cp filler mk II

mrlard
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:40 am

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by mrlard »

alikocho wrote:I have the More Beer CPF, which is great. The trick on this is the pressure relief valve, which you can adjust and then set. I bottled a case the other day in no time.

I've been thinking about making the process easier, not least in terms of the faff of putting down and piking up the thing. It's occured to me that mounting the filler in some form of fixed position (using a lab clamp and stand, say) and then holding the bottle up (rather than pushing the cpf down on the bottle, might be a good way of improving the process.
Bench mounting is the future
Capn Ahab
Posts: 887
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:32 pm

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by Capn Ahab »

RogerP wrote:There was an article in Zymurgy that reviewed CP fillers by way of analysing %age carbonation retained and the amount of O2 that got into the beer. All the various CP fillers retained more or less the same carbonation (i.e. lost 5-10%) yet all of them were worse for O2 levels irrespective of whether it was possible to purge the bottle with CO2.

One bottle filler was very significantly better in avoiding O2 pickup. That was a piece of tube on a picnic tap (http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f35/we-no-n ... gun-24678/). That method did lose more carbonation, about 25%.

All the methods advocated chilling the keg and recieving bottles to 2-3C first. The picnic tap method probably kept out O2 by the break out of CO2 protecting the beer.

Slightly over carbonate, chill beer, picnic tap and bit of tube :)

The article found a lot of the CP fillers a pain to use, but one with press to open taps was much easier to use than standard ball valves. They are probably expensive and I don't know where to source them.
Firstly, don't you have a Blichmann Beer Gun? Do you not bother with it?

Secondly, if CP Fillers invariably mean there will be significant O2 pick up during packaging, then how on earth are the majority of beers bottles worldwide?? Incidence of bottle conditioning must be tiny when you take into account all the buds, singhas, kingfishers, urquells, london prides etc etc, so the big commercial brewers must have a way of bottling force carbed beer without oxidising their beers. Does anyone know how it's done on big bottling lines?
Eat sh*t or die trying
User avatar
steve crawshaw
Posts: 856
Joined: Thu Apr 22, 2010 8:49 pm
Contact:

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by steve crawshaw »

Capn Ahab wrote:. Does anyone know how it's done on big bottling lines?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pEwWBuayLxM
I like to keep a bottle of stimulant handy in case I see a snake, which I also keep handy.
Capn Ahab
Posts: 887
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:32 pm

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by Capn Ahab »

Good link, thanks Steve :-)

So, basically the pro's all do CP Filling with a purge of CO2 at the beginning and cap on foam at the end. Sounds like what I do, just a lot more neatly and efficiently.
Eat sh*t or die trying
User avatar
alikocho
Posts: 1540
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:31 am

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by alikocho »

Capn Ahab wrote:
RogerP wrote:There was an article in Zymurgy that reviewed CP fillers by way of analysing %age carbonation retained and the amount of O2 that got into the beer. All the various CP fillers retained more or less the same carbonation (i.e. lost 5-10%) yet all of them were worse for O2 levels irrespective of whether it was possible to purge the bottle with CO2.

One bottle filler was very significantly better in avoiding O2 pickup. That was a piece of tube on a picnic tap (http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f35/we-no-n ... gun-24678/). That method did lose more carbonation, about 25%.

All the methods advocated chilling the keg and recieving bottles to 2-3C first. The picnic tap method probably kept out O2 by the break out of CO2 protecting the beer.

Slightly over carbonate, chill beer, picnic tap and bit of tube :)

The article found a lot of the CP fillers a pain to use, but one with press to open taps was much easier to use than standard ball valves. They are probably expensive and I don't know where to source them.
Firstly, don't you have a Blichmann Beer Gun? Do you not bother with it?

Secondly, if CP Fillers invariably mean there will be significant O2 pick up during packaging, then how on earth are the majority of beers bottles worldwide?? Incidence of bottle conditioning must be tiny when you take into account all the buds, singhas, kingfishers, urquells, london prides etc etc, so the big commercial brewers must have a way of bottling force carbed beer without oxidising their beers. Does anyone know how it's done on big bottling lines?
Big brewers use CPF fillers. I've seen Stone's at work and it's very obvious that it's purge, fill, cap on foam. The More Beer website blurb for theirs makes this point - " Our counter pressure filler mimics a single filling head on a professional bottling line, a concept that we all know works very, very well."

The Zymurgy Article ran in the autumn of 1995 (actually it was one of three articles in the same issue according to the AHA website). Someone summed up their conclusions on it here - http://www.beerandloafing.org/hbd/fetch.php?id=33894

But George Fix (Principles of Brewing Science) came back with a whole host of issues with the article here - http://www.beerandloafing.org/hbd/fetch.php?id=33991. And it turns out that some of the samples for the Zymurgy test were part filled bottles.

Not so simple then, and Fix labours user proficiency to some extent as key.

I've found my More Beer CPF to be great. It took a few goes to get used to it, but I can bottle consistently and have noticed no problems with oxidation. It is a little slow, and takes a bit of time to set up and clean afterwards.


Oh, and surely a Blichman beer gun is a stainless version of tube in picnic tap with the ability to purge bottles first...
Ali

BJCP National Judge
BJCP Assistant Regional Director (North-East/Europe)
American Homebrewers' Association International Subcommittee
Organizer, National Homebrew Competition
CBA UK Competition and Training Coordinator

http://serenbrewing.com
User avatar
I_used_to_brew
Posts: 2356
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2010 1:06 pm

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by I_used_to_brew »

Edit now I'm not using a tiny 'phone screen.
alikocho wrote:Oh, and surely a Blichman beer gun is a stainless version of tube in picnic tap with the ability to purge bottles first...
Yep, and with the same level of coronation loss etc. Got some picnic tap filled beers at +12months and they are fine.
Not yet used the beer gun, I rarely bottle.
Capn Ahab wrote: Secondly, if CP Fillers invariably mean there will be significant O2 pick up during packaging, then how on earth are the majority of beers bottles worldwide?? Incidence of bottle conditioning must be tiny when you take into account all the buds, singhas, kingfishers, urquells, london prides etc etc, so the big commercial brewers must have a way of bottling force carbed beer without oxidising their beers. Does anyone know how it's done on big bottling lines?
Commercially the beers you mention are all pasteurised so are somewhat different to our homebrew/corny keg situation. Also many commercial beers contain 'Sulphite' which acts to prevent Oxidation. They are producing a carbonated product quickly and can do that in a few ways, I suspect that they use in-line carbonation rather than mimic our tank-based system (simply for speed). All we are trying to do is preserve the CO2 levels we have lovingly created. The CP filler is definitely the best at that. I was suprised at the article and the differences in O2 pickup and I'm struggling to see how it can happen with a CPF in a properly purged bottle. I can understand why there is less O2 pickup with the tap+ tube method (CO2 breakout).
mrlard
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Nov 14, 2011 11:40 am

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by mrlard »

I I'll be honest the only time I ever have any probs for cpb

1) is if I haven't chilled the beer down to below a few degrees
2) if the pipe that goes to the bottom of the bottle isn't right at the bottom - I have also cut it to 45 degree to help this.
3) if I have been drinking that really messes up bottling.

Cap on foam is key tho can't emphasis that enough


(ps sorry for any typos still on my bloody phone)
User avatar
alikocho
Posts: 1540
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:31 am

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by alikocho »

RogerP wrote:
Commercially the beers you mention are all pasteurised so are somewhat different to our homebrew/corny keg situation. Also many commercial beers contain 'Sulphite' which acts to prevent Oxidation. They are producing a carbonated product quickly and can do that in a few ways, I suspect that they use in-line carbonation rather than mimic our tank-based system (simply for speed). All we are trying to do is preserve the CO2 levels we have lovingly created. The CP filler is definitely the best at that. I was suprised at the article and the differences in O2 pickup and I'm struggling to see how it can happen with a CPF in a properly purged bottle. I can understand why there is less O2 pickup with the tap+ tube method (CO2 breakout).
The one's he mentioned are pasteurised, but the example I gave (Stone) isn't. Nor is Victory, Brooklyn, 21st Ammendment (who can), Sixpoint (who can), Brewdog, Magic Rock, Sam Adams, Widmer, Lagunitas, Green Flash, New Belgium, Elysian, Ninkasi, Captain Lawrence. So, there are big guys, medium guys and little guys cpf filling and not necessarily experiencing oxidation problems (although how they carbonate I don't know, but I can tell you that at least three of these in the US use CO2 diffusing stones as I've seen them).

I guess there might be something about tolerable oxidation in packaging, and shelf life. Most reckon on 6ish months for an unpasteurised CPF filled to still be at its best, with higher alcohol stuff having a longer life. Remember that oxidation isn't just that soggy cardboard smell/taste, but also a beer just not tasting so fresh (like when you pop that IIPA and there's no real hop aroma, or the subdued APA that you'd had three months earlier and it was sharper).

On the last point - "properly purged bottle". This is Fix's point - the user, and getting a bottle that is properly purged. Jam your CPF in the bottle, pressurize with CO2 and all you're doing is increasing the quantity of CO2 while keeping oxygen in their. Add brownian motion, and as your beer flows in there's oxygen for it to mingle with and minimal to no CO2 breakout to blanket the beer. I follow the advice of turing the gas on as you put the end of the CPF into the bottle as a means of purging. Now I'm no scientist, but I expect my method is more likely to displace oxygen than starting off with a sealed environment.
Ali

BJCP National Judge
BJCP Assistant Regional Director (North-East/Europe)
American Homebrewers' Association International Subcommittee
Organizer, National Homebrew Competition
CBA UK Competition and Training Coordinator

http://serenbrewing.com
Capn Ahab
Posts: 887
Joined: Sat Feb 05, 2011 7:32 pm

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by Capn Ahab »

What has pasteurisation got to do with oxidation?
Eat sh*t or die trying
User avatar
alikocho
Posts: 1540
Joined: Fri Feb 04, 2011 8:31 am

Re: cp filler mk II

Post by alikocho »

Capn Ahab wrote:What has pasteurisation got to do with oxidation?
Certain organisms and enzymes, which pasteurization might kill would accelerate oxidative or souring effects in the presence of oxygen (like acetobacteria, brettanomyces, lactobacillus) as far as I understand it.
Ali

BJCP National Judge
BJCP Assistant Regional Director (North-East/Europe)
American Homebrewers' Association International Subcommittee
Organizer, National Homebrew Competition
CBA UK Competition and Training Coordinator

http://serenbrewing.com
Post Reply