Post by Derek J DeckerPost by JoergCurrently I am using two 1000W electric burners that my very wide
13-gallon aluminum brew kettle straddles. They plug into two different
circuits. My batches are 5-gallon and to make up for boil-off I start
with slightly above 5-1/2 gallons. 70F to 155F takes a whole hour, 155F
to 207F boil takes more than another hour.
A few ideas a swirling around in my head on how to speed this up without
investing a ton of money. One of them is to buy two 120V induction
burners which come in 1800W, so more oomph. I'd probably set them to
1500W in order not to overtax a circuit. Cost is about $50 a piece. Of
course, the aluminum pot would not work by itself and here comes my
Does anyone know whether laying a big round steel disc inside the kettle
would make this work efficiently? Considering the thickness of the
aluminum bottom of the kettle the distance from the ceramic cooktop
surfaces to that plate could exceed 1/8".
I purchased an induction burner a few months ago because it was on sale
for $28 at Aldi - at that price, hey, new toy! And it works very well -
certainly boiled water faster than my electric coils.
$28, wow! Unfortunately we don't have Aldi in Northern California.
Post by Derek J DeckerBut it didn't work with my copper-bottom Revereware pots, which limited
<https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07C2QTB3V/>
which is basically a stainless steel disk with a handle, and is built
precisely for this task. This goes under the pot you want to heat, and
not inside it - induction makes the disk hot, which makes your pot hot,
which boils the water. This is slightly less efficient than just
directly heating a compatible pot, but still works well.
From what I've read on the Internet the "under the pot" transfer plates
make things less efficient than the old electric coil cooktop because
now you have two interfaces, induction coil to transfer disk, then
transfer disk to bottom of pot. It won't matter much when cooking food
in a smaller pot or pan but for the big brew kettle "watts into wort" is
all that counts.
Post by Derek J DeckerMy induction burner has two control methods - heat to a controlled temp,
or run at a particular power. I can run the burner at its highest power
with an induction-compatible pot of water on it.
That would be the other issue I'd have to fix. Induction cooktops, for
whatever weird reason, cannot be brought into a mode where the
temperature can be set in 1F steps. They either have 40F steps or
ocasionally 10F steps. If you have to hold 157F that's not going to
work. Same for the fine line between rolling boil and boil-over. This is
where my old $12 Walmart work well. They have a nice old analog
thermostat knob where I put markers on the respective settings.
Amazingly, that holds 157F to +/-2F precision, measured with an external
sensor on a radio link.
So I was thinking, if the temperature sensing happens via an NTC or PTC
resistor under the ceramic layer I should be able to wire a
potentiometer in series for vernier control. Of course, nicely insulated
and all.
The engineers could do it smarter like the ones for my thermostat did.
When in normal mode it only offers five temps. Rare, medium-rare,
medium, and so on. It's a meat thermometer for barbecue. However, when
holding the temp-set button down for a few seconds it beeps, temp set
goes into blink mode and then I can increment/decrement the temperature
setting in 1F steps. Perfect to set the alarm for when I can put in my
steeping grains.
Post by Derek J DeckerIf I use the disk with a non-compatible pot at full power, the disc will
overheat, and the burner will shut down till things cool off. The trick
when using the disk is to set the burner to maintain the highest possible
temperature (around 400°F is what I recall). This causes the burner to
modulate its power output and not overheat. 'Course, you're putting less
wattage into the pot than the burner could theoretically put out
That would make steeping control tough and, more importantly, require me
to be at the pot all the time later during the long initial boil.
Currently I brew outside and when it's 40mins until the first flavoring
hops go in I use that time to do some yard work, away from the pot, just
not too far away. So far I only had one boil-over, a very messy affair,
and that happened because I accidentally left the cooktops on max.
Post by Derek J DeckerOf course, if you're running two 1800 Watt devices at once, you'll want
them to be on separate circuits.
Oh yes, that's what I already do.
Post by Derek J Decker1) Steel disk works, is a standard product you can buy for this
application
2) Disk goes under the pot, not inside
Many suggest a disk inside like here, for a more efficent heat tranfer:
https://www.ebay.com/itm/Stainless-Steel-Cookware-Thermal-Guide-Plate-Induction-Cooktop-Converter-Disk/123517389767
Yet I can't find any info on how much power you lose versus pot bottom
thickness.
I'd just need a much bigger disk and that I would have to cut myself.
I'd have to find a place in the valley that carries sheet stock of
stainless steel with enough magnetic property (IOW "the cheap stuff")
and go there with a magnet in my pocket to test. Cleaning the brew
kettle between brews would become more nasty though because first I'd
have to fish a big dripping steel plate out of the remaining sludge. I
could mount a small hook on it for that.
Post by Derek J Decker3) Disk reduces efficiency some, overheating may result
Post by JoergSecond question: If the power were the same how moch more efficient is
induction heating versus regular electric burners in your experience?
I could do controlled scientific experiments, but I haven't yet. I am of
the opinion that a higher percentage of the heat generated by induction
goes to the pot and not the surrounding air, etc
Just by gut feel, how much faster did it boil water that your electric
coils?
--
Regards, Joerg
http://www.analogconsultants.com/