# New Oxygenation Method



## Lyrebird_Cycles (27/10/17)

I've dropped a few hints about this over the last couple of months but I've finally got around to lodging a patent application so I can reveal a little more. The idea is incredibly simple, but as usual the devil is in the details.

Since beer is moderately conductive it can be used to form an electrolytic cell, if conditions are right this produces oxygen at the anode in proportion to the applied current. If the anode and the (hydrogen producing) cathode are organised the right way the oxygen goes into solution and the hydrogen diffuses away.

The tricky bit is making sure the anode survives the evolution of oxygen: the answer is a titanium electrode with vapour deposited platinum surface, and yes that is every bit as expensive as it sounds. The other tricky bit is making the whole assembly easy to sanitise.

If you wish to DIY this* you have my blessing. The equation you need is this:

O2 (in mg / hour) = 0.3 x average current (in mA).

I will be making a unit that solves all the problems noted above commercially available but I want to do some beta testing first to make sure it is easy to use, I have a bad habit of assuming people are more comfortable with maths than they actually are.

To this end I invite volunteers for beta testing: I already have one, I'd like a couple more. The deal is that you get lent the unit for no charge and you tell me what you think. My preference is for people who have used oxygenation before and who have a fermenter volume around 25 - 30 litres. PM me if interested.



* my definition of DIY is you make it yourself for your own use and not for sale. Good luck with the platinated titanium electrodes.


----------



## mtb (27/10/17)

**** yeah.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (27/10/17)

Beta testing slots now filled. That took less than 10 minutes.

I should have units ready to go out next week*. I will PM participants when the units are ready.



*One part needs to be 3D printed and I am waiting on new filament.


----------



## Danscraftbeer (27/10/17)

I'd like to watch, read the results.


----------



## technobabble66 (28/10/17)

Hey LC, I've been waiting for a while to see some details on your Top Secret O2 Development. Thanks for sharing lots of detail! 

Out of interest, how is the O2 formed? Or rather, what is the (chemical) environment in which the molecule forms?

Basically, the reason i'm asking is to check whether there's any issue/risk of any other chemistry occurring - e.g.: O- radical formation, electrolysis of other components of the wort, etc. 
(I'm guessing you kept track of our little H2O2 experiment a few months ago...)
I'm assuming you're all over these issues, but just thought i'd ask 

Looks like a great idea!


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (28/10/17)

I think the relevant detail is in the first post.

From my reading of the available research, the actual mechanism is due to surface activity on the platinum electrode and indeed this involves some peroxide radical formation but these radicals appear to stay bound to the surface. In the presence of sulphate some ozone should form but this appears to break down immediately in a pitched wort.

There is a very important relationship between maximal current and anode surface area which is key to reducing side reactions. The device incorporates a controlled current source to achieve this.


----------



## Mardoo (30/10/17)

Totally. Awesome. Love your work. Always something interesting. 

And totally gutted I missed the beta slots. I’ll be reading this thread with interest. Here’s to hoping folks report back here.


----------



## Schikitar (30/10/17)

Bulk Buy!


----------



## SnailAle (30/10/17)

Top stuff mate, bit more technical than my method! I'll be watching this with interest [emoji106]


----------



## malt junkie (30/10/17)

Does temperature have any impact on O2 production using this method?


----------



## good4whatAlesU (30/10/17)

Great work LC

I thought you might have gone with a bicycle friendly version though: 

https://rockthebike.com/fender-blender-pro/


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (30/10/17)

malt junkie said:


> Does temperature have any impact on O2 production using this method?



No. 

Temperature affects the solubility of oxygen but that matters litttle: the idea behind this technique is to pitch the wort first and lower the anode to the bottom of the fermenter: since the rate at which yeast can absorb oxygen is higher than the rate at which the unit produces it, almost all the oxygen is immediately taken up by the yeast.


Temperature also affects the conductivity of the wort slightly, which in turn slightly changes the voltage required to drive the control current. This is factored in for all temperatures between freezing and boiling so it won't matter.


----------



## malt junkie (30/10/17)

Other question was how this works across different batch sizes, I'm guessing at some point the size or number of anodes would need to increase?


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (30/10/17)

At some point yes, but that increases the cost as I have to use larger electrodes and controlled current source. The current model is designed for 10 - 30 litres but can be pushed higher or lower with no performance deficit.

I decided that the easy way to do this was to remove all adjustability from the device* and provide a chart that gives an "on" time for each combination of O2 rate and volume. You stick the wand** into the fermenter, plug it in, wait for the alloted time then turn it off and remove it.

Chart currently covers 5 - 20 mg/l O2 and 10 - 30 litres.To do an increased volume, say 60 litres, at a given O2 rate, say 10mg/l, you'd simply take the 30 litre time for that rate (about 4 hours) and double it.

* This also makes it cheaper, the electronics for the adjustable version are much more expensive. I'm trying to keep this cheap enough to retail at under $150 through LHBS assuming normal margins.

** Current working title is "Moxie Wand" because it is a bit like magic watching it work. "Oxy wand" might have been preferable but it is trademarked in the US.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (30/10/17)

Schikitar said:


> Bulk Buy!



I'm OK with that idea but I don't want to push things with the mods and also I think it's advisable to wait until I get feedback from beta testers and make any modifications that might come out of that process.


----------



## n87 (30/10/17)

Out of curiosity, how many 'on hours' do you expect the electrodes to last, or to show signs of degradation?
Or is this something that in a perfect world would last forever?


----------



## Schikitar (30/10/17)

You must be stuck in 'science mode', I was only joking about a BB.. well, partially joking! Haha!  I am really interested in your project though, will be awesome to see what feedback you get and where the testing goes!


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (30/10/17)

n87 said:


> Out of curiosity, how many 'on hours' do you expect the electrodes to last, or to show signs of degradation?
> Or is this something that in a perfect world would last forever?



There is a known degradation rate of the platinum coating, which is calculated in thousands of hours per ampere per cm^2. Given that I'm putting 240 mA across 16 cm^2 I could expect >30,000 hours of anode life in a sulphuric acid bath (that's the standard life calculation for anodes used in plating operations).

In wort the life should be functionally infinite.


----------



## malt junkie (30/10/17)

If this was welded into say a kegmenter, and controled by Brewpiless or equivalent (and yes there's a spare pin) you'd have the perfect repeatable fermentation process, also accurate double dropping (aerating at the 8-12 hour mark) no staying up till 3am to break out the oxygen kit. Now if only I could write code
I'm guessing pressure wouldn't be an issue.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (30/10/17)

You could always just use a timer plug.

BTW I do not recommend leaving the unit in the fermenter once its job is done. Get it out, clean it and pack it away. The above life calculation for the anode is only valid if it isn't scratched or scuffed: the platinum is very hard and durable but very thin.

The other restriction I see is that if you, like me, virtually always brew things in pairs for experimental purposes you either need two of them or to accept a difference in oxygenation times.


----------



## technobabble66 (30/10/17)

Great to see more and more info/discussion on this. Keen to see a pic or 3 of the wand!

With the name, I'd suggest dropping the "M". 2 reasons: 1) Moxie just sounds bad, whereas Oxie/Oxy wand sounds good, and actually describes obviously what it is; 2) this (http://www.chemistwarehouse.com.au/Shop-Online/1117/Moxie)

Obviously just my simple opinion. Feel free to ignore! [emoji6]


----------



## Bridgey23 (30/10/17)

If the yanks have trade marked oxy wand maybe ozy wand. [emoji106] [emoji1037]


----------



## malt junkie (30/10/17)

Or Oxzy Wand


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (30/10/17)

The name was originally a reference to the primary use for the device which is microoxygenation in wine, known colloquially as Mox. I have registered the domain name Electromox but was calling it Moxie for short.

It's also a common US slang term roughly equivalent to UK "bottle". Since I think the biggest market will be the USA I'm inclined to keep it.


----------



## n87 (30/10/17)

Oxygen
Xenobiotic
Yardstick

O.X.Y for short


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (30/10/17)

n87 said:


> Oxygen
> Xenobiotic
> Yardstick
> 
> O.X.Y for short



That's excellent.

Marvellous Oxygen Xenobiotic Yardstick = MOXY.

In my mind's eye I see in Showcard Font:

Professor Kelly's Marvellous
Oxygen Xenobiotic Yardstick

Cures all ills: 
fermentile dysfunction, 
premature attenuation, 
lack of yeast libido,&c &c


----------



## n87 (30/10/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> That's excellent.



I take payment in beer and new oxygenation devices


----------



## stewy (30/10/17)

Deleted


----------



## Brewnicorn (31/10/17)

Deleted. Sorry wrong thread


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (4/11/17)

I thought some detail on how this is used might be helpful.

First, slide the cathode (upper electrode) along the glass tube so that it is about half in the wort when the anode (bottom electrode) is at the bottom of the fermenter.




Sizing

Next, sanitise all the parts that will be in the fermenter: I spray with starsan, wait a few minutes then rinse off with boiling water.
Not having a porous sinter makes sanitisation really simple.

Then place the device in the fermenter, connect up the power supply and leave for the required time as per the rate card:in this case 1 hour 50minutes.
I just set a reminder on my phone for the finish time.




Running

When finished, pull it out and turn it off.


----------



## Garfield (5/11/17)

How are the results looking?


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (5/11/17)

You'll have to wait for the beta tester reports for independent results.

From what I've seen there is no difference in outcome in terms of yeast health for a given actual O2 addition rate between the electronic method and the gas addition method.

The differences appears to lie in accuracy of addition rates and a reduction in collateral damage. Results so far indicate that this method has nearly complete utilisation of generated oxygen whereas with gas addition methods the amount of the added oxygen that ends up where it is wanted is pot luck. In theory adding oxygen at a rate that is within the absorbtion capacity of the yeast should mean less is available to participate in unwanted side reactions like lipid oxidation.


----------



## fletcher (5/11/17)

this looks amazing. good job mate!


----------



## stewy (5/11/17)

I might be missing something, but why would I change to a method which takes 1hr to oxygenate from a method that takes 1 minute, is predictable enough & very cheap?


----------



## mtb (5/11/17)

You wouldn't. It's intended for commercial applications.


----------



## stewy (5/11/17)

On page 1 the author states that they are “trying to keep it under $150 retail at LHBS”. 
I assumed home brewers were the target market from that statement


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (5/11/17)

stewy said:


> I might be missing something, but why would I change to a method which takes 1hr to oxygenate from a method that takes 1 minute, is predictable enough & very cheap?



Take it or leave it, your choice.

I developed this as a side issue from a commercial application in wine. I thought it was worth doing at this scale, in my opinion the advantages (ease, cleanliness, accuracy, safety, no consumables) outweigh the single disadvantage (time), especially as it's not like the wort is going anywhere for that extra hour or two. 

I fully expect that there will be those who do not share that opinion.


----------



## mtb (6/11/17)

stewy said:


> On page 1 the author states that they are “trying to keep it under $150 retail at LHBS”.
> I assumed home brewers were the target market from that statement


Oh I missed that bit. My bad


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

That's alright, it now looks like I won't be able to hit that price point anyway. Making the thing foolproof has been surprisingly expensive.


----------



## n87 (6/11/17)

For something that will last a lifetime (if looked after), a one time expense is acceptable for most here.
add on top of that that you dont have to keep stock of Oxygen and it becomes even more apealing.

The only real improvement I can think of is the addition of a timer, so you can set it up, turn it on and go to the shops, or to bed; take it out when you can.

The way I see it is this device isnt filling a hole, it is an alternative to the current method.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

The easiest and cheapest way of adding a timer is to use a mains timer; this one is $5.50.

I could easily add a timer to the controller but then I'd need an interface (HMI) so the user could control it. That blows the cost out completely.

I also looked at controlling it via phone app but that looks to be about $10k in development expenses. I can't see that flying either.


----------



## malt junkie (6/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> Making the thing foolproof has been surprisingly expensive.



So glad your designing specifically for me!
Does the main stem need to be glass, I like robustness, and for most things near my beer stainless. Also would mean the device could be welded into a stainless fermenter.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

It has to be an insulator, which stainless isn't.

I would also strongly advise against leaving the device in place. You couldn't weld it in place anyway as the two electrodes need to be isolated.

I tried a tougher plastic tube but the thermal expansion makes heat sterilisation problematic. In the end I decided that the obvious fagility of glass will encourage people to handle it carefully. This will hopefully help protect the platinum coating on the anode which is the weakest point (and also the most expensive).


----------



## malt junkie (6/11/17)

Damn!!! Do you know how many glass Hydrometers I've been through! For some reason just because they are so fragile, they have this innate gravitation to falling from great heights. I was barred from buying hydrometers for a year at one point.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

It's not that bad.

The glass is lab grade borosilicate tube 1.5mm wall thickness, plus it is bonded to the stainless central conductor with high grade epoxy. Don't go playing sword fights with it, otherwise you'll be OK.


----------



## FarsideOfCrazy (6/11/17)

Just a thought LC, not sure how many you're likely to sell but is worth trying to sell then through LHBS's? How many is too many to sell through an online site?


----------



## malt junkie (6/11/17)

I think you'll find our yanky friends will go nuts for these, probably easier for LC to bulk ship to retailers there.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

malt junkie said:


> So glad your designing specifically for me!
> Does the main stem need to be glass, I like robustness, and for most things near my beer stainless. Also would mean the device could be welded into a stainless fermenter.






Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> It has to be an insulator, which stainless isn't.



Actually, thinking about it, I could make the main stem stainless, sleeve the inner conductor and cast silicone seals into the ends. If you want to try this configuration I have the materials on hand.


----------



## malt junkie (6/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> Actually, thinking about it, I could make the main stem stainless, sleeve the inner conductor and cast silicone seals into the ends. If you want to try this configuration I have the materials on hand.


I'm looking at the KK kegmenter, and already have the thermowell to be welded to the lid, I don't think it would be a simple task to build this device to withstand 30 PSIG. My original thought was maintaining the sealed integrity of the fermenter and have this also mounted in the triclove lid, with sealed transfers. If the entire length of the tube were silicone filled, and the upper anode(?) were fixed (obviously specific to the fermenter) it may well hold pressure, but I'm no engineer.

Perhaps at this point pressure fermentation is just an added complication to a well thought out simple device.

ED: There are presently around 4 different common pressure fermenters used here, then Sankes in the states and varrious size unitanks from SS brewtech, and Spike brewing. A simple molded rod specific to each (obviously a premium product) with the top being male thread where the cables exits, it would then be a matter for the brewer to add the socket to their setup. Hell KK could just add it to the current lid molding of the fermentasuarus.

Another thought is HDPE injection, but perhaps a year or 2 after initial launch.


----------



## pcqypcqy (6/11/17)

Depending on where your final retail price comes in, the price point sounds like it'll be competitive with a half decent oxygen bottle set up.

I'm currently looking at going the O2 cylinder from bunnings, so that's a $200 deposit tied up on top of the costs of the wand, stones and regulator. So say you're talking $40 for wand and stone, $75 for a halfway decent regulator, $69 for the bunnings d-size cylinder (and ignoring the deposit, I'm looking at $185 right there.

The brewman kit is $175 but that doesn't even include the wand I don't believe, looks like it's a neat $200 with the wand.

So anything that comes in around the $200 mark will be competitive, and as someone mentioned earlier avoids the need to store oxygen.


----------



## malt junkie (6/11/17)

Excuse my rudimentary drawings


----------



## malt junkie (6/11/17)

So my thoughts were SS tube with slip fittings (elbows and tees) and threaded bulkhead/ screw to welded fitting type setup with all peices welded or silver soldered. HDPE filling just cause it's harder wearing will hold the bottom probe firmly in place. Lets face it, breaking this would probably require you beating some poor home invader to death with it.

Ok so my first drawing specifically for the fermentasuarus as it has a reinforced section near the based for an optional bulkhead racking arm.
Second drawing for instalation from the top of any vessel, obviously differing lengths would be required to suit.

HDPE injection is actually quite easy, with your skills and equipment you'd probably build one (plastics injector) in a few hrs.

Thoughts?


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

malt junkie said:


> So my thoughts were SS tube with slip fittings (elbows and tees) and threaded bulkhead/ screw to welded fitting type setup with all peices welded or silver soldered. HDPE filling just cause it's harder wearing will hold the bottom probe firmly in place. Lets face it, breaking this would probably require you beating some poor home invader to death with it.
> 
> Ok so my first drawing specifically for the fermentasuarus as it has a reinforced section near the based for an optional bulkhead racking arm.
> Second drawing for instalation from the top of any vessel, obviously differing lengths would be required to suit.
> ...



Nice idea but I'm avoiding the use of low temperature materials so I'd probably fill it with two part silicone.

The other difficulty is the electrical connection to the anode. No conductive material that is at anode potential can be exposed to the working fluid other than the platinum surface of the anode itself. If this is allowed to happen all hell breaks loose.

BTW for a while I ran a section of a food factory which used several twin screw APV extruders, so I'm moderately familiar with the technology.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

BTW 2cranky has just pointed out that this won't fit a wide mouth drum type fermenter without it being modified. Easiest mod I can see is to cut a 50mm hole in the fermenter lid and fit a silicone wine bung.

I'm going to try getting hold of one of those lids and see what I can come up with.


----------



## n87 (6/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> BTW 2cranky has just pointed out that this won't fit a wide mouth drum type fermenter without it being modified. Easiest mod I can see is to cut a 50mm hole in the fermenter lid and fit a silicone wine bung.



Glad wrap 

I will add that if selling to the states, consider if it fits through a narrow necked carboy


----------



## malt junkie (6/11/17)

Would an etching on the top probe be possible (to show liquid level) for the completely clueless? or an SS float (isolated with silicone) that way the device will work at it's optimum even when blind filling even though your timing maybe be slightly short or long. 

ED: ignore me how could I forget wort gravity.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

Stainless

Stainless version is now a goer.

I used a bit of Torlon (polyamide/imide) that I happened to have lying around to form the end piece, future versions I'll probably use PEEK.


----------



## malt junkie (6/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> Nice idea but I'm avoiding the use of low temperature materials so I'd probably fill it with two part silicone.
> 
> The other difficulty is the electrical connection to the anode. No conductive material that is at anode potential can be exposed to the working fluid other than the platinum surface of the anode itself. If this is allowed to happen all hell breaks loose.
> 
> BTW for a while I ran a section of a food factory which used several twin screw APV extruders, so I'm moderately familiar with the technology.


Does this mean those with stainless fermenters should NOT have the probe resting on the bottom?


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

Yes, there will be a small plastic cap that fits over the end of the anode to prevent contact with a stainless fermenter. It also serves to protect the platinum from the stainless: platinum is a bit harder than gold but much softer than steel.


----------



## peteru (6/11/17)

BTW: @Lyrebird_Cycles, clicking on the pictures leads to a Flickr page that informs me that the photos are private and can not be viewed. Would be nice to get a better look at a hi-res picture.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (6/11/17)

Yeah, sorry about that, but I don't know how fix it.

The Flickr page is mostly for bicycle pics: my son, who acts as my social media advisor,* says that anything that isn't bike related should be kept out of the main feed so as to keep it "on message". The only way I've found to do that is to keep the non-bike pics in a separate album and mark it as private.

FWIW I cut the pics down to 1000p before posting them to Flickr so there's not much more detail anyway.


*I think there are two things wrong with social media and they are "social" and "media". /scrooge.


----------



## peteru (6/11/17)

No worries.

FWIW, I agree with the footnote.


----------



## stewy (7/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> Take it or leave it, your choice.
> 
> I developed this as a side issue from a commercial application in wine. I thought it was worth doing at this scale, in my opinion the advantages (ease, cleanliness, accuracy, safety, no consumables) outweigh the single disadvantage (time), especially as it's not like the wort is going anywhere for that extra hour or two.
> 
> I fully expect that there will be those who do not share that opinion.



You are correct, my choice. 
I just want to give you honest feedback. 

If you wish to scale this & make money from it you need to have a value proposition to appeal to the target market. 

Usually this is achieved by lower cost/ease of use/simplification/reduced time; &/or a combination of all. 

The fact that it takes at least one hour to oxygenate wort is your biggest roadblock. 

Standard O2 setup costs $150-250
Storage space is a small footprint
1 Bunnings cylinder = $50 & does 35+ batches

I would ALWAYS spend my $$ with the AHB community & support them in their ventures & will happily do so with you, I just don’t see the value prop yet. 

I genuinely hope to see you achieve great commercial success with this. 
[emoji481][emoji481][emoji481]


----------



## technobabble66 (7/11/17)

Hey LC, any reason why you're using a circular cross section (ie: tube)?
Wouldn't a flat strip provide better surface area for the electrodes?
Or at least make the active electrode sections into flat strips? 
It should enhance efficiency, I think. 
So not like a flimsy tape, but like a 1-3mm thick rectangular cross section. 

Also, is the glass section a significant cost addition? If so, I reckon it might be worth considering the hdpe option for the inert section. If not, doesn't matter. I appreciate the superiority of the glass surface, but hdpe should suffice if it adds significant cost.


----------



## technobabble66 (7/11/17)

Not knowing anything about the detail of the manufacturing process, would it be possible to consider, say, a stainless steel core, coat the bottom section with platinum & top section with ...(can't remember) then spray coat the bit in between with silicone rubber. So it's all like a (core) single piece (that's conductive) with different coatings resulting in the active areas divided by the inactive region.


----------



## peteru (7/11/17)

The speed of oxygenation may not be a negative factor. Experimentation is required, but it is possible that a steady addition of oxygen over several hours may provide better results than a big hit up front with no follow up.

If we are throwing suggestions / ideas about, here's one thing that I have been pondering...

The production of oxygen will be localised to the electrode, however yeast will be distributed throughout the entire volume of the fermentation vessel. Will the natural diffusion be adequate to deliver the oxygen to enough yeast? Would it be a good idea to introduce some form of agitation to the system?


----------



## malt junkie (7/11/17)

stewy said:


> You are correct, my choice.
> I just want to give you honest feedback.
> 
> If you wish to scale this & make money from it you need to have a value proposition to appeal to the target market.
> ...


Beyond 35 batches with your current rig, your either buying a reserve bottle or hoping it don't run out on a public holiday. This thing is good for 30,000 batches. It has a smaller foot print. Both systems need the same treatment until they are placed in wort, with yours you'll fiddle with flow control and stand there for 2 minutes and if double dropping return in 12hrs and repeat, with this hooked up to a timer you'll turn on the power and go get a beer or several, remove the following day. If you can do the simple math you will never under or over O2 the wort.

ED: For all of us repeatability batch to batch, is the path to quality beer, this will provide that, the O2 set ups till now are a stab in the dark and waste full, I'd has at a guess half your bottle is going to atmosphere. 

Not going you personally, I was about to drop some big coin on the large bunnings setup.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

technobabble66 said:


> Hey LC, any reason why you're using a circular cross section (ie: tube)?
> Wouldn't a flat strip provide better surface area for the electrodes?
> Or at least make the active electrode sections into flat strips?
> It should enhance efficiency, I think.
> ...





technobabble66 said:


> Not knowing anything about the detail of the manufacturing process, would it be possible to consider, say, a stainless steel core, coat the bottom section with platinum & top section with ...(can't remember) then spray coat the bit in between with silicone rubber. So it's all like a (core) single piece (that's conductive) with different coatings resulting in the active areas divided by the inactive region.



The circular cross section came about because the original use for these particular electrodes was in wine barrels so I made something that can be inserted through a standard MLF bung which has a 9mm hole in it. Larger electrodes will be flat.

Yes the glass section is expensive, both in raw material cost and in the amount of time it takes to assemble the thing. At Malt Junkie's suggestion I made a stainless one yesterday (see post #57) it seems to be working out so I will probably go that way.

No HDPE, max service temp is too low.

The platinising is a specialist process so there's a limit to what can be done and, more importantly, to what I can afford to have done


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

peteru said:


> The speed of oxygenation may not be a negative factor. Experimentation is required, but it is possible that a steady addition of oxygen over several hours may provide better results than a big hit up front with no follow up.
> 
> If we are throwing suggestions / ideas about, here's one thing that I have been pondering...
> 
> The production of oxygen will be localised to the electrode, however yeast will be distributed throughout the entire volume of the fermentation vessel. Will the natural diffusion be adequate to deliver the oxygen to enough yeast? Would it be a good idea to introduce some form of agitation to the system?



I *think* you are correct that the slow addition is actually better but I don't yet have enough evidence to claim that. 

It certainly helps when doing a second add during fermentation, a situation where I suspect stripping by the fermentation gas reduces the effectiveness of a gas O2 add greatly.

Diffusion appears to be adequate to distribute the oxygen, especially as most of the yeast at this early stage is at the bottom of the fermenter. It's also a self correcting problem: the yeast which receive the oxygen become more active, produce more gas and distribute themselves quite nicely.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

malt junkie said:


> ED: For all of us repeatability batch to batch, is the path to quality beer, this will provide that, the O2 set ups till now are a stab in the dark and waste full, I'd has at a guess half your bottle is going to atmosphere.
> 
> .



More like 90%: see post # 695 in the oxygenation thread


----------



## stewy (7/11/17)

malt junkie said:


> Beyond 35 batches with your current rig, your either buying a reserve bottle or hoping it don't run out on a public holiday. This thing is good for 30,000 batches. It has a smaller foot print. Both systems need the same treatment until they are placed in wort, with yours you'll fiddle with flow control and stand there for 2 minutes and if double dropping return in 12hrs and repeat, with this hooked up to a timer you'll turn on the power and go get a beer or several, remove the following day. If you can do the simple math you will never under or over O2 the wort.
> 
> ED: For all of us repeatability batch to batch, is the path to quality beer, this will provide that, the O2 set ups till now are a stab in the dark and waste full, I'd has at a guess half your bottle is going to atmosphere.
> 
> Not going you personally, I was about to drop some big coin on the large bunnings setup.



Flow rate x time is a very simple equation, not a stab in the dark

Even fiddling around - 2 mins vs a minimum of 60? No contest for me

And yes, after 35 batches I am buying another O2 cylinder, for $50 or approx $1.20 per batch... for 1 minute oxygenation...


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

stewy said:


> Flow rate x time is a very simple equation, not a stab in the dark



I can't remember the exact equation, but something like (Flow rate x time x column height ) / (average bubble diameter^N * x bubble velocity) will give you an approximation of O2 that actually goes into the wort.

* This is the bit I can't remember, I think it's the 2/3 power.

BTW bubble diameter has almost nothing to do with pore size, it's related (via the Fritz equation) to the surface energies of the sinter surface, the gas and the wort, the last of which changes with composition. It's also worth noting that average bubble diameter and bubble velocity are not independent, the velocity is also a function of bubble diameter.

It has been shown in wine that the minimum column height for complete dissolution of a rising column of oxygen bubbles is between 2 and 6 metres, dependent mostly on the release surface, stainless sinters being at the high end of this range.

This is why commercial operations oxygenate after the HX when casting out, the turbulent mixing in the transfer hose serves to increase the dissolution rate.


----------



## stewy (7/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> (Flow rate x time x column height ) / (average bubble diameter ^2 x bubble velocity) will give you an approximation of O2 that actually goes into the wort. Anything else is a stab in the dark.



Sure. 

My 60 second “stab in the dark” will yield approx 10-12 PPM. 

I have the option to be more precise if I am willing to extend my 1 minute by at least 60 fold. 

Do you honestly think a large enough segment of the HB community will buy this & make it economically viable? ( at a guess the vast majority don’t even use O2 currently)

Not being argumentative for the sake of it, highlighting what is likely a big roadblock for commercialisation. 

If you’re happy to extend your O2 time by that much, go for it! I personally am pushed for time
[emoji481]


----------



## DJ_L3ThAL (7/11/17)

“Upgrade” or pro model suggestion - incorporate onto a 1.5” tri-clamp fitting for Chronical/conical users, could simply be two compression (Swagelok etc) type fitting to suit the stainless tubing or to avoid people damaging from overtightening just stainless electrical cable glands to grip the rods at the desired height. That way you don’t need to worry about the height each use if your volumes are the same every batch?

Awesome work by the way, I’m sure this will be taken up be a large numbers of home brewers!


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

stewy said:


> Sure.



Please note that I amended that equation as I realised that I couldn't remember all of it. I also took out the comment about the stab in the dark.

As for the time thing, as I said previously, take it or leave it.

I see it a bit like no chill: yes no-chill takes a lot longer than a wort chiller to get to pitch temperature but in practice it's actually easier.


----------



## Dave70 (7/11/17)

Does this system work along the same principle as a HHO generator? Though the units themselves are a complete scam and useless for their intended purpose, but actually _do_ generate hydrogen and oxygen, I've wondered how effective they would be piped into your wort.
Did you investigate a 'remote' method like this before deciding to use the beer as a electrolytic cell?


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

This is an offshoot of a commercial application in wine, the idea from the get go was to use the medium as the electrolyte.


----------



## Dave70 (7/11/17)

But the decomposition of water into hydrogen / oxygen is more or less the same, yeah? Only in situ.


----------



## pcqypcqy (7/11/17)

malt junkie said:


> Not going you personally, I was about to drop some big coin on the large bunnings setup.



I too am now holding off on that, very interested in this development.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

Dave70 said:


> But the decomposition of water into hydrogen / oxygen is more or less the same, yeah? Only in situ.



Yes.


----------



## MHB (7/11/17)

Have you looked at the formation of Chlorine?
There is plenty of NaCl and CaCl2 in the wort. Not knocking or nit picking just a question I think worth knowing the answer to as I personally take steps to get rid of Cl.
I would have to take a refresher course in electrochemistry to know if the salts are going to disassociate at the voltages you are using.
Mark


----------



## Mardoo (7/11/17)

pcqypcqy said:


> I too am now holding off on that, very interested in this development.


Yep, me too.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

MHB said:


> Have you looked at the formation of Chlorine?



I was very concerned about the production of chlorine from residual chloride, I am hypersensitive to halophenols.

Basically chlorine formation is related to excess drive voltage ("overvoltage" is the term used in analysis of electrolysis). Using a controlled current source at a very low current density (~ 15mA / cm^2) on a platinum surface eliminates this as a problem.


----------



## MHB (7/11/17)

Fair cop, I'm not surprised you looked at the possibility and its good to know.
Mark


----------



## technobabble66 (7/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> I think the relevant detail is in the first post.
> 
> From my reading of the available research, the actual mechanism is due to surface activity on the platinum electrode and indeed this involves some peroxide radical formation but these radicals appear to stay bound to the surface. In the presence of sulphate some ozone should form but this appears to break down immediately in a pitched wort.
> 
> There is a very important relationship between maximal current and anode surface area which is key to reducing side reactions. The device incorporates a controlled current source to achieve this.





Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> I was very concerned about the production of chlorine from residual chloride, I am hypersensitive to halophenols.
> 
> Basically chlorine formation is related to excess drive voltage ("overvoltage" is the term used in analysis of electrolysis). Using a controlled current source at a very low current density (~ 15mA / cm^2) on a platinum surface eliminates this as a problem.


So obviously you flagged the importance of minimising the excess drive voltage as critical to minimise undesired electrochemistry and by-products from the get-go .

I assume this issue (the possibility of the electrolysis interacting with the wort grain-derived compounds and forming all sorts of by-products) is not seen as a problem in the wine industry? (it sounds like it's already being used there(?)).

Additionally, isn't "some peroxide radical formation" an issue, even if those radicals are bound to the electrode? I'm not trying to be picky with this, but it was seen as the condemning issue with using H2O2 - that the peroxide radicals would be producing all sorts of undesirable by-products. While being bound should help minimise this, i'm also assuming they'll remain active radicals until they react with something, and most of the stuff to react with will be the wort compounds.

I've obviously not read/researched any of the background electrochemistry & the devil is really in the detail with this stuff. I'm just seeking a little clarification and explanation on this stuff, partly out of curiosity and partly out of wanting to ensure one of the potential issues can be ticked off.

I'm definitely not trying to shoot down this fantastic idea, and are very keen to see it work (i'm also holding off from O2 options to see how this pans out first).
Cheers


----------



## 2cranky (7/11/17)

I can see the time to do this might be an issue, but I can see this is just the beginning. Ultimately this might become part of the fermenter, so you could potentially reach pitching temps, pitch seal it up, turn it on and forget it. It would build O2 and turn off at the required time.
But to do this it would need to fit different fermenters and be a price that you wouldn't shy away from having one for each fermenter in a typical brew day (2 for me).
marketing - you would sell it to the guys that make these fancy stainless fermenters like SS Brew bucket. Having this as a bolt on to the basic model has cred, also selling a model that converts your basic 30L would work well (include a bung or other method for converting).
my 2c


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

technobabble66 said:


> So obviously you flagged the importance of minimising the excess drive voltage as critical to minimise undesired electrochemistry and by-products from the get-go .
> 
> I assume this issue (the possibility of the electrolysis interacting with the wort grain-derived compounds and forming all sorts of by-products) is not seen as a problem in the wine industry? (it sounds like it's already being used there(?)).
> 
> ...



As far as I am aware the peroxide moeities* remain bound to the electronically active anode surface until they react to form the oxygen. The hydronium ions and the peroxide moeities are negatively charged so they bind to the anode surface (which, by definition, is positively charged). The oxygen is not charged so it is free to diffuse away.

As I understand it, the surface of the platinum oxidises to form a monoatomic layer of PtO. The action of the anode is then bind a hydronium ion to a bound oxygen, forming a bound peroxide. Apparently the surface binding effect is so strong that the motion of these bound peroxides is exclusively two dimensional, they "skate" on the surface of the anode, allowing them to react and form an oxygen molecule which breaks free and the process starts again.

If you remember, the action of peroxide in ADr0's excellent experiments became evident due to a slow ferment start. The beer I was oxygenating in post #30 three days ago is now almost at FG, having been pitched with one pack of Nottingham in about 30 litres of wort at 13 oP and held at 17 oC. I don't count that as a sluggish start.

I am more than happy for people to post their concerns. Hopefully I have done enough background research to allay them. If not, I'm shot.


* I was wrong when I called this a peroxide radical previously, it is charged and therefore not a radical.


----------



## good4whatAlesU (7/11/17)

Palladium coated? Can it be bicycle powered?

https://m.ebay.com.au/itm/New-Medic...Platinized-Electrode-/332049558602?nav=SEARCH


----------



## manticle (7/11/17)

I'm interested.

I've been wanting to purchase a brewman O2 setup for a while and will likely still head down that road but if this becomes available for a good price, I'd get one, compare, then sell the less efficient/suitable for me version.

Really interesting possible alternative.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (7/11/17)

good4whatAlesU said:


> Palladium coated? Can it be bicycle powered?
> 
> https://m.ebay.com.au/itm/New-Medic...Platinized-Electrode-/332049558602?nav=SEARCH



From memory palladium is added to Ti alloys as a beta phase stabiliser to improve mechanical properties. (I started out many years ago as a trainee Aeronautical Engineer in the defence forces).

Note the comment that "regular maintenance, cleaning, and replacement of pieces are needed for high performance applications". In other words, the anode is sacrificial (intended to erode through the service life).

Yes it can be bicycle powered but a simple 12V SLA is probably easier if you want to go "off grid": you could always recharge the battery by bicycle power.


----------



## good4whatAlesU (7/11/17)

But it's on the internet. It must be true?


----------



## malt junkie (7/11/17)

stewy said:


> Flow rate x time is a very simple equation, not a stab in the dark
> 
> Even fiddling around - 2 mins vs a minimum of 60? No contest for me
> 
> And yes, after 35 batches I am buying another O2 cylinder, for $50 or approx $1.20 per batch... for 1 minute oxygenation...


Once you've flicked the switch to turn on the power/timer what are you thinking your attendance is required for. Your argument makes no sense 0.3 of a second vs 2mins and 12hrs later another 2 mins. Mate you stand there holdin your stick, I'll be upstairs gettin a blowy!


----------



## manticle (7/11/17)

You have an issue with blowflies where you are?


----------



## malt junkie (7/11/17)

Too cold for any flies here Mants.


----------



## stewy (7/11/17)

malt junkie said:


> Once you've flicked the switch to turn on the power/timer what are you thinking your attendance is required for. Your argument makes no sense 0.3 of a second vs 2mins and 12hrs later another 2 mins. Mate you stand there holdin your stick, I'll be upstairs gettin a blowy!



Takes 1 min to o2 my wort. (You’ve blown your load well within that time, obviously)

No need to re do in 12 hours time unless I’m brewing a barley wine. 

Don’t stress, you guys will have the last laugh when this thing is flying off the shelf & I look like a fool for not having purchased one


----------



## mtb (7/11/17)

stewy said:


> I will O2 my wort & pitch the yeast. Then I will get several blowies, drink several beers & you will have to head back to the brew shed, after blowing your load within 30seconds (you still have at least another hour to kill while this thing is in your wort) & then pitch your yeast.
> 
> If you can bring a product to market that is no cheaper & takes at LEAST 60 times longer to do the task required, & get the masses to buy it - you’d be a genius!
> 
> 2Cranky is the only bloke on here who has suggested a potentially viable value prop.


You must be fun at parties stewy


----------



## stewy (7/11/17)

mtb said:


> You must be fun at parties stewy



Excellent point. 

You’ve convinced me to purchase one.


----------



## mtb (7/11/17)

stewy said:


> Excellent point.
> 
> You’ve convinced me to purchase one.


Without even trying! I'm fairly talented like that


----------



## malt junkie (7/11/17)

stewy said:


> Takes 1 min to o2 my wort. (You’ve blown your load well within that time, obviously)
> 
> No need to re do in 12 hours time unless I’m brewing a barley wine.
> 
> Don’t stress, you guys will have the last laugh when this thing is flying off the shelf & I look like a fool for not having purchased one


Why am I waiting to pitch yeast? Seriously what is your scientific reasoning? Your really hung up on this hour thing. How long does your yeast take to eat your 12ppm? Are you there watching it do so? I won't be, chuck yeast in, chuck Moxy Wand in, turn it on, return to fermenter.... well when ever I get to the shed. 

Value 1c per brew versus 120...... ummmm, maybe you skipped math at school?


----------



## stewy (7/11/17)

malt junkie said:


> Why am I waiting to pitch yeast? Seriously what is your scientific reasoning? Your really hung up on this hour thing. How long does your yeast take to eat your 12ppm? Are you there watching it do so? I won't be, chuck yeast in, chuck Moxy Wand in, turn it on, return to fermenter.... well when ever I get to the shed.
> 
> Value 1c per brew versus 120...... ummmm, maybe you skipped math at



*You’re

If you find value in this method, buy in! 

Ps. Ad-hom isn’t an argument (re: “maybe you skipped math)

And, it’s maths. We’re not yanks
[emoji481]


----------



## mtb (7/11/17)

A practically infinite source of brewing oxygen for a once off cost? I'll be buying it.


----------



## stewy (7/11/17)

mtb said:


> A practically infinite source of brewing oxygen for a once off cost? I'll be buying it.



Hey, electricity isn’t free!!!!!!

Unless you vote for LNP in the QLD election & they will live up to their promise of discounting electricity & it will be virtually free then

[emoji23][emoji23][emoji481][emoji481]


----------



## malt junkie (7/11/17)

stewy said:


> Hey, electricity isn’t free!!!!!!
> 
> Unless you vote for LNP in the QLD election & they will live up to their promise of discounting electricity & it will be virtually free then
> 
> [emoji23][emoji23][emoji481][emoji481]


It's 12v and I have solar already ... so it bloody is!


----------



## good4whatAlesU (8/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> Note the comment that "regular maintenance, cleaning, and replacement of pieces are needed for high performance applications". In other words, the anode is sacrificial (intended to erode through the service life).
> 
> .



Fair point but im not sure what denotes a high performance application? Palladium coated electrodes work similarly to platinum ones don't they? And they are cheaper?

btw it's a great idea, I'm just brainstorming to get the price point down...

My Picks:

"Oxy-nator"
"Gen-Ox"


----------



## good4whatAlesU (8/11/17)

stewy said:


> Hey, electricity isn’t free!!!!!!
> 
> Unless you vote for LNP in the QLD election & they will live up to their promise of discounting electricity & it will be virtually free then
> 
> [emoji23][emoji23][emoji481][emoji481]



I have a bicycle with a dynamo


----------



## Kumamoto_Ken (8/11/17)

Mardoo said:


> Yep, me too.



Me three.

Oxygenation is my next step and if this flies I'll be on it.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (8/11/17)

good4whatAlesU said:


> Fair point but im not sure what denotes a high performance application? Palladium coated electrodes work similarly to platinum ones don't they? And they are cheaper?
> 
> btw it's a great idea, I'm just brainstorming to get the price point down...
> 
> ...



Palladium works less well than platinum as it is less inert: it's basically halfway between nickel and platinum (not conicidentally, the three form a column in the transition metals on the periodic table). A palladium coated electrode would be cheaper but would require periodic replacement, I don't believe that's a good proposition.

In any case my reading of the link is the material being sold is Ti Pd alloy, also known as gr7 Ti alloy, which includes about 0.2% of Pd as a beta phase stabiliser.


----------



## RobB (8/11/17)

With the slow output of this device, will the dissolved oxygen ever reach saturation?

Is the intention to slowly get it up to 12-ish ppm, or will it be drip feeding the yeast at lower levels and replacing the oxygen as fast as they take it up?


----------



## good4whatAlesU (8/11/17)

In this study (albeit alkaline solution) palladium performed better than platinum.

I note that palladium / platinum alloys have also been examined?

https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/BF00610813


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (8/11/17)

RobB said:


> With the slow output of this device, will the dissolved oxygen ever reach saturation?
> 
> Is the intention to slowly get it up to 12-ish ppm, or will it be drip feeding the yeast at lower levels and replacing the oxygen as fast as they take it up?



The idea is that the oxygen is directly absorbed by the yeast. I have not got around to measuring it yet but I suspect that the DO2 level stays very low.


----------



## FarsideOfCrazy (8/11/17)

This stuff blows my mind.

I hope this works for you LC as you have put an awful lot of time, money and effort in.


----------



## good4whatAlesU (8/11/17)

This also looks interesting:
http://m.jes.ecsdl.org/content/155/7/E101.abstract
All sorts of stuff out there......


----------



## wide eyed and legless (8/11/17)

FarsideOfCrazy said:


> Just a thought LC, not sure how many you're likely to sell but is worth trying to sell then through LHBS's? How many is too many to sell through an online site?


Keep this thread going and they will come, surprising how many overseas LHB stores and others watch these threads, for sure it will market itself, depending on results.


----------



## CJW (9/11/17)

Have you considered a configuration similar to Spikes carb/oxy stone TC config.

It might help serve to protect the electrode, but probably dearer i guess. 

https://spikebrewing.com/collections/conical-accessories/products/carb-stone


----------



## malt junkie (9/11/17)

CJW said:


> Have you considered a configuration similar to Spikes carb/oxy stone TC config.
> 
> It might help serve to protect the electrode, but probably dearer i guess.
> 
> https://spikebrewing.com/collections/conical-accessories/products/carb-stone


I like this as an Idea for conicals, Clamp this to the dump valve (then open; close valve and remove when done), and have the top electrode come down through a tc in the lid fitted with a compression fitting to allow height adjustment.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (27/11/17)

Since I can't attach this to a PM, here is the rate card for the beta testers.


Sorry that it's an .xls file but someone miscoded the file uploader here and it won't pick up normal Excel files (.xlsx): it will pick however pick up .xlxs files which AFAIK don't actually exist.


----------



## n87 (27/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> Since I can't attach this to a PM, here is the rate card for the beta testers.
> 
> 
> Sorry that it's an .xls file but someone miscoded the file uploader here and it won't pick up normal Excel files (.xlsx): it will pick however pick up .xlxs files which AFAIK don't actually exist.



Just for clarity, These values are hours?


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (27/11/17)

Yes, the format is hh:mm.

It's hard to get Excel to fit a Babylonian number format so the calculation returns fractions of a day which Excel then formats as hours.


----------



## MHB (27/11/17)

How would this go in a continuous yeast propagator, I have a couple of Spinner Flasks that I'm looking to set up as propagators, was planning to use a flip/flop timer switch to turn the O2 on and off.
Foam and excess O2 toxicity being the problem.
Spinner like this one, adding a heater and I/O ports, was going tp put in an airstone but....


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (27/11/17)

I can't see why it won't work.

It would be best to calculate the O2 production rate on your expected yeast growth rate to achieve optimal uptake, the expected rate of uptake being around 8 mg O2 / g yeast / hour. If you can give me a rough guide on your expected propagator perfromance, I can work out how to tailor the O2 rate to suit.


----------



## 2cranky (27/11/17)

wouldn't this be easier
delete the table and make it look pretty!


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (27/11/17)

I thought of something similar but it comes with the problem of people overwriting the calculation and stuffing things up. I speak from experience : I wrote a bunch of calculators for various functions at a commercial winery for which I worked and keeping them up to date and clean on the shared drive became a chore (I kept backup versions on my drive).

The best solution would be an online calculator written in Javascript or similar, I will do this if the device ever becomes a commercial proposition. As stated previously that is now in doubt.


----------



## MHB (27/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> I can't see why it won't work.
> 
> It would be best to calculate the O2 production rate on your expected yeast growth rate to achieve optimal uptake, the expected rate of uptake being around 8 mg O2 / g yeast / hour. If you can give me a rough guide on your expected propagator perfromance, I can work out how to tailor the O2 rate to suit.


Well I have 1 of 1L and 2 of 6L spinners, plan being to step a smack pack up to 1L, then transfer to a 6L, possibly from there to a 50L highly modified keg.
Simplest would just to make up some 10oP wort and propagate until the nutrient is expended then step up. Have also considered starting at a lot lower gravity and adding high gravity wort via a small peristaltic pump, take a bit of fiddling to get the addition rate right.
Saw these on eBay ORP Controller (one of many), have to see if one could be used to keep the gravity low enough to avoid the obvious problems and high enough to keep the yeast growing.

Would be great not to have to worry about foam and O2 poisoning.
Mark


----------



## 2cranky (27/11/17)

Lyrebird_Cycles said:


> I thought of something similar but it comes with the problem of people overwriting the calculation and stuffing things up. I speak from experience : I wrote a bunch of calculators for various functions at a commercial winery for which I worked and keeping them up to date and clean on the shared drive became a chore (I kept backup versions on my drive).
> 
> The best solution would be an online calculator written in Javascript or similar, I will do this if the device ever becomes a commercial proposition. As stated previously that is now in doubt.


Just lock everything you don't want anyone to mess with. I've got sheets that have been going for over 15 years. But that presents another problem, you forget the password!


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (27/11/17)

2cranky said:


> But that presents another problem, you forget the password!



One of the banes of modern life, the endless multiplication of passwords.


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (27/11/17)

MHB said:


> Saw these on eBay ORP Controller (one of many), have to see if one could be used to keep the gravity low enough to avoid the obvious problems and high enough to keep the yeast growing.



That's an interesting idea, I assume you are using the pH controller to modify the fermentation parameters?


----------



## MHB (27/11/17)

Well maybe, but was hoping the ORP could control the sugar content by turning the wort supply pump on and off. Stay low enough to avoid Crabtree effects, continuous O2 supply should be able to push the yeast population close to 3*10^6/ml, probably double what you get with a simple growth.
Mark

too many 00's


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (27/11/17)

OK I'm not sure I understand how that will work if we are talking about using oxygenation at the same time. 

Evidence in wine says that oxygenation temporarily overcomes any reductive effects of turning on the sulphate reduction sequence, if that's what the ORP controller was meant to respond to.


----------



## Matplat (28/11/17)

A few people have mentioned that they're holding out on purchasing a gas o2 set up, to potentially purchase this instead, but at the moment it seems like you are still at the prototype stage of product development, and reaching commercial production may be a fair way off? When do you anticipate having product ready for sale to the gen-pop?


----------



## Lyrebird_Cycles (28/11/17)

That depends on how they are marketed / sold so at this stage I can't give you a firm answer.


----------

