14)

Wobbly, whether you whirlpool before or after chilling, there is going to be break carry over. You mention the possibility of changing to a plate chiller when you get the Hop Rocket. This will see cold break carry over to the fermenter as Adr_O mentioned at the end of his post. So, even more trub in the fermenter than you're getting now with the immersion chiller. You may have gone as far as you can with trub minimisation in the fermenter.

Scotty hit the nail on the head with his comment, "just trub-off in the morning." This is where you have an advantage over most homebrewers. The sediment bottle allows you to remove trub when you want. I understand the desire to minimise the number of times you need to empty the sediment bottle. However, looking at the list of possibilities in the OP, with a 750ml bottle, I suspect you'll fill it a couple times no matter what you try.


----------



## Goose (13/6/14)

Dave70 said:


> I somehow doubt the best commercial brewers dump kettle trub into their fermentation tanks, so why do it small scale either if you can avoid it?


Definitely the not the hot break, but I think most commercial brewers plate chill direct from boiler to fermenter and by definition cold break goes into their fermenters, am I right ?


----------



## Bribie G (13/6/14)

A very few breweries filter the _cold _break out of their wort, for example Arkells in the UK. I'd guess most of them either don't bother. Arkells beer always struck me as a bit ordinary anyway.


----------



## wobbly (13/6/14)

Adr_0 said:


> This is particularly helpful for the plate chiller I use, but it does get some hops in it *and of course cold break material.*


Those using a chiller plate does returning/recirculating the output from the chiller back to the whirlpool/boiler via a filter/hop back until the full boil volume is chilled show any reduced amount of cold break transferred to the fermentation vessel either via one last pass of the chiller/hop back or direct from the boiler to the fermenter

Cheers

Wobbly


----------



## SnakeDoctor (13/6/14)

Didn't the WW guy say that extract beers are better than AG anyway?

Probably easier to minimise trub that way if you believe him.


----------



## wobbly (13/6/14)

SnakeDoctor said:


> Didn't the WW guy say that extract beers are better than AG anyway?
> 
> Probably easier to minimise trub that way if you believe him.


Yes I guess you could be right but that's not what I am interested in doing

And on the subject (off topic I know) of how good the WW extract beers/process is perhaps this will be of interest to some.

Cheers

Woobly

. 

View attachment 2014 Beer Awards Results for Brewers.pdf


----------



## SnakeDoctor (13/6/14)

wobbly said:


> Yes I guess you could be right but that's not what I am interested in doing
> 
> And on the subject (off topic I know) of how good the WW extract beers/process is perhaps this will be of interest to some.
> 
> ...



Your mate organises a comp and then declares his own customers as the winners?

Sounds reasonable to me 

No mention of extract or not by the way.


----------



## wobbly (13/6/14)

I will start another topic on this subject just so this thread doesn't get totally derailed

Cheers

Wobbly


----------



## wobbly (13/6/14)

I will start another topic on the subject of the Williamswaarn Beer awards just so this topic doesn't get totally derailed

Cheers

Wobbly


----------



## Goose (13/6/14)

wobbly said:


> Those using a chiller plate does returning/recirculating the output from the chiller back to the whirlpool/boiler via a filter/hop back until the full boil volume is chilled show any reduced amount of cold break transferred to the fermentation vessel either via one last pass of the chiller/hop back or direct from the boiler to the fermenter
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Wobbly


yep. that'd do it I reckon.

Might even give that a try soon, after all, the proof's n the tasting.

There is some interesting reading here on cold break removal. Am sure most of you know who Zamil is, and he makes a point of it himself in this discussion, though it is dated.


----------



## Adr_0 (13/6/14)

wobbly said:


> Those using a chiller plate does returning/recirculating the output from the chiller back to the whirlpool/boiler via a filter/hop back until the full boil volume is chilled show any reduced amount of cold break transferred to the fermentation vessel either via one last pass of the chiller/hop back or direct from the boiler to the fermenter
> 
> Cheers
> 
> Wobbly


I will let you know how the return from the plate chiller goes in about 5-6 weeks.  A couple of things to consider:
- The return line shouldn't splash the beer around too much (a little is fine) as according to the Belgians this can have a neg impact on head retention
- Putting my engineer hat on, I would then be conscious of stratification if you returned to the bottom of the kettle (via a dip tube over the top), i.e. cold stuff on the bottom of the kettle staying in a layer there and being recycled

So for my setup I was going to return it at a tangent to the kettle, about 2/3 of the way up (or at my normal level for a ~20L batch) and in the same direction the whirlpool went. This should then return cooler stuff to the top (mix back in with the hot wort) and encourage a slight whirlpool again.

Kai has a bit on whirlpooling:
http://braukaiser.com/wiki/index.php?title=Whirlpooling

One concern he has is the potential production of DMS without boiloff. I was pretty sure that if you boiled long enough (90min for pils) you got rid of the majority of the precursor (DMM? DSS? BDSM?) so it's not a concern anyway. And how many no-chillers here have no-chilled till the cows come home with no DMS issues? 

The other thing I was going to say was I'm 50:50 on whether waiting 20-30min has any extra benefit. Once the particles have clumped, they are there: either floating around or settled. Once you establish a good whirlpool, as soon as they have started their first cycle these particles will start to settle in the middle. I generally wait 5-10minutes and it seems to do the job (very slight swirling is still happening after 5min) but I might have to see if 20-30min improves things. My gut feel says not really: the separation happens when the whirlpool is happening, and the particles are big enough to settle within seconds (I would have thought).

Stu, only thing with Wobler is where is his bottleneck? If the sediment tank is before the plate chiller, whirlpooling when hot might make a difference (if there is better hot break separation at higher temps). If the sed tank is after the plate chiller I guess he should whirlpool while cold?


----------



## /// (14/6/14)

for all this effort, you know you get a CCV and just trub off in the morning? If you are going to all this effort and not managing your ferment (temp/o2 addition/ cell counts) you are wasting your time worrying about all these factors.


----------



## spryzie (14/6/14)

use a bigger sediment bottle.


----------



## wobbly (17/6/14)

Photos of using "polyester fibre" in a Hop Rocket to filter out break material

http://s1315.photobucket.com/user/gwk453/media/Filtering%20with%20HopBack/DSC_0242_zps0f8052c1.jpg.html

Not my set up but one I found on The Brewing Net Work

Cheers

Wobbly


----------



## lael (19/6/14)

Wonder what polyester does at heated temps? Leach anything?


----------



## djar007 (19/6/14)

http://www.tfia.com.au/satellite/textiles/about-polyester

Not sure about at temp though lael. Maybe put the hop rocket after the plate chiller.


----------



## Not For Horses (19/6/14)

lael said:


> Wonder what polyester does at heated temps? Leach anything?


You've obviously never tried to no chill a yeast starter in a PET bottle. Does not end well.


----------



## Beertard (19/6/14)

http://www.corebrewingconcepts.com.au/product-category/stainless-parts/

There's a stainless triclover trub strainer in their parts list you might be able to fit into your system wobbly.


----------



## lael (19/6/14)

Not For Horses said:


> You've obviously never tried to no chill a yeast starter in a PET bottle. Does not end well.


So you're saying it's a bad idea? Wonder how it goes for filtration in a hop rocket then? Seems... bad...


----------



## Not For Horses (19/6/14)

lael said:


> So you're saying it's a bad idea? Wonder how it goes for filtration in a hop rocket then? Seems... bad...


I think it would be a pretty bad idea. I reckon you'd end up with a big glob of melted plastic in your beer.


----------



## pk.sax (19/6/14)

Not necessarily. There are different types of polyester. Your hdpe cubes are a type of polyester.

Edit: Just think, sticking a poly filled pillow into a washing. Machine on HOT and then later Ito a tumble dryer doesn't melt the fibres.

I think it all depends on type of plasticiser used.


----------



## Not For Horses (19/6/14)

Well technically yes, cubes are a type of polyester but generally speaking when something is called polyester, it means it is PET.
Bearing that in mind, a quick look at the elastic modulus vs temperature graph shows a pretty steep decline after about 80 to 90c. It wouldn't melt but I imagine it would deform quite a bit and cause aforementioned glob.


----------



## Adr_0 (20/6/14)

If you're afraid of poly esters maybe only use it if you're brewing a wheat, Belgian or English style and avoid if you're brewing a lager or APA? 

... 

..


----------



## roger mellie (20/6/14)

djar007 said:


> http://www.tfia.com.au/satellite/textiles/about-polyester
> 
> Not sure about at temp though lael. Maybe put the hop rocket after the plate chiller.


 The whole point of the Hop Rocket is to Isomerise hops pre chill - going to the Hop rocket post chiller would seem to be defeating the point - unless you were using purely as a filter.

RM


----------



## Bribie G (20/6/14)

practicalfool said:


> Not necessarily. There are different types of polyester. Your hdpe cubes are a type of polyester.
> 
> Edit: Just think, sticking a poly filled pillow into a washing. Machine on HOT and then later Ito a tumble dryer doesn't melt the fibres.
> 
> I think it all depends on type of plasticiser used.


No.
HDPE stands for High Density Polyethylene.
Polyethylene (as used for plastic bags and some containers such as fruit juices and of course our cubes) is not an polyester, it's simply a very very long chain carbon to carbon to carbon chain with hydrogen atoms sticking off the sides and is the most "pure" plastic.

Polyesters are long carbon chains that incorporate various esters - for example PET is Polyethylene Teraphthalate. This can give rise to confusion with people who do not understand organic chemistry. The presence of "Polyethylene" as a component of the name doesn't mean that Polyethylene is a polyester, any more than Potassium Chloride as found in your shaker of Lite Salt and Potassium Cyanide are fairly similar. Try and see for yourself.


----------



## djar007 (20/6/14)

roger mellie said:


> The whole point of the Hop Rocket is to Isomerise hops pre chill - going to the Hop rocket post chiller would seem to be defeating the point - unless you were using purely as a filter.
> 
> RM


If you were using it to run hops through then you would not need the polyester as the hops flowers are the filter . I have a hop rocket and am aware of how to and why to use it.


----------



## Not For Horses (20/6/14)

Bribie G said:


> No.
> HDPE stands for High Density Polyethylene.
> Polyethylene (as used for plastic bags and some containers such as fruit juices and of course our cubes) is not an polyester, it's simply a very very long chain carbon to carbon to carbon chain with hydrogen atoms sticking off the sides and is the most "pure" plastic.
> 
> Polyesters are long carbon chains that incorporate various esters - for example PET is Polyethylene Teraphthalate. This can give rise to confusion with people who do not understand organic chemistry. The presence of "Polyethylene" as a component of the name doesn't mean that Polyethylene is a polyester, any more than Potassium Chloride as found in your shaker of Lite Salt and Potassium Cyanide are fairly similar. Try and see for yourself.


I stand corrected. HDPE is indeed not a polyester. It's been a few years since I studied organic chemistry.


----------



## Bribie G (20/6/14)

Been a few _decades _since I studied it


----------

