Vented Bungs SO2 test

[kuziwk]

Hi guys, it appears that the silicone vented bungs with the flapper on top perform better than the Hollow rubber bungs with the S airlock. While there are a lot of variables and I wasn’t actually planning to conduct a test, that data I had collected had some interesting results that I couldn’t help but notice. I plan to conduct a more controlled experiment with different types of bungs. I also plan to eliminate the 1/4tsp measurement in favour of weighing the sulfite powder. In the meantime here are my notes from two wine kits, virtually racked and started at the same time, one with a vented silicone bung and the other s airlock with universal hollow bung.


Passport California red blend

-07/14/19 pitched yeast, RC 212 with 38c water for 20 minutes

-07/18/19 pitched ec-1118 yeast

-07/28/19 Racked and added 1tsp cellering tannin and 4g sulphites, did not add clearing agents

-08/18/19 racked and added 1tsp cellaring tannin complex, American Oak Cubes

-08/25/19 tested approximately 46 ppm sulfite

-10/24/19 added 1/8 tsp sulphite

-11/21/19 racked and added 1/4 tsp sulphite with vented silicone bung.

-02/19/20 racked and add 1.6G sulfite,sulfite tested at 69PPM, added 3 month used 50G hungarian oak stave. Based on calculator it is assumed that the sulfite were 29 PPM before adding

-06/13/20 filter and bottle, test Sulfites before bottling.




Showcase carmenere

-07/16/19 pitched RC 212 yeast with 41c water for 20 minutes

-07/18/19 pitched ec-1118 yeast.

-07/28/19 Racked and added 1tsp cellering tannin and 4g sulphites, did not add clearing agents

-08/18/19 racked and added 1tsp cellaring tannin, French Oak cubes

-08/25/19 tested approximately 32ppm sulphite

-10/24/19 added 1/8 tsp sulphite

-11/21/19 racked and added 1/4 tsp sulphite with hollow rubber bung

-02/19/20 racked and added 1.6g sulfite, tested at 62PPM. Based on calculator it is assumed that the sulfite were 24 PPM before adding

-06/13/20 filter and bottle, test Sulfites before bottling.


Just for fun I was also surprised how fast the sulfites dropped in another kit I just bottled. This one also has the “S” airlock. My conclusion is when we rack in three weeks or so, the first racking we should be adding some sulfites Even though 4 grams were just added coming out of the primary...I Found roughly 0.6 to 0.8 grams is sufficient before the next addition when racking in 3-4 months of 1/4 tsp or 1.6 grams. For the record I do degas with a stirring attachment on my drill, however I time exactly 4 minutes and I change directions very quickly before a vortex forms.

RJS Zinfandel(bottled)

-12/03/19 pitched yeast, added 1 tblsp tannin complex

-12/15/19 racked added 1tsp tannin complex, 4G sulfite, 12.5 kliesesol, 75ml chitosin.

-12/27/19 racked from sediment.

-01/21/20 added 20 g French oak chips.

-02/16/20 tested 14ppm before filtering

-02/16/20 filtered and bottled, sulftes tested at 42PPM prior to bottling

 

[cmason1957]

Interesting Daniel Pambianchi announced in the Facebook group that he moderates back in April that the hard silicon type bungs allow much more oxygen into the carboy than the older type of bungs. He tested the same wines, same measurement intervals, which certainly will make a difference. I don't know that he ever published these results anywhere, perhaps he did and I hope he did. But I haven't found the full write-up anywhere. I have stayed with the old style bungs for that reason.

 

[kuziwk]

Right and that would make sense silicon is more permeable than other rubbers. That being said though, the air infiltration of the water air lock is likely the weak point compared to the vented silicone bung. I might try glycerin and see if there is a difference as well.

Would sooner trust the old drilled rubber bungs over the plastic type hollow rubber bungs (new style). The only problem is they are really hard to remove once they are in.