# Temp Control Choices...



## gibbocore (14/9/08)

I'm tossing up between the mashmaster set point controller or a PID for the herms system, i'll defs go with set point control for my HLT but for the herms unit i'm wondering if i just play round with a set point i can wok out the relationship between my coil and MT i should be able to get some decent efficacy from a set point controller and avoid the extra stuffing around of a PID.

feel free to shoot me down.

Thoughts?


----------



## LethalCorpse (14/9/08)

I dunno what you mean. A PID, or PID controller as it is more accurately termed, is just one of many different types of set-point controller. What's the other type you're talking about? on-off control (like a simple thermostat)?


----------



## gibbocore (14/9/08)

one of these






or


----------



## LethalCorpse (14/9/08)

I see. Well, the first photo you've got there is of a self-tuning PID controller, the second is of a mashmate which is an on-off controller. An on-off controller is pretty straightforward - the element is on when the temperature is below the setpoint, of when it's above. A PID controller, along with most other types of controller besides on-off, adjusts the duty cycle of the heating element - turns it on for a few cycles, off for a few - so that the heat put out by the element can be varied. The PID controller specifically has its output power determined by a combination of the size of the error (the difference between the setpoint and the current temp), the derivitive (the speed that it's changing) and the integral of the error (the sum of all previous sampled errors over time). This allows for finer control over the temperature, and can, in well tuned systems, result in fast rise time (initial heating when you turn it on or change the temp), low or even zero overshoot, fast settling time (how long it takes to stop over and undershooting), and better steady state stability and accuracy (once it's reached the setpoint, it stays there). There are some caveats though. On-off control works reasonably well, with the main limitation being how long it takes the heat you put in to affect the temperature read by the sensor. PID control needs to be tuned, and expects the system it's controlling to be linear and time invariant (this means that you've always got the same amount of water in it, the ambient temperature is the same, air movements etc all remain reasonably constant). Such a controller will perform very differently with a small batch as compared to a large one. There are smarter control systems that can deal with this sort of thing on the fly, but they're much harder to come by, because they're more difficult to understand and design.

All of that aside, a PID controller will still likely perform better, once tuned for an average water volume, than an on-off controller. That isn't to say that the on-off controller won't be satisfactory, and since they're cheaper, it might be hard to argue with on-off control. There is another important consideration though - for a HERMS system, I understand that you've got a pump recirculating the wort through a copper coil submerged in the HLT, which is full of water at some higher temperature, and the pump is either shut off, or has its flow diverted with a solenoid valve, so that the recirculated wort doesn't flow through the HLT coil, correct? In this case, it has to be on-off control (for the pump and/or the solendoid), unless you have some means of varying the flow in small steps, like zizzle's wiper-motor-ball-valve contraption, or an expensive flow control valve, or a pump that is happy with a variable duty cycle. Even then, you would need a complex, double input, dual loop system model to account for the fact that you've got a variable HLT temp and a variable flow rate. The maths gets pretty ugly.

If it were me, I'd go for a PID controller on the HLT's element, and a mashmate on-off controller for the HERMS recirc pump/valve. If it's a RIMS, not a HERMS, a PID loop on the RIMS element wouldn't go astray but again, expect variable performance with variable system conditions.


----------



## gibbocore (14/9/08)

Cheers for that dude.

I had intended on having constant re-circ without the solenoid valve switching, there will be a bypass though for the HLT water additions for mash out and batch sparging but during the mash cycle i was going to just havea constant flow through the coil and let the temp controler throttle the temp with my probe in the MLT outlet. I'm fairly aware of the temp overshoot i'm going to have to battle here but its how i'd prefer to tune the system.


----------



## LethalCorpse (14/9/08)

If you want to do it that way, you'd be much better off with a RIMS. It's a much too complicated system model to control the temp of the HLT water and have that change the mash temp - performance will be terrible. The simplest option will be a fixed temp in the HLT, using a PID controller, ideally set at your mash-out temp. Then use on/off control (like the mashmate) with temp probe in the tun, and either switching the pump on and off, or switching a solenoid for flow diversion.


----------



## gibbocore (14/9/08)

i'm thinking now that i'll go with solenoid switching to bypass the herms and maintain circulation throughout the mash cycle.

i have started to build my brewery already and pretty much have an empty shell atm, two keggles (MLT& Kettle) a 40L pot for HLT and a 20L pot for the herms coil, i want to finalise my plumbing circuit so i can go buy the bits.

So from what i understand, i'll have my probe in the MLT or MLT outlet (preferably) start the pump for recirc and set the Mashmaster controller for mash temp, when temp drops a degree below the set point solenoid valves will open/close allowing circulation through the HERMS then when temp is achieved the solenoids swtch back to bypass. The only thing i cant work out is what will the element be doing in the HERMS vessel while it is recirculating?


----------



## LethalCorpse (14/9/08)

Why are you using a separate vessel for the HERMS? It's just a waste in terms of water and plumbing. If you use your HLT, you can just have it set at your mashout temp, and when it comes time to sparge you utilise the water you've been using for the HERMS. I know you can get faster steps if you were to use a separate vessel and keep it closer to boiling, but otherwise I can't see any real advantages.


----------



## gibbocore (14/9/08)

HHmmmm that was my origional plan. Then i was advised against it, and it seemed the norm when observing other peoples systems.

I guess the clincher was faster steps. 

geez now i'm confused


----------



## LethalCorpse (14/9/08)

The steps aren't that much faster, and a higher differential temperature reduces your steady state stability (temp oscillates more at the setpoint). Stick with the HLT and use the 20L pot for big bastard laksas and mussel dishes.


----------



## gibbocore (14/9/08)

well it looks like i'm back to the drawing board.....

BTW, are solenoid valves hard to come by?

Cheers again for helping out!


----------



## LethalCorpse (14/9/08)

Yeah, but they're not cheap. Again, if it were me, I'd just put the on-off controller on the pump - you won't get that big an advantage from constant recirc, and in terms of wort sitting in the coil getting hot, well, that's going to happen whichever method you use. Solenoids _are_ expensive, though if you're mechanically and electrically handy you could rig up something like zizzle's motors attached to standard, cheap ball valves. Servos or stepper motors would be ideal if you know how to drive them, as they are made for driving to fixed positions.


----------



## Screwtop (14/9/08)

LethalCorpse said:


> Why are you using a separate vessel for the HERMS? It's just a waste in terms of water and plumbing. If you use your HLT, you can just have it set at your mashout temp, and when it comes time to sparge you utilise the water you've been using for the HERMS. I know you can get faster steps if you were to use a separate vessel and keep it closer to boiling, but otherwise I can't see any real advantages.




Is your system HERMS or RIMS LC ?

Screwy


----------



## gibbocore (14/9/08)

Hey guys, before i make any drastic changes to the origional plan i had, i might do an MSpaint sketch of my plan and plumbing layout and see peoples thoughts on weather it would actually work or not.


----------



## Screwtop (14/9/08)

gibbocore said:


> Hey guys, before i make any drastic changes to the origional plan i had, i might do an MSpaint sketch of my plan and plumbing layout and see peoples thoughts on weather it would actually work or not.



Good idea Gibbo, there are quite a few HERMS brewers who could kick in ideas.

Screwy


----------



## gibbocore (14/9/08)

here tis






There's a fair few valves i know but the flow is actually pretty easy (for me) to understand.

bare i nmind also that hose distance and valve distance is not to scale.


----------



## Screwtop (14/9/08)

gibbocore said:


> here tis
> 
> 
> 
> ...




It's one of those Zackary systems Gibbo :lol: Zacary the same as mine, works well. You need to take into account the temp that your wort will reach in the system while circulating. There are times when you need to throttle back the outlet from the pump to slow the flow when recirculating (during rests and after mash out to clear the wort) so as not to pack down the grainbed. Much more important a lower rest temps, as once at mash out the mash loosens up considerably, but when starchy at lower temps it packs down. Opening up the valve fully gives the fastest ramp time, is it possible to achieve valve adjustment using solenoids?

Cheers,

Screwy


----------



## Tony (14/9/08)

Ive been running a HERMS for a few years now, and have made a few changes over time to optinise it.

Im a Control Systems Engineer for fun on weekdays and live with PLC's, SCADA and PID control. But on my brew rig i went with nice simple on/off control. And wont change it either!

I have $800 Eurothern PID controllers sitting in boxes in my gagage but use cheap on/off control for everything. I do this because its simple and accurate enough for home brewing! I have said this before and will say it again. PID is not needed for your average home brewing setup. Some complex systems may need it but 99% will get buy just fine with on/off control.

The more critical factor is your control point. Where are you going to get your readings from and what temperature 's are you going to control?

I have 2 temperature controlers but i only use one these days....... the HLT one. simple setup, temp probe in HLT, HWS element and an Omron on/off controller running the show. It over and under shoots by a degree either way but the temp of the outlef of the HErns only changes by 0.2 deg either way during recirculation. 

Anyone who tells you 0.2 deg in mash "recirc" temp will cause problems needs shooting!

Here is what i do and it works very well. Screwey has changed his system to be similar as far as i know and now gets predictable results as far as i know.

I work on averages! To get a given finnish to a beer i know what average temp i need in my mash for the wanted result.

I have a 50 liter insulated keg as a mash tun. I use a march pump to recirc and regulate flow with a ball valve on the pump outlet. I like to recirc slow to stop the mash bed compacting. With different malts ect this can mean a different rate of flow for any different brew. I origionally had solenoilds set up to switch my recirc through the herms from recirc to bypass depending on the temp of the wort exiting the mash but i found this a poor control point because by the time the exit mash liquor heated up to the setpoint by a fixed HLT temp the top of the mash was over heated.

So i changed my control point to the return liquor point. I still monitor the exit point. I now mash in at temp wanted and let settle for 10 min. I then start the pump and adjust the required flow with the pump outlet valve. 

lets say i want to mash at 66 deg. In my system i will usually get a 1 or 2 deg drop in temp out the botom of the mash before it goes through the HERMS coil.... say 64 deg I then raise the HLT temp so that my return is at 68 deg.

Average through the mash is 66 as shown by a dial therm i have in the center of the mash.

If im mashing cooler at 64 deg its 62 out and 66 return.

works a bloody treat!

a deg or 2 makes bugger all dfference in the mash. The recirc process moves the wort through the mash and effectivly stires it without disturbing the grain bed, you get clear wort to the kettle and can simple control the beers outcome.

you dont need to control the worts temp to within 0.1 deg, as long as it stays within a few deg either side while recircing it will work out perfect

I say start simple and ifyour not happy, go to PID and all the complication it presents. Tuning, hunting ect if not tuned properly..... (auto tune doesnt always work) and the pricey equipment needed to PID control an element.

cheers


----------



## kirem (14/9/08)

Gibbo,

You are going to get different opinions on PID versus on/off control, sensor placement, HERMS versus RIMS, how much 2degC in the mash makes to your fermentablity, to use a separate heat-exchanger or the HLT and many more questions.

These opposing opinions will come from some very highly qualified, experienced and knowledgable people on here.

You need to make your own decisions from these opinions and build your system and get some real world answers for yourself.

The HERMS I have now is very different to the original system I built.

cheers,

Kirk


----------



## Tony (14/9/08)

100% aggree!

Build something to what gear you have and what control you can use effectivly and go from there

As i, kirem and many others did, findout what your systems problems are and change it to suit your brewing requirements.

No system is the same when we are talking about home made breweries and no control statagy can be put into place on the assumption of what your system will be like when its full of grain and hot water.

Build it and they will come 

cheers


----------



## Thirsty Boy (14/9/08)

Not going to argue with Tony in General - only a little bit of nitpicking. I run a PID and like it better than the set-point. I get significantly less overshoot on the mash temp.

My PID cost me about $10 less than, delivered from the states and installed with a mech relay into a jiffy box, a Mashmaster wold have cost me. So for mine, I beleive I got a slightly better degree of control for a little less money.

Complexity - I suppose so if you consider pressing the auto tune button and letting the system do its thing to be complex.

Still, I suspect it mainly comes down to what you are comfortable with. Lots of people are brewing great beer with mashmaster or similar set-point controllers, people are doing the same with PIDs. Either way your design is a tried and tested one and I see no reason for you to be going anywhere near the drawing board again. Toss a coin, pick a controller and it will be fine either way.

TB

PS - two more replies while I was typing (I am slow) and I agree with them both 100% - just go now and fine tune on the fly


----------



## Screwtop (14/9/08)

kirem said:


> Gibbo,
> 
> You are going to get different opinions on PID versus on/off control, sensor placement, HERMS versus RIMS, how much 2degC in the mash makes to your fermentablity, to use a separate heat-exchanger or the HLT and many more questions.
> 
> ...







Tony said:


> 100% aggree!
> 
> Build something to what gear you have and what control you can use effectivly and go from there
> 
> ...




Top advice, we can relate our findings and how we apply processes that have been developed from using our individual kit. But really it's up to what spins your wheels. Hopefully there'll be some more input from experienced HERMS brewers, I found the more info I could get hold of helped immensely in deciding what design was acceptable to me and what I could build given my abilities and available materials.

Screwy


----------



## LethalCorpse (14/9/08)

Screwtop said:


> Is your system HERMS or RIMS LC ?
> 
> Screwy


Neither, Screwy, I'm a lowly partial man until I get enough time and cash to put my birthday present together. My input comes from experience with control systems, not with HERMS specifically, but it's generally applicable.

When I do get it together, it'll be RIMS because, like Tony, I think the control system should be as simple as possible to reliably achieve the desired results, and having multiple inputs, multiple outputs to a system complicates it unnecessarily. I'm not with him on on-off control though - I agree that it's simple and effective, and pretty much good enough for brewing, but since it'll cost me nothing extra to implement a better control system I might as well. I'll be building my control system using some fat SCRs and a microcontroller, ideally resulting in one box to control the whole brewery - elements, valves, fridge compressors, etc. I haven't decided what control strategy to use yet, but I'm going to start with pure proportional (the next most simple after on-off) and work from there depending on the results I get.


----------



## Screwtop (15/9/08)

LethalCorpse said:


> Neither, Screwy, I'm a lowly partial man until I get enough time and cash to put my birthday present together. My input comes from experience with control systems, not with HERMS specifically, but it's generally applicable.
> 
> When I do get it together, it'll be RIMS because, like Tony, I think the control system should be as simple as possible to reliably achieve the desired results, and having multiple inputs, multiple outputs to a system complicates it unnecessarily. I'm not with him on on-off control though - I agree that it's simple and effective, and pretty much good enough for brewing, but since it'll cost me nothing extra to implement a better control system I might as well. I'll be building my control system using some fat SCRs and a microcontroller, ideally resulting in one box to control the whole brewery - elements, valves, fridge compressors, etc. I haven't decided what control strategy to use yet, but I'm going to start with pure proportional (the next most simple after on-off) and work from there depending on the results I get.



OK, I see. Keep in mind there are other issues to brewing other than control, something I've learn't from experience.

Cheers,

Screwy


----------



## LethalCorpse (15/9/08)

Screwtop said:


> OK, I see. Keep in mind there are other issues to brewing other than control, something I've learn't from experience.
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Screwy


Well aware of that, Screwtop, but while it was just Gibbo and me in this thread I thought I'd get the control aspect covered while we waited for some of the HERMS brewers to come along and share their "experience".

The issues associated with HERMS (Because that's all we're talking about here, not brewing in general) are, as I understand it, temperature control and recirculation. The objective is to recirc the mash so that the grain bed forms a filter and the runoff is clear, while applying gentle heat through the coils which allows you to keep a constant temp without scorching the wort or extracting tannins. You also need to make sure that, in doing this, you don't compact the grain bed or form wells in it. Have I missed anything?

So, that in mind, I still don't see why you need a separate vessel to the HLT for your heat exchanger. It's performing the same job, but you need more plumbing, another element and another controller. If you've got the answer, screwy, let me know, but I won't cop "because we're HERMS brewers and we say so". As has already been pointed out, plenty of HERMS brewers use the HLT, and I don't think I need to have built one to be qualified to ask the question.


----------



## kirem (15/9/08)

LethalCorpse said:


> Well aware of that, Screwtop, but while it was just Gibbo and me in this thread I thought I'd get the control aspect covered while we waited for some of the HERMS brewers to come along and share their "experience".
> 
> The issues associated with HERMS (Because that's all we're talking about here, not brewing in general) are, as I understand it, temperature control and recirculation. The objective is to recirc the mash so that the grain bed forms a filter and the runoff is clear, while applying gentle heat through the coils which allows you to keep a constant temp without scorching the wort or extracting tannins. You also need to make sure that, in doing this, you don't compact the grain bed or form wells in it. Have I missed anything?
> 
> So, that in mind, I still don't see why you need a separate vessel to the HLT for your heat exchanger. It's performing the same job, but you need more plumbing, another element and another controller. If you've got the answer, screwy, let me know, but I won't cop "because we're HERMS brewers and we say so". As has already been pointed out, plenty of HERMS brewers use the HLT, and I don't think I need to have built one to be qualified to ask the question.



It's the just the vibe your honour.

I ran a HERMS with a coil in my HLT, in the end I found the temps required in HLT and the mash schedule clashed.

I also found that I was keeping a 50L vessel full of hot water just to use as a heat exchanger.

Now with separate vessels I only heat a small volume of water to use in the heat exchanger (more efficent both power and water wise) and only heat the water required in HLT for the brewing session.


----------



## trevc (15/9/08)

I hate reading these threads about more elaborate brewing setups. My brewery clearly needs more LCD's and temperature controllers.


----------



## kirem (15/9/08)

I get enjoyment out of the gadgets I put on my brewery and making my system more stable and repeatable and most importantly clean up to take as little effort as possible.


----------



## Thirsty Boy (15/9/08)

LethalCorpse said:


> Well aware of that, Screwtop, but while it was just Gibbo and me in this thread I thought I'd get the control aspect covered while we waited for some of the HERMS brewers to come along and share their "experience".
> 
> The issues associated with HERMS (Because that's all we're talking about here, not brewing in general) are, as I understand it, temperature control and recirculation. The objective is to recirc the mash so that the grain bed forms a filter and the runoff is clear, while applying gentle heat through the coils which allows you to keep a constant temp without scorching the wort or extracting tannins. You also need to make sure that, in doing this, you don't compact the grain bed or form wells in it. Have I missed anything?
> 
> So, that in mind, I still don't see why you need a separate vessel to the HLT for your heat exchanger. It's performing the same job, but you need more plumbing, another element and another controller. If you've got the answer, screwy, let me know, but I won't cop "because we're HERMS brewers and we say so". As has already been pointed out, plenty of HERMS brewers use the HLT, and I don't think I need to have built one to be qualified to ask the question.



How about "because we're HERMS brewers and everything you have suggested has been thought of before, tried, tried again, is being used AND has been rejected, re-thought, re-fitted and pulled out again in favour of a different option by those of us who are HERMS brewers" You dont exactly think you are the first person to run this argument do you? Pretty much every single person who runs a recirculating brewery has been through this conversation several times before. _And_ been through the experience of using the results.

Perhaps the reason that HERMS brewers might tell you this, is because its bloody obvious that having the coil in the HLT is a simpler and easier solution, and its how most HERMS systems start out - people who have moved away from that, did so because they saw a benefit, not just because they are masochists who like to add an extra layer of difficulty to their day & complexity to their brewery.

You want a reason, here it is. Because the greater total volumes to be heated when using the HLT as the exchanger vessel, mean that the ramps are slower and there is more overshoot. If you are running 20+ litres in your HLT ready for Mash/out and sparge, then your total volume that needs to have a delta T applied to it is 30% or more, larger by having the element in the HLT than it is by having a smaller (the standard is 10L or so) separate HERMS vessel.

Not to mention that your HLT temp isn't tied to your mash temp - handy if you want to infuse to a mash-out/sparge temps rather than wait the 20mins for your whole system to get from the mid 60's to the high 70's at the end of your mash.

Lots of people prefer the simplicity & still have their coil in the HLT - it works and fairly damn well - but from a "control" perspective for step mashing, a separate HERMS vessel is a superior option.

Good enough?

Thirsty


----------



## Screwtop (15/9/08)

LethalCorpse said:


> Well aware of that, Screwtop, but while it was just Gibbo and me in this thread I thought I'd get the control aspect covered while we waited for some of the HERMS brewers to come along and share their "experience".
> 
> The issues associated with HERMS (Because that's all we're talking about here, not brewing in general) are, as I understand it, temperature control and recirculation. The objective is to recirc the mash so that the grain bed forms a filter and the runoff is clear, while applying gentle heat through the coils which allows you to keep a constant temp without scorching the wort or extracting tannins. You also need to make sure that, in doing this, you don't compact the grain bed or form wells in it. Have I missed anything?
> 
> So, that in mind, I still don't see why you need a separate vessel to the HLT for your heat exchanger. It's performing the same job, but you need more plumbing, another element and another controller. If you've got the answer, screwy, let me know, but I won't cop "because we're HERMS brewers and we say so". As has already been pointed out, plenty of HERMS brewers use the HLT, and I don't think I need to have built one to be qualified to ask the question.



Geez you bat off the back foot pretty easy LC :lol:



kirem said:


> I ran a HERMS with a coil in my HLT, in the end I found the temps required in HLT and the mash schedule clashed.
> 
> I also found that I was keeping a 50L vessel full of hot water just to use as a heat exchanger.
> 
> Now with separate vessels I only heat a small volume of water to use in the heat exchanger (more efficent both power and water wise) and only heat the water required in HLT for the brewing session.



Similar experience to Kirk, however I investigated what others had done, quite a few had gone from HLT to additional vessel for the reasons above so that seemed to me the way to go. Tried many methods of applying the HERMS to mashing schedules and have settled on a process now which works well. There are a few pitfalls to watch for in designing and use of the systems, as no doubt you'll find when you build yours.



kirem said:


> I get enjoyment out of the gadgets I put on my brewery and making my system more stable and repeatable and most importantly clean up to take as little effort as possible.



Sorry I don't have anything new to add, again these are the reasons for my choice of design, the water from the heat exchanger is tipped into the empty HLT and heated to use for cleanup.



LethalCorpse said:


> If you've got the answer, screwy, let me know, but I won't cop "because we're HERMS brewers and we say so".



As for this little gem, don't be an arse. The reasons have been explained in a civil manner to you in the threads above.


----------



## hockadays (15/9/08)

LethalCorpse said:


> Well aware of that, Screwtop, but while it was just Gibbo and me in this thread I thought I'd get the control aspect covered while we waited for some of the HERMS brewers to come along and share their "experience".
> 
> The issues associated with HERMS (Because that's all we're talking about here, not brewing in general) are, as I understand it, temperature control and recirculation. The objective is to recirc the mash so that the grain bed forms a filter and the runoff is clear, while applying gentle heat through the coils which allows you to keep a constant temp without scorching the wort or extracting tannins. You also need to make sure that, in doing this, you don't compact the grain bed or form wells in it. Have I missed anything?
> 
> So, that in mind, I still don't see why you need a separate vessel to the HLT for your heat exchanger. It's performing the same job, but you need more plumbing, another element and another controller. If you've got the answer, screwy, let me know, but I won't cop "because we're HERMS brewers and we say so". As has already been pointed out, plenty of HERMS brewers use the HLT, and I don't think I need to have built one to be qualified to ask the question.




I'm in the process of building my herms as well and one reason I came acroos to use a separate Heat Xchaner is that it would take alot more heat to bring up 50L of water back up to temp quickly when using the HLT as heat source. If using a smaller amount say 10L you can reheat the water source quicker and therefore have better ramp times. This is how I understand it from waht I've read but if it works well using the HLT then it's far easier to just do that then build another container. Decisions decisions...


----------



## JasonY (15/9/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> How about "because we're HERMS brewers and everything you have suggested has been thought of before, tried, tried again, is being used AND has been rejected, re-thought, re-fitted and pulled out again in favour of a different option by those of us who are HERMS brewers" You dont exactly think you are the first person to run this argument do you? Pretty much every single person who runs a recirculating brewery has been through this conversation several times before. _And_ been through the experience of using the results.
> 
> Perhaps the reason that HERMS brewers might tell you this, is because its bloody obvious that having the coil in the HLT is a simpler and easier solution, and its how most HERMS systems start out - people who have moved away from that, did so because they saw a benefit, not just because they are masochists who like to add an extra layer of difficulty to their day & complexity to their brewery.
> 
> ...




+1, couldn't have said it better


----------



## LethalCorpse (15/9/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> Good enough?
> 
> Thirsty


Yep, that's all I wanted in the first place - some sort of an explanation as opposed to "this is what we do because it's what we've always done" which is all I was getting up to that point. I'm still unconvinced on the mash temp being tied to the HLT temp, because that's what the pump controller/solenoid is for, so the HLT temp is just the heat source, not the set temp of the mash. However, this being a finer point, I'm more than happy to defer to experience.



Screwtop said:


> Geez you bat off the back foot pretty easy LC :lol:
> 
> 
> As for this little gem, don't be an arse. The reasons have been explained in a civil manner to you in the threads above.


You were more subtle about it, but to be fair, you were being every bit the arse I was, no? You know it doesn't take much to get me to bite, don't be surprised when I do. I also know to back down when I've been licked.


----------



## kirem (15/9/08)

I tried the solenoid bypass option in my first setup.

I couldn't get to work to my satifaction. Maybe due to some of these;

Tiny pieces of grain blocked the solenoid, there is only a small pass through the solenoid when it opens. Back pressure for the solenoid to open correctly could be another issue and a sugary substance may effect the opening and closing ability in a solenoid.

IMHO A better solution would be to use an actuator on a ball valve or the DIY ball/gate valve detailed elsewhere on ahb.


----------



## therook (15/9/08)

I've been looking at going down the RIMS/HERMs path for some time now, but i keep asking myself " Are my beers going to improve that much "

It would be nice to get a break down of comp beers that have been made all the different ways...e.g No chill/Chill , Herms / non Herms , step mash / single infusion, but this wont happen.

Have you blokes that use a herms/Rims noticed a big difference in your beers since taking this path

Rook


----------



## fraser_john (15/9/08)

therook said:


> Have you blokes that use a herms/Rims noticed a big difference in your beers since taking this path
> 
> Rook



Sounds like you need to create a poll Mark!


----------



## Screwtop (15/9/08)

therook said:


> I've been looking at going down the RIMS/HERMs path for some time now, but i keep asking myself " Are my beers going to improve that much "
> 
> It would be nice to get a break down of comp beers that have been made all the different ways...e.g No chill/Chill , Herms / non Herms , step mash / single infusion, but this wont happen.
> 
> ...




Yes Mark, but as I think I've mentioned before, took me 12 months to dial in the system due to my lack of knowledge re temp monitoring, or more where in the system to monitor the temp, a number of AHB HERMS brewers helped me with this, Kirk and Tony were a good source of info, plus some pro brewers. HERMS/RIMS is the best way for small scale brewers to gain such a degree of control of mash schedules. So easy, one water addition, set the controller to maintain rest temp by recirculation, at the end of the rest period ramp up to the next rest temp by upping the control setting, all the way to mash out then a 10 min rest. The wort is already running clear, so redirect to the kettle and start sparge water flow into the tun. Great for lazy buggers like me :lol:

Screwy


----------



## justsomeguy (15/9/08)

Thirsty Boy said:


> Lots of people prefer the simplicity & still have their coil in the HLT - it works and fairly damn well - but from a "control" perspective for step mashing, a separate HERMS vessel is a superior option.
> 
> Thirsty



I think you've hit the nail on the head with that one comment. If you want to do a step mash then you are either going to need a massive heat source capable of driving the temp of your HLT up fast enough, or a small heat vessel with a more reasonably sized heat source attached.

I'm planning on trying out the HERM stuff soon. I'm not interested in step mashing and the like I just want stable temperatures for the duration of the mash. For this reason I think I can get away with a HERMS system with the coil sitting in the HLT.

gary


----------



## Tony (15/9/08)

kirem said:


> It's the just the vibe your honour.
> 
> I ran a HERMS with a coil in my HLT, in the end I found the temps required in HLT and the mash schedule clashed.
> 
> ...



Now i have used my HLT for years as the HERMS and have learnt to work around these problems, and as i just said, they are problems.

Have been thinking recently of going to a smaller vessel as i hate waiting for the HLT to heat up before i can start recircing sometimes.

On/off control works just fine in a large volume system like mine but i can see definate advantages of PID control in a small vessel used specifically for HERMS duty.





kirem said:


> I tried the solenoid bypass option in my first setup.
> 
> I couldn't get to work to my satifaction. Maybe due to some of these;
> 
> ...



I too built a solenoid bypass system....... and its still there but its not used. I also wired in auto/manual control switches and can bypass the solenoids operation and run them manually. I basicly run them as electric ball valves now. I have never had anything get stuck in these but they are proper water flow solenoids. Not sure what you used Kirem but i have more problem with half open ball valves blocking with grain chunks early in the recirc process.

Been thinking about dumping the solenoids and using them in a more usefull place in the brewery.

Been thinking of doing a big revamp on the system but never really sure which way to go. THis thread has been good.

cheers


----------



## Ducatiboy stu (15/9/08)

The only gadget in my setup is a plastic jug and a household kettle.... :icon_cheers: 

I like my brewing nice and simple


----------



## Tony (15/9/08)

is that why Ross wouldnt drink your beer mate?  

Some of my best beers have been made with a simple setup. To answer a question before i have an old ale that won a state championship that was mashed without the HERMS and no chilled, with 2 inches of airspace for a month.

go figure!

Question........ what are people using to control the power the the element in the PID setups?

cheers


----------



## browndog (15/9/08)

therook said:


> I've been looking at going down the RIMS/HERMs path for some time now, but i keep asking myself " Are my beers going to improve that much "
> 
> It would be nice to get a break down of comp beers that have been made all the different ways...e.g No chill/Chill , Herms / non Herms , step mash / single infusion, but this wont happen.
> 
> ...



The bottom line is "if your mash tun will hold temp thoughout the mash and you can accurately predict your mash temp, then you don't need a HERMS or RIMS" that is unless you enjoy tinkering with automation which a lot of our blokes love to do. IMHO, if you can satisfy the statement above, then a RIMS or HERMS will not improve your beer.

cheers

Browndog


----------



## kirem (15/9/08)

Tony said:


> Question........ what are people using to control the power the the element in the PID setups?



zero crossing SSRs 40A rating from memory for 3.6kW elements


----------



## Tony (15/9/08)

Are they these ones:

http://auberins.com/index.php?main_page=index&cPath=2

Do they work on a 4-20mA input?

cheers


----------



## kirem (15/9/08)

Yep, that is them.

The input data is on the pdf sheet on the web site >4.5v is ON <4.5v is OFF
12mA at 12VDC

I also have some of these as well;

http://secure.oatleyelectronics.com//produ...6b2847df991d53f


----------



## Tony (15/9/08)

mmm really after something with 4-20mA control

Will probably stick with what i have anyway...... it works and works well, maybe not as time efficient but who is in a rush anyway?

cheers


----------



## kirem (15/9/08)

ahh I see what you are asking now. you want to switch using current rather than voltage.

I would ask newguy, he may know where to source what you are after


----------



## Thirsty Boy (16/9/08)

*Tony -* I drive my element off a 10A mechanical relay. The PID can control either its SSR output, or be set to control the inbuilt "alarm" relays. I just set-up a 12V control loop through the PID relays and into the 10A relay, which handles the 240V stuff.

In a separate PID - I jiggered with it and replaced the internal 3A mech relays with 12A ones. I don't need a separate 12V power source on this unit. They both work very well. I run them on a 2 second control period for the HERMS and a 10-15 second control period when I am using them to control fermentation tempertures inside my fridge (for my set-up PIDs are vital for fermentation temp control, on/off wouldn't do the trick)
*
Rook -* I've never had any system but a HERMS, so I cant comment on "improvement" but the reasons I went with a HERMS in the first place were these.

1/ - I wanted to be able to make any beer to any recipe - so if the recipe called for a step mash, or an infusion, or a decoction, or certain L:G ratios, I wanted to be able to do it. No limits, no compromises. For that I needed a mash tun that could have heat added. So it was direct flame, HERMS or RIMS. 

2/ - I want absolute control over my temperatures. While not everyone is convinced that 0.5 of a degree makes a difference, I think it does and I don't want it to be an issue. If the recipe (someone elses or mine) says 56-62-71-78 those are the exact temperatures I want. I demand absolute consistency from my brewing. That is my goal and that is what my system is being set up to achieve. I'm a long way off it yet - but thats what I want.

I picked HERMS - and its been pretty good to me. But I am changing to RIMS because I want even tighter control than I am getting with my HERMS. That might seem a waste of time and effort to some brewers, and well it might be, but when I can dial in 65.5 degrees and walk away knowing that thats exactly what I am getting... then I have the brewery that I want.

*Lethal Corpse -* I just re-read my last post replying to you. I was a bit of a dick. Posting too late at night and I improperly engaged my "don't be an arse" filter. Sorry about that.

Thirsty


----------



## Screwtop (16/9/08)

Really simple off the shelf stuff here, one mashmaster controls my HLT element via a 240V 30A relay (I know too much gun but what was available). Water is heated for a low temp mash-in usually 48 or so. After dough in the mashmaster is set to Sparge temp. A second Mashmaster controls the exchanger (jug element in a 10L SS vessel) directly via the probe mounted in the wort return manifold in the MLT. Temp of the grainbed is monitored via a thermometer in the MLT. After dough in mash temp is ramped up to the temp of the first rest, protien if using this step or straight to saccarification rest temp. Temp is maintained to within 1 degree at the return point which results in maintaining the temp in the mash tun within .5 of a degree.

Screwy


----------



## gibbocore (16/9/08)

Well, seems i've opened a can of worms so to speak.

Thank you everyone who's piped up (bad pun), i'm very grateful and i believe i'll run my mach 1 brewery with a mashmaster temp controler for convenience first off.

I'll start posting some pics when it starts looking like more of a brewery.

Also, i decided on a HERMS brewery casue i wanted 3 things from my beers that my Esky mash tun couldn't seem to offer, volume, control and consistency.

Cheers


----------



## egolds77 (28/5/09)

Screwtop said:


> Really simple off the shelf stuff here, one mashmaster controls my HLT element via a 240V 30A relay (I know too much gun but what was available). Water is heated for a low temp mash-in usually 48 or so. After dough in the mashmaster is set to Sparge temp. A second Mashmaster controls the exchanger (jug element in a 10L SS vessel) directly via the probe mounted in the wort return manifold in the MLT. Temp of the grainbed is monitored via a thermometer in the MLT. After dough in mash temp is ramped up to the temp of the first rest, protien if using this step or straight to saccarification rest temp. Temp is maintained to within 1 degree at the return point which results in maintaining the temp in the mash tun within .5 of a degree.
> 
> Screwy




Hi, Screwtop

I'm building a HERMS with seperate HEX like your own. Just wondering if you could draw a schematic of your system including wiring of the relay into the mashmater and heating element?

Cheers
:icon_chickcheers:


----------

