That touch science chiller is a great chiller for the price. I think we got it for less than 10k shipped from China. I actually would like it to get to a colder setpoint, honestly. If she could, or another one, achieve colder than -80c it would be ideal for what I want.
I could probably chill two as long as it’s not fighting anything and all is insulated properly. I want two dewax chambers, actually. One to stall in at -40/50 for a few hours, filter and transfer into the next one, then drop chiller and go for the next alloted amount of time.
Ha 2 dewax chambers is something I’ve been thinking about w/ the new setup im putting together. Which brings me back to the 8" column question if I may… What do you think would be more efficient?
2 x (4x48) Material > 8x48 Dewaxer > Collection
2 x (4x48) Material > 2 x (6x36) Dewaxer > Collection.
If I went directly to a 6x48 Material > 8x48 Dewaxer I’m under the impression that quality would suffer since it’ll be more difficult to hold cryo temps. Correct?
I would go with the 6". You probably won’t use that much solvent to fill up the “8 dewaxing chambers. And yea there would be more surface area with the 6”, too. Even if you were putting 4-5k into a 4x48 column. That’s only 1-1.5k dry. You wouldn’t fill that 8" halfway.
I ran the numbers and by doing a 4:1 solvent / material ratio, all the above columns would be basically maxed out (80% fill). The 2 x (4x48) > 1 x (8x48) dewaxer setup is the exception, with about 35% headroom in the dewaxer (8x36 is too small w/ that ratio).
If im doing my numbers right…
If I understand, you would opt for the 2 x (4x48) Material > 2 x (6x36) Dewaxer. Each material column will have a dedicated dewaxer. More costly and labour intensive to run things this way and I wonder if quality output will be worth the extra time/costs.
Ah. You’re running both columns and putting them both in at once. Then, you definitely will need a larger chamber. But, even then, with my 6x24 I hardly fill above halfway with just one. I think the 6x48 would suffice.
Take a gander at other 10lb systems and their dewax chamber. Nboler is a 6x48 material and dewax column (jacketed). So is the bizzy systems. Even with extra solvent you probably won’t over fill. That 4-5k frozen in there is 70-75% water. Minus that and you don’t need that much solvent going through.
Good point, I never took water content into account. So youre running with a 4x48 and only filling a 6x24 dewax halfway? The volumes are almost identical. Interesting… Why’d you opt for a 6x24 over another 4x48?
I actually have two of the 6x24 ones. I just don’t have everything to connect the second one to the chiller. The jacketed columns were already there and I have to use what is available. Only reason I wouldn’t go smaller is to avoid clogging the filters.
I think he is onto something. Filtering is faster with pressure. Filtering is limited with vacuum to the amount of suction. With pressure you can just up the pressure which is pretty limitless.
I filter in the negative. But for those with nitrogen and dewaxers. Ever try to add nitro to your dewaxer you push threw the filters??
I think that’s where the poster is going with this.
He’s referencing coagulation, actually. Depending on the dewaxing chamber setup. If they have a ball valve to dump through filters, like mine, I don’t know how much it would make. Other systems dewaxing chambers, have their filters directly underneath the column. Added pressure would potentially push your solution through before you were able to get dewaxing done, right? And furthermore, as dewaxing goes on, cold spreads. Migration of solvent would pass through the filters as they cooled, I feel. I’ve never used it that way.
I use added pressure to push through my filters. It’s the only way I move cold ass solvent around.
What im saying is after you close that valve for your dewaxer and wait like 3 hours for coagulation which essentially would be low pressure dewaxing. Then pressure push the solvent threw the filters leaving the coagulated waxes in the dewaxer.
Recently there have been a push to pressurized filteing ie Summits Pig Filter (Aka maple syrup plate filter) but i see where the pressure could help this. I read @Beaker talking about vacuum vs pressure for filtration.
If this is what you do already. then sorry. Ive always let the vacuum pull my dewaxed solution threw the filters.
I think he asking will the pressure drop the fats out quicker though … Not about moving it, just instead 2hr dewax, that pressure speed up and only take say 30min… And instead adding it at end to move it add at beginning during dewax…
…
I’m not saying this work, just references to what he was originally saying
And that if they not solid sceince reason behind why it wouldn’t maybe some test would find out…
My last run, I accidentally forgot to dump the nitro pressure off the top of my dewaxer from pushing the last bit through my column, I like to speed it up instead of waiting for it to get pulled over, I saw no effect.
However I did realize about an hour into dewax that I had like 10-15 psi so I burped it off, closed the valve, then about 30 minutes later I saw it was still at 0, so I decided I’d pull a vacuum on the top of the dewaxer, when I got to -15 it violently boiled my slurry out of the jacket, (it was a dry ice and acetone mix) so I shut the valve fast, then tried to slowly open it again and it tried to boil over again, this time there wasn’t much acetone left to blow out like a volcano so it just bubbled up… that was my experience playing with pressure and vacuum. Not exactly sure what happened…
What model Touch science do you use? Ive requested the size of the reservoir but they haven’t gotten back to me yet so I’m not sure how many columns I can run off one chiller. Im looking at their 2.5kw @ -80c to rock a closed loop system for use with ethanol.
