Copy Link
Add to Bookmark
Report
Cider Digest #1659
Subject: Cider Digest #1659, 1 October 2011
From: cider-request@talisman.com
Cider Digest #1659 1 October 2011
Cider and Perry Discussion Forum
Contents:
Re: Cider Digest #1658, 27 September 2011 (Mike Faul)
RE: Cider Digest #1658, 27 September 2011 ("Rich Anderson")
Problems Pumping Pomace (Charles McGonegal) (Curtis Sherrer)
CIP for small tanks (Tim Artz)
could we just name these varieties?!? (Dick Dunn)
NOTE: Digest appears whenever there is enough material to send one.
Send ONLY articles for the digest to cider@talisman.com.
Use cider-request@talisman.com for subscribe/unsubscribe/admin requests.
Archives of the Digest are available at www.talisman.com/cider#Archives
Digest Janitor: Dick Dunn
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Cider Digest #1658, 27 September 2011
From: Mike Faul <mfaul@faul.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 16:38:06 -0700
Charles,
we use two types of pump here. One is a flexible impeller pump but it is
a self priming and positive displacement pump. It will move pretty much
anything in the tank. variable speed so we turn it on slow, it pulls
everything in the tank through. The other pump is also a positive
displacement pump but it is a air driven diaphragm pump.
Mike
Rabbit's Foot Meadery
Red Branch Cider Company
> Subject: Problems Pumping Pomace
> From: Charles McGonegal<cpm@appletrue.com>
> Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 10:01:09 -0500
>
> We grind into a short term (< hour) storage tank and use a flexible impeller
> pump to move the pomace to the rack and cloth press.
>
> This works fine with dessert apples, but the traditional cider varieties
> and perry pears don't release as much free run juice. At least for us. And
> thus, they don't flow out of the holding tank and into the pump. We end
> up bucketing them over.
>
> Does anyone else use this kind of setup? Seen a similar problem? Found a
> solution? I'm thinking of saving my pennies for an elliptical lobe pump
> with an auger in-feed. That's a lot of pennies.
------------------------------
Subject: RE: Cider Digest #1658, 27 September 2011
From: "Rich Anderson" <rhanderson@centurytel.net>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 17:43:06 -0700
We had a similar discussion on pumps a few months ago. In the winery there
is a pump for everything and they are expensive. We are fermenting apple
mash for distillation and purchased a screw pump (Kiesel) which being
manufactured in Germany comes 3 phase. We fitted it with 2" hose, but it
looks like it could handle a 3", maybe 4" hose if you have the right DIN
fittings, so the hose is DIN on the pump end, tri-clamp on the other. It
does the job, even with the heavy marc that rises to the top of the
fermenter. Being new to this approach to fermentation, we are learning as we
go. I thought about using a lighter juice impeller pump, but thought the
rubber impellers would not last long. Despite the cost I think this was the
way to go and the pump can also be used for bulk juice transfer, in fact
some of the literature I saw as I researched suggest that a screw pump is
gentler that an impeller pump, but this is a topic for another discussion.
------------------------------
Subject: Problems Pumping Pomace (Charles McGonegal)
From: Curtis Sherrer <redbrickmill@yahoo.com>
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2011 18:49:36 -0700 (PDT)
This will certainly allow you to use the flexible impeller pump but may
add more labor in the pressing department. Just add pressed juice to your
pomace to increase the liquid content. Good Luck,
Curt Sherrer
------------------------------
Subject: CIP for small tanks
From: Tim Artz <tartz@cox.net>
Date: Wed, 28 Sep 2011 09:50:02 -0400
I made a small scale setup for tank cleaning using a rotating high
density plastic CIP spray head purchased from More Beer. I threaded the
spray head onto a 30" SS nipple, and then connected the open end of the
nipple to a 10' section of reinforced flexible tubing (1" ID). I used
several heavy duty hose clamps to make sure it stays connected under
pressure. The SS nipple and spray head are inserted into the top of the
tank through a small port; all other openings are sealed. The other end
of the tube is then connected to the output of the high volume (25 GPM)
centrifugal pump. The pump input is a 1.5" tri-clover fitting to
connect to the tank. I use a tri-clover T fitting between the pump and
the tank so there is a port to drain the cleaning solution without
disconnecting the pump. Cleaning cycle is (1) hot PBW, (2) hot water
rinse, (3) iodophor. The entire set up cost about $300, but that cost
is quickly recovered through reduced chemical costs.
------------------------------
Subject: could we just name these varieties?!?
From: Dick Dunn <rcd@talisman.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Oct 2011 00:21:24 -0600
Anybody else in the US getting tired of explaining our not-a-Tremlett's and
not-a-Foxwhelp?
I find both of these varieties--whatever they are--useful. The Foxwhelp
is at least a productive tree giving flavorful, sharp juice here. I've
heard it's not so good elsewhere, but those variations are always the case.
The nonTremlett's is more problematic to explain because it's more useful
as cider fruit: rather tannic, and some good hard tannin at that; it's not
difficult to see why it was mis-classified.
We had a dinner here recently where I gave some tastes of cider fruit. I
wanted to tell people what they were tasting, but I didn't want to be at
all dishonest, so I couldn't make myself say they were tasting a Tremlett's
Bitter. (And you ask, "But who would know?" And I answer, "I would".)
So I gave a stupid, waffling explanation. All that people got out of it
was that there's a matter of apples being identified differently from one
area to another...which is a useful snippet of understanding...but I don't
know that many people actually took away that understanding.
OK, we've been calling the false-Foxwhelp a "Fauxwhelp" here on the Digest
for some time. That's clever, cute (twee?), but it's a written-pun that
doesn't even begin to work when you're walking around giving a talk...nor
any other verbal interchange and frankly the written one only works in a
few situations.
There's no cleverness to describe the not-a-Foxwhelp.
So what do we call them? Can we give them names, just to avoid the
nuisance? (PLEASE, if anybody has done DNA analysis to find out what
they really are, even if they're not misnomers of something else, could
you let us know?!?)
Maybe we should just say "American Foxwhelp" and "American Tremlett's"
(or Tremlett's American)?
I'm open to lots of possibilities as long as we can get to a consensus
which improves on the hundred-words-of-waffling we use to describe these
two now.
- --
Dick Dunn rcd@talisman.com Hygiene, Colorado USA
------------------------------
End of Cider Digest #1659
*************************
