+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 57

Thread: Cleaning tubing

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Location
    NH
    Posts
    254

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BreezyHill View Post

    One boy of the 4-H group helped me bring wood into the sugar house last season. After lugging in wood for 20 minutes I grabbed the 18" squeegee and cleaned the concrete floor of our tracks. Just before he left he asked if he could clean the floor before leaving...I said sure, have at it. He did a magnificent job and didn't leave a spot. The next day his mom texted me. What did you say to him yesterday??? Well we talked about how many hours a day it takes to boil and we actual discussed why we cleaned the floor after bring in wood....Why I asked. Well he always sleeps in on Sunday...I awoke at 7 am to the vacuum cleaner running, so I peaked in his room and could see the floor for once; obviously I was dreaming so I went back to bed. Seems the boy had gotten up early and cleaned his room and vacuumed from corner to corner. Later that morning she texted back and asked if the boy could come over and help boil and clean the floors. I told her "he is always welcome!" They came a short time later and she hugged me and said thanks! Seems he found that work was more fun than playing video games and sitting in the house. I ran out of jobs for him to do that day.
    This made me smile. Thanks for posting it.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Hoosick Falls
    Posts
    2,000

    Default

    In the last four years, since the study you mention was done, there has been several studies completed that show the effect of cleaning. The latest is this years presentation on cleaning and the effects on production that was a joint effort between Childs & Perkins. This showed that cleaning of listed technique resulted in nearly the same productionof gallons of sap as new drop and spout. So a little simple math: product cost for solution $35, cost of dedicated sprayer $50 for 5 yrs. Time spent cleaning tubing 3hrs at 3x @ $10/hr =$90, $10 for atv use and fuel. Total of $145 plus another $.18 for seasonal spout on 700 taps = $126 for grand total of $271 or a total cost of less than $.39/ tap.
    The production numbers listed was 7.9 gallons more for new vs old and un washed spout and drop. So at just 5 gallons more sap at $.50 a gallon you turned a profit of over $2.10 per tap...or on this 700 tap bush another $1470 dollars for that $271 investment.

    Seems pretty sizeable return to me for taking a few hours to was the tubing. Put $3 in and get back $15 in a years time...now that is return on investment!

    This is all data that was presented by Steve Childs of Cornell University this summer in a power point.

    If a person is satisfied with air and water results or not cleaning...I will not fault them for doing what is best for them. I just know what I have done and how it has worked for our operation over the years; in a never ending goal of the most production at a profitable return on investment.

    No disrespect intended, just many thanks to Steve and Dave for all their efforts over the years and future efforts!

    Ben

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Bristol, VT
    Posts
    1,978

    Default

    This showed that cleaning of listed technique resulted in nearly the same productionof gallons of sap as new drop and spout.
    What are you saying? Do you have a reference for this you can point us to? What's a "listed technique"?

    It sounds like you are saying that washing your tubing using some technique annually will result in nearly the same yields as replacing your drops and spouts every year. IS that right?

    Is this what you are talking about?

    http://maple.dnr.cornell.edu/pubs/20...h%20Report.pdf
    Last edited by GeneralStark; 10-10-2014 at 12:41 PM.
    About 750 taps on High Vac.
    2.5 x 8 Intens-O-Fire
    Airtech 3 hp LR Pump
    Springtech Elite 500 RO
    14 x 24 Timber Frame SugarHouse
    16 x 22 Sap Shed w/ 1500 gal. + 700 gal. tanks
    www.littlehogbackfarm.com

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Middlebury Center, PA
    Posts
    1,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by GeneralStark View Post
    What are you saying? Do you have a reference for this you can point us to? What's a "listed technique"?

    It sounds like you are saying that washing your tubing using some technique annually will result in nearly the same yields as replacing your drops and spouts every year. IS that right?
    The only one I found is the same one you found from Cornell was 2013 Study which is one year newer than the PMRC one in 2012. Anyhow the only part that I saw that mentioned 7.9 gain was vacuum clear spout new drop vs vacuum new spout old drop, which is exactly what General is saying.

    They did have one where they treated spouts with alcohol for 12 hours during the season that did better than untreated, which is obvious I would think since they are killing bacteria during the season. However the vacuum treated with isopropal vs untreated spouts, drops 3rd year showed no significant difference. Maybe there is a newer one. I see very little dirty spots in my lines and drops and from what I know from research what I can't see can't be cleaned so I would rather replace a percentage of drops each year and spouts every year.

    Oh I forgot the math new drop 30" long .275 plus new seasonal spout .18=.45 every 5 or 6 years.
    Last edited by unc23win; 10-10-2014 at 12:57 PM. Reason: added math
    Jared

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Hoosick Falls
    Posts
    2,000

    Default

    What I have is straight from Steve Childs of Cornell University. In his email he states this was from a power point, at a talk that he did this season. Steve is one of our states land grant college's contacts of all things maple for our 4-H club.

    The last time that I shared info from Cornell, Dr Tim got upset, stating that it was copy right protected material and that it is for purchase. Thus to not upset the good DR. again; I have to state that the name of this section of the presentation is 2014 Tap Hole: Sanitation and Vacuum.

    It is definitely ground breaking data that will change the way progressive producers manage and maintain their tubing systems for maximum production.

    The key to the sanitation is to let the product sit so that it has an affect. Remember that Dr Tim eluded to this point that we need to have contact of product to kill spores. The vacuuming into the spout and system has little to no affect; but letting the sanitizer have contact for at least 30 minutes and results are major!

    I was recommended to let it sit for a day and then vacuum out or let the first run flush it out. I will opt to flush with water while vacuuming it out to remove the black spots I have in the system.
    .

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Bristol, VT
    Posts
    1,978

    Default

    I would still like to know the cleaning methodology being employed in this study you are referring to as in past studies done by Cornell that showed similar yields between a washed old drop and spout and a new drop and spout, they were using the following methodology:

    15+ year old drops were washed with water and detergent (doesn't say how), then rinsed, then subjected to a 10 minute 10% chlorine treatment, and then a 20 minute Hydrogen Peroxide treatment and finally rinsed and drained.

    If in the new study they were actually using a method that could be utilized by a sugar maker easily on an installed system, there may be something to this study, but this method would be difficult to reproduce and would likely not yield the same results.

    I will personally wait until this information goes public and is more widely tested before doing more than pulling taps under vacuum. If cleaning makes you feel better, go for it.
    About 750 taps on High Vac.
    2.5 x 8 Intens-O-Fire
    Airtech 3 hp LR Pump
    Springtech Elite 500 RO
    14 x 24 Timber Frame SugarHouse
    16 x 22 Sap Shed w/ 1500 gal. + 700 gal. tanks
    www.littlehogbackfarm.com

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Hoosick Falls
    Posts
    2,000

    Default

    Talk about irony...In a few days we have a National Holiday to celebrate a man, Chris, that nearly everyone of his time said his theories were impossible and could never be.

    But on his side was his experience, math, science, and faith. Fortunately for the world, he didn't listen to those that were still thinking the world was flat, when for years he had seen it was round.

    Happy Columbus Day!

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Walpole, NH
    Posts
    1,363

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BreezyHill View Post
    What I have is straight from Steve Childs of Cornell University. In his email he states this was from a power point, at a talk that he did this season. Steve is one of our states land grant college's contacts of all things maple for our 4-H club.

    The last time that I shared info from Cornell, Dr Tim got upset, stating that it was copy right protected material and that it is for purchase. Thus to not upset the good DR. again; I have to state that the name of this section of the presentation is 2014 Tap Hole: Sanitation and Vacuum.

    It is definitely ground breaking data that will change the way progressive producers manage and maintain their tubing systems for maximum production.

    The key to the sanitation is to let the product sit so that it has an affect. Remember that Dr Tim eluded to this point that we need to have contact of product to kill spores. The vacuuming into the spout and system has little to no affect; but letting the sanitizer have contact for at least 30 minutes and results are major!

    I was recommended to let it sit for a day and then vacuum out or let the first run flush it out. I will opt to flush with water while vacuuming it out to remove the black spots I have in the system.
    .
    Interesting to have copyrighted material you have to pay for from work produced and paid for by your tax dollars.
    Sugaring for 45+ years
    New Sugarhouse 14'x32'
    New to Me Algier 2'x8' wood fired evaporator
    2022 added a used RB25 RO Bucket
    250 mostly Sugar Maples, 15% Soft Maples. Currently,(110on 3/16" and 125 on Shurflo 4008 vacuum, 15 gravity), (16,000 before being disabled)
    1947 Farmall H and Wagon with gathering tank
    2012 Kubota with forks to move wood around

  9. #19
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    UVM Proctor Maple Research Center, Underhill Ctr, VT
    Posts
    6,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BreezyHill View Post
    The latest is this years presentation on cleaning and the effects on production that was a joint effort between Childs & Perkins. This showed that cleaning of listed technique resulted in nearly the same productionof gallons of sap as new drop and spout.
    Actually, that is not completely correct. It is a bit too complex to try to explain quickly, but I will try to give you a brief summary. Of course it depends what measure you wish to use....sap yield or net profit (after subtracting out the costs of doing some certain activity).

    In any case, UVM PMRC and Cornell are involved in a 3 year joint NESARE Project examining cleaning versus replacement (and using them in combination). Steve Childs in the Cornell investigator, Dr. Abby van den Berg is a UVM investigator, and I am the Lead Investigator. We are looking at several different cleaning methods including: "dry cleaning" (pulling spouts with vacuum on), water cleaning, isopropyl alcohol (with some liquid left in the drops to supposedly provide vapors to continue to sanitize the tubing), bleach (calcium based as opposed to sodium based...hopefully to reduce critter damage), and hydrogen peroxide + peroxiacetic acid. In addition we are comparing replacement of new spouts annually, new CV spouts annually, and new spouts + drops annually. Finally, we are looking at a combination of cleaning with those different sanitizers plus replacing the spouts annually. Keep in mind that we have only done 1 yr of 2 yrs of planned research on this, and different seasons can produce different results.

    At PMRC we applied the cleaning solution by sucking in through the spout under vacuum.

    At Cornell all the drops were brought in from the woods and immersed in the cleaning solution for 30 min, then rinsed, then put back out into the woods.

    We used 6 yr old spouts/drops for our research. The sap yield results at PMRC indicated that cleaning with anything was better than not cleaning ("dry cleaning"), but simply replacing a spout got slightly better results, the CV adapter did better than that, and the best was (and always is) a new spout and drop. In terms of economics, cleaning comes out last, ESPECIALLY for the peroxide, bleach, and isopropyl alcohol, and even more so if you include the fact that you are SUPPOSED to let the first sap run on the ground. The next best was replacing the spout, followed by the CV, which this year was just edged out by drop replacement (it was a good production year). We actually had two very similar experiments with the same treatments and found essentially the same results in both experiments.

    Now because Steve did things in a different way, he found different results. The spouts were 2 yrs old and the tubing was 4 yrs old. His sanitation treatments (soaking the drops for 30 min) was far more effective (not at all surprising). Although sap yield after cleaning (in general) was much better than not cleaning when done this way, replacing spouts (on old drops) did slightly better than that, using CV slightly better than that, and new drops the best. In terms of economics, cleaning was lowest (bleach did the best, isopropyl alcohol resulted in a net loss), a new spout better, a CV spout just slightly better, and the new drop was NOT as good (economically) as a new spout alone.

    One thing for sure....it doesn't appear to be economically advantageous to BOTH clean and replace spouts, except that it might delay the need to replace drops by a few years (so maybe every 5-6 yrs instead of every 3 yrs). If you do a GOOD job cleaning, the replacing spouts may not add much value. If you replace spouts, then cleaning may not add much to your bottom line.

    I'll be talking a lot more about this at meetings this winter, but again, we've got another year to do this before we construct and finalize all our economic models and start making recommendations based upon those.
    Dr. Tim Perkins
    UVM Proctor Maple Research Ctr
    http://www.uvm.edu/~pmrc
    https://mapleresearch.org
    Timothy.Perkins@uvm.edu

  10. #20
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    UVM Proctor Maple Research Center, Underhill Ctr, VT
    Posts
    6,391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by BAP View Post
    Interesting to have copyrighted material you have to pay for from work produced and paid for by your tax dollars.
    The material in question regarding the copyright was from a manual that was being SOLD by Cornell. I do not know who paid for it to be produced, however I do know that Cornell was selling them, and thus would probably would not have been pleased to have it distributed freely on the web. My suggestion at the time was that the person offering to put it on the web check first with Steve Childs and see if that was the case.
    Dr. Tim Perkins
    UVM Proctor Maple Research Ctr
    http://www.uvm.edu/~pmrc
    https://mapleresearch.org
    Timothy.Perkins@uvm.edu

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 6 FirstFirst 123456 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts