- Joined
- Nov 23, 2019
- Messages
- 472
- Reaction score
- 724
How far can a vacuum pull wine? Planning for cold stabilization this winter. Need to move wine roughly twenty feet between supply and receiving vessel.
Come on Paul the food engineering courses were 50 years ago and not really useful/ used information since most factory pumping operations never gets close to the maximum. ,,, Put a few more decade on you and RARELY becomes an increasing probability. ,,, typing I debated 32 feet H2O and used the safer number, with dissolved gas he will never get close to maximum.I think @Rice_Guy, who rarely misses ANYTHING ❤, got psi and ftH2O confused!
If the bottom of the source vessel is 18" above the top of the receiving vessel, you only need enough vacuum to lift the wine out of the source vessel (a few inches?) for a moment, then gravity will take it as far as you want horizontally. A syphon relies on the difference in altitude to maintain the necessary vacuum. The greater the difference, the faster the flow. Attach your long hose to an autosyphon, and one pump should be all you need to get it going, no electricity or vacuum pump required.The bottom of the supply vessels will be approximately eighteen inches above the receiving vessels.
Also, note that your hose can even run along the floor of your basement and into the receiving vessel, but when the source is empty, any hose below the level of wine in your receiving vessel will be full of wine, so you need to progressively raise the hose above the level of the receiver as you walk toward it, OR, keep the entire hose gradually sloping toward the receiver for the entire distance.If the bottom of the source vessel is 18" above the top of the receiving vessel, you only need enough vacuum to lift the wine out of the source vessel (a few inches?) for a moment, then gravity will take it as far as you want horizontally. A syphon relies on the difference in altitude to maintain the necessary vacuum. The greater the difference, the faster the flow. Attach your long hose to an autosyphon, and one pump should be all you need to get it going, no electricity or vacuum pump required.
It's definitely not CO2. Most likely it's water vapour (like a normal cloud) condensing due to the drop in temperature caused by the expansion of the gas created by the vacuum. That's how a cloud chamber works. It requires the receiving vessel to contain air close enough to the dew point that the water vapour condenses into droplets before it warms back up to the surrounding temperature again.I have noticed a significant cloud formation, which I can only say is CO2
I have a strong opinion about this, and after using the Allinone vacuum pump for over 2 years, I can say my opinion is based on working theory, and my results suggest (not prove, but suggest) that I'm correct.
Ahhhh, but it is better than you suggest, I think, for 2 reasons. First, it decreases the time that oxygen is in contact with the wine because the vacuum transfer tends to be faster than syphon. Second, the transfer starts at very little vacuum, but the pump stays on, and the vacuum increases as the transfer continues. By the end of the transfer in my setup, both vessels at the same height, the pump is pulling about 15" Hg, about half an atmosphere. It would also be possible to evacuate the receiving carboy before allowing the wine transfer to start. My AIO will pull about 22" Hg, which still leaves 25% of the oxygen in the receiver, but a different pump could certainly be used to pull close to perfect vacuum before transfer.I don't really disagree with any of your points. However, I would like to point out that the vacuum level needed in the receiving carboy to initiate flow from the source carboy to the receiving carboy is close to nothing, i.e., VERY close to atmospheric pressure. Complete vacuum corresponds to 30-some feet of height difference between the receiving carboy and the source. Other than the CO2 effect that you (correctly) mention, the effect is proportional. So, if you have your receiving carboy 1 foot above your source carboy, your atmosphere (and O2 exposure) would naively be expected to be reduced by ~1/34 or ~3%. You may have a strong opinion on how important 3% is, but I do not.
I agree that CO2 being released from the source carboy mitigates the O2 exposure, but I (and, I gather, you) have no idea how to quantify this.
Enter your email address to join: