Temp Control Choices...

[Thirsty Boy]

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]

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

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

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

 

[kirem]

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]

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]

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:

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.

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.

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]

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]

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

+1, couldn't have said it better

 

[LethalCorpse]

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.

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]

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]

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]

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]

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

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]

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]

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.

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.

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.

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]

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

I like my brewing nice and simple