Moonshiners' 'Thumpers': Myth or Reality?

Anybody ever see/read this little book? It's a pretty entertaining read, copyrighted 1966. I think that it was from this that I initially thought that a slobber box and thumper were the same thing. It seems to operate on that assumption. Also, it doesn't specify whether or not the tube should reach to the bottom, or whether to start with some liquid inside.

A favorite quote:

"Some old moonshiners never add yeast, depending on yeast which remains in the fermentation barrels or vats or on natural yeasts of the air. Some operators maintain, even vehemently, that no yeast is involved in their fermentation, and in certain circles one sometimes hears, 'I don't like yeast whisky!' But add yeast; it's fast and sure and one cannot often afford to waste time."

Pardon the crappy images, my camera kind of sucks.

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

The heat from the water vapor in the Alch. depleted boiler is now coming over at or near 210 - 212 * f, and the BP in the thump is at or near 185 - 190 *f. No need to move anything

Quote: Originally posted by Magpie

I've been looking at the ethanol-water VLE chart in my textbook (Foust) in regard to the enthalpy. It is presented as BTU/lb-mole. What's amazing is that the enthalpies for both the liquid and the vapor stay almost the same as the streams (liquid and vapor) increase in ethanol content. I interpret this to mean that once the thumper reaches maximum ethanol concentration it's not only going to put out a richer vapor but it's going to come over like gangbusters. My conclusion is based on the fact that a lb-mole of water weights 18 lbs whereas a lb-mole of ethanol weighs 46 lbs. Zombie: Does your experience support this? Edit: This is likely due to the fact that on a per mole basis water and ethanol heats of vaporization are very close, ie, for water it is 40.65 kJ/mol and for ethanol it is 42.3 kJ/mole. So 14 g of condensing water should evaporate 44 g of ethanol. [Edited on 20-2-2015 by Magpie]

Quote: Originally posted by deltaH

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie   Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25   Quote: Originally posted by deltaH   [...] if you're willing to make an improved design then I'd rather build a refluxed tray. Completely second that. A controlled refluxer/tray would be far more efficient and demonstrably effective. Even simpler: a decent fractionating column. Easy peasy and highly effective. [Edited on 20-2-2015 by blogfast25] That's where all this comes full circle back to the nature of the builders, and operators of thumpers. For the most part they were back woods Tennessee hill folk. The most they understood was basic trading math, and how to fit a lid on a bucket. If you think about the origin, it's actually quite a leap in evolution for them. I included some old looking rum still setups a while back in this thread that appeared to be using thumpers, so I'm not so sure these 'billies invented them. I think it's much more likely that this knowledge was imported from rum making methodology and that in itself might be very old, who knows?

Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25

I saw a thumper on The Flintstones once!

Quote: Originally posted by Crowfjord

Anybody ever see/read this little book? It's a pretty entertaining read, copyrighted 1966. I think that it was from this that I initially thought that a slobber box and thumper were the same thing. It seems to operate on that assumption. Also, it doesn't specify whether or not the tube should reach to the bottom, or whether to start with some liquid inside. A favorite quote: "Some old moonshiners never add yeast, depending on yeast which remains in the fermentation barrels or vats or on natural yeasts of the air. Some operators maintain, even vehemently, that no yeast is involved in their fermentation, and in certain circles one sometimes hears, 'I don't like yeast whisky!' But add yeast; it's fast and sure and one cannot often afford to waste time." Pardon the crappy images, my camera kind of sucks.

Quote: Originally posted by aga

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie   The heat from the water vapor in the Alch. depleted boiler is now coming over at or near 210 - 212 * f, and the BP in the thump is at or near 185 - 190 *f. No need to move anything I don't understand how the Boiling Point in the Thump can be static - as i see it it will be very much a dynamic, first going lower as it takes up the EtOH from the boiling pot, then going higher as it loses EtOH, and takes in Water (steam) at the same time. Sealing the intake from the first boiling pot after it gives up it's Shine, and moving the heat will surely give more % in the distillate. By adding Steam (i.e. water) from the first pot, the Thumper pot gets Diluted as well as heated. With out setup, we can unhook the first pot easily, plug the open neck and move the flame, so that might be worth trying After the initial runs to get the Thump data. We'll know for sure when the last two glass jigsaw pieces arrive. Oh. Question @ Zombie: what are you guys actually measuring during runs ? [Edited on 20-2-2015 by aga]

You missed the point.

The run is very much dynamic. At the END of the run is where my statement applies.

The fact is the boiler is now 2-3% ABV. The thump is near 18% abv. The steam coming over does NOT dilute as the EtOH is vaporizing at a faster rate than the water. That is the sole purpose of heat control. It is the EXACT same thing as moving pots around, and you end up with the exact same abv, and amount as if you had moved pots.

You will understand completely once you see it in action. I promise.

Quote: Originally posted by aga

So you expect the ethanol to evaporate off faster than the steam coming in. OK. From what you say, you imply that you're measuring the EtOH % in the boiling pot liquid, and the Thumper liquid. If that's true, then how do you obtain samples without disrupting the temperature/pressure conditions, or is that part of it as well ?

Quote: Originally posted by aga

So you expect the ethanol to evaporate off faster than the steam coming in.

Quote: Originally posted by aga

Your point is clear, yet i still feel that moving the flame will give a slightly higher yield. Well, we'll see once the data is collected. It is a real pain waiting for deliveries of small bits of glassware.

I love you guys, and really appreciate all the time/ money you are investing.
This has been very enlightening because I am learning that I should be paying more attention to the technical side of chemistry.
I tend to learn the mechanics, and ignore the math, formulas, and lingo.

Perhaps it is because I never enjoyed discussing methods in a common language. I'm more of a do'er, than a talker.

If I did pay attention, and apply what I know to formulas, Perhaps I could have conveyed the formulas in a manner much more precise than my hitting the keyboard with a hammer, and you all would have understood more clearly what I am trying to express.

Many thanks. You are making a monster you know...

Super Brain 2016!!!

Quote: Originally posted by aga

DRY STATES ?

Quote: Originally posted by aga

So you can Brew, but not Shine. Drink, but not publicly. Next they'll want to ban Drugs and stop all those Sober people carrying guns ... [Edited on 20-2-2015 by aga]

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

Quote: Originally posted by aga   So you can Brew, but not Shine. Drink, but not publicly. Next they'll want to ban Drugs and stop all those Sober people carrying guns ... [Edited on 20-2-2015 by aga] GOD FORBID! I Like gettin' doped up, and shootin' at sh^t. Especially at drunks! Dry county map... http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/govbeat/wp/2014/09/02/wh...

Quote: Originally posted by aga

So to be Safe, and not being familiar with US State geography, i need to head for Miami or Arizona (Avoiding California on grounds of it being too strange to matter) ? Holiday with Jail Time for drinking beer = no holiday.

Quote: Originally posted by aga

[...] + NaOH will break your glassware when it cools' It does. Use metal.

It didn't mine.

Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25

It didn't mine.

I heard somewhere that hammers, and rocks do the same thing to glass.

It's one of the few things I do believe on face value, and therefore never felt the need to prove.

It's all good fellas. Just be careful sampling the product...

Quote: Originally posted by aga

Hammers and Rocks do Not break glass per se. Place a Rock or a Hammer on a Glass sheet, and the glass will happily support the weight of the hammer. A metal hammer moving at sufficient Speed will break glass. This particular Theory is well known, and there should be be data supporting it.

You, and Blogfast have a LOT in common.

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

Without creating a way to drop liquid down the column full of packing all you create a a partially blocked column, and the vapor will rise but have Very little to strip on it's way up.

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

The thumpers capacity to act as a "Partial Reflux condenser" is minimal.

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

Lets suppose the thumper WERE 100% efficient, and insulated. Then it would have NO effect. It would simply be in the pipe.

Drank the samples, and have to re run the experiment.

37 bottles of beer on the wall, 31 bottt... shoot.

99 bottles of beer on the wall

Quote: Originally posted by gsd

Sorry for barging in late into this thread. I was not following it, but after some discussion with Magpie, I browsed thru'. Here is my take on it for whatever it is worth. 1) This "thumper" is a contraption for Steam Distillation with an added twist that the heat source i.e. motive steam contains the feed stream as well. [big snip]

Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25

Imagine a pot of pure EtOH at BP. Now we lead pure water vapour (steam) through it. Do you really believe the vapour leaving the thumper would be 100 % EtOH?

Quote: Originally posted by DJF90

Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25   Imagine a pot of pure EtOH at BP. Now we lead pure water vapour (steam) through it. Do you really believe the vapour leaving the thumper would be 100 % EtOH? This is the fallacy that prevents you from making sense of the thumper. It is not claimed to work under these conditions, nor those using 50% EtOH as you have referred to previously. Its clear from the VLE diagram that if a thumper is capable of working, it has to start towards the lower end of the scale.

Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25

Imagine a pot of pure EtOH at BP. Now we lead pure water vapour (steam) through it. Do you really believe the vapour leaving the thumper would be 100 % EtOH? That would only be true if the steam and EtOH were kept rigorously separated, for instance by using the steam in a heating coil placed in the EtOH bath (or in a heating coil heating the EtOH pot from the outside with a mantle or such like).

Quote: Originally posted by DJF90

It is not claimed to work under these conditions, nor those using 50% EtOH as you have referred to previously.

Quote: Originally posted by gsd

If you use steam in heating coil (as you should for distilling pure alcohol) then it is no more a steam distillation. It is distillation by using steam in the coil (or jacket) as an indirect heating medium. gsd

Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25

Quote: Originally posted by DJF90   It is not claimed to work under these conditions, nor those using 50% EtOH as you have referred to previously. I didn't claim it worked like that. Learn to read, instead of setting up straw men. Re. the latter you've got previouses and I expect this latest one won't be the last either. Quote: Originally posted by gsd   If you use steam in heating coil (as you should for distilling pure alcohol) then it is no more a steam distillation. It is distillation by using steam in the coil (or jacket) as an indirect heating medium. gsd Yawn. [Edited on 10-3-2015 by blogfast25]

Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25

Quote: Originally posted by DJF90   It is not claimed to work under these conditions, nor those using 50% EtOH as you have referred to previously. I didn't claim it worked like that. Learn to read, instead of setting up straw men. Re. the latter you've got previouses and I expect this latest one won't be the last either.

Quote:
" The only person worse at that than you is zombie, who somehow managed nearly two pages of posts without a reply."

To keep it in context, as is the crux of your post...

Those nearly 2 pages were all replies to statements or questions. I was replying to others. Not making random posts.

It's all good.

Quote: Originally posted by Magpie

To add to an existing post all you need to do is use the "edit" button. But edits must be done within 24hrs, except in the "prepublication forum" where there's a 30 day window, IIRC.

[Edited on 3-11-2015 by Zombie]


I'll try on another forum to get this down..

[Edited on 3-11-2015 by Zombie]

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

Even when I try to use the "quick reply", and go back one page to pull a quote, my response disappears.

Quote: Originally posted by Magpie

For multiple quotes I open a 2nd window. Then just block and copy to the first window. You have to remember to enclose each quote with the proper BB codes. This may be crude, but it's effective. [Edited on 11-3-2015 by Magpie]

Quote: Originally posted by Fulmen

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie   Even when I try to use the "quick reply", and go back one page to pull a quote, my response disappears. Yes, that will happen. Other software allows you to see the thread below when composing, sadly this doesn't. The trick is to pull up the thread in a new tab. Some browsers have shortcuts for this, don't know what they are except on Firefox. But there you simply press [AltGr] while clicking a link or the back-button.

Quote: Originally posted by aga

It's more fun to just type a reply with no quote. The delay allows others to reply before you do, thus causing all sorts of mayhem.

By George I think he's got it.

That second tab was the trick.

Thank you guys. I owe ya' one!

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

Thank you guys. I owe ya' one!

Hmmmm.

Now to wrap my head around that one. Constant challenges here.

Sure you don't want a puppy or something?

So the thumper does provide reflux by returning the distillate to the pot?

That is exactly right.

It starts off with slow steady "thumps" as the pipe bounces off the bottom.

It will get crazy loud until the pots equalize in temperature, and then quite back down.


Just another thought... "suckback" might be the wrong term. Perhaps the "thumper" is not allowing vapor out fast enough, and pressurizing.

Be careful.

Quote: Originally posted by aga

It appears that a very steady/constant heat is required to ensure a continuous positive pressure from the boiling pot.

It is also possible that your hot plate is cyclic, and can not hold a steady enough heat.
We can not use hot plates in distillation boilers because they tend to switch off, and on in cycles rather than maintain a heat setting.

Try to avoid any sort of "puking, maybe boiling chips will help I do use them in even large boilers, and perhaps a water bath might help to maintain a steady temp.

I know you will figure something out, and I really do appreciate your efforts here.

If I were to document any of this from MY end... It would be tantamount to a written confession.
I sort of like having access to daily life.

Quote: Originally posted by aga

No liquid transfer ? As the EtOH vapour leaves the boiling pot, it was condensing on the walls of the short transfer pipe into the thumper = liquid transfer.

Some Experiments Regarding Distillation Techniques

A series of experimental distillations were made to Quantitatively compare the effects of using a 'Thumper' and a Vigreux column in the distillation of Ethanol/Water mixtures, specifically targetting the EtOH w% in the product.

The equipment used was all standard quickfit glassware, two thermometers, a kitchen timer and a refractometer (to measure the ethanol w%).

The thermometers were calibrated using boiling water, an ice slurry, and the standard y = mx + c formula along with a bit of algebra (to determine slope multiplier and offset constant)

Ironically an ethanol spirit burner was used as the heat source.

The FeedStock for all experiments was 500ml of cheap 37.5 w% Vodka diluted with DIW to give 1875ml of 10 w% EtOH/Water (as measured by the refractometer).



To determine the behaviour of a Thumper, a preliminary experiment was made with the apparatus seen here :-




250ml of feedstock was loaded into the boiling pot, and 150ml into the thumper.

Less than 1 minute after lighting the spirit burner bubbles (of air) were seen leaving the pipe in the thumper liquid.

@10 mins the liquid in the 500ml flask boiled.
@12 mins condensate was forming in the transfer piping, and entering the thumper.
@14 mins the liquid level in the vertical pipe into the thumper could be seen rapidly rising and falling.
@16 mins violent suck-back dumped the contents of the thumper back into the boiling flask.
@18 mins the thumper felt significantly warm to the touch.
@28 mins the first distillate product left the apparatus.
@38 mins distillate stopped leaving the exit pipe.

7ml of distillate were collected.

A second attempt was made with 150ml in the boiling pot, 50ml in the thumper.

The suck-back problem was worse, with several suck-back events after 16 mins.
These were prevented by removing the thermometer stopper as the suck-back developed, and so it was determined that the suck-back was caused by sudden temperature drop in the boiling flask, which was in turn caused by the experiment being done outside in a light breeze.

A shield made from Al foil was devised to prevent this in subsequent experiments.

Logically, the thumper will heat faster with less mass in there, so a much lower volume was thought to be beneficial, so long as the inlet tube was covered.

A line was noticed in the boiling flask, so this experiment was immediately aborted.

Turned out to be a just a manufacturing defect rather than a hairline crack.


#1 Thumper Distillation

190ml was loaded into the boiling pot, 10ml into the thumper and the flame lit.

After 36 mins 3ml of final distillate was collected.

Testing with the refractometer showed no result at all (off-the-scale).
The distillate was diluted 50:50 with DIW and this solution was measured at 49 w%, meaning that the actual product was 98 w% indicating some error, probably in the dilution, as the azeotrope max is 95.6 w%.

The remaining 175ml of boiling pot liquid was measured at 4 w%.
The remaining 22ml thumper pot liquid measured 37 w%


#2 Standard Distillation (no column etc)



200ml FeedStock was loaded into the 500ml RBF boiling pot, and the flame lit.

After 10 mins 3ml of distillate had been collected.

This measured 76 w%


#3 Eleven-tier Vigreux Column Distillation



200ml FeedStock was loaded into the 500ml RBF boiling pot, and the flame lit.

After 16 mins over 3ml of distillate was collected.

This measured off-the-scale, and so was diluted 50:50 with DIW.

The resulting liquor measured 47.5 w% meaning 95 w% in the actual product.
Dilution error could have occurred as only 1ml of distillate was used.

Notes:-

In the Thumper distillations, the final product distillate was seen to stop after a certain time.
The experiment was stopped at that point, and the boiling pot had not yet begun to boil the remaining water.
It is suspected that more distillate would be seen after water began to boil and enter the thumper.

Suck-back is likely due to the similar volumes of boiling pot and thumper pot.
All photos seen of thumpers show them to be significantly smaller than the boiling pot.

Speculation is that the sheer volume of boiling liquid, and EtOH leaving the normal-sized boiling pot keeps up a positive pressure at all times, regardless of the volume of the thumper contents.

More experiments are required to quantitatively determine the full distillation profile for the three techniques, such as total time, yield and w% of product for a full run, and the w% of the product at set intervals into each run.

This set of experiments simply show that Thumpers do actually work in raising the w% of the product, at least in the early distillate product.

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

At this point I would suggest getting a 10Ml beaker, and some teeny/tiny ice cubes... nEnjoy!

Quote: Originally posted by aga

Sorry, my mistake. I thought you were referring to the OP's question. Using a Standard Plate Equivalent distillation model is not thumper-related.

Quote: Originally posted by aga

Sorry, my mistake. I thought you were referring to the OP's question. Using a Standard Plate Equivalent distillation model is not thumper-related.

Quote: Originally posted by blogfast25

There are in the immediate responses above a number of things I strongly object to (not in the least Zombie's phantasmagorical "I broke the azeotrope") but current poor health and other priorities prevent me from spending much time on them. Maybe later.

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

Just answering the questions.

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

Like?

Zombie I'm trying to respect your skills and your extensive experience but telling me you broke the azeotrope with plates and heat is straining my nerves. If you are correct you had better take out a patent quickly. Those industrial fuel manufacturers like Archer Daniels Midland are going to want that technology bad. Then they won't have to waste all that money on running their mole sieve columns.

Quote: Originally posted by aga

In the light of those comments, it is now Obvious that i've just heated stuff up and written stuff down, then thought i Knew something.

Quote: Originally posted by Zombie

I know my instruments are accurate I pay for them to be, and I can watch the gauge float back up to azeo.