Cdl zap bac

[fred]

Where are you getting that data from?

Steve Childs research.

[spud]

Here is what I can tell you about the history of Zap-Bac spouts. We started doing research with a company in Mass. in 2009 ( they are the company that makes the anti-microbial additive- silver). Cornell University's Maple Program has been doing research since 2010 on the spouts and is still doing research today the most recent on 3/16 gravity systems. If you look at the 2018 research that Steve Childs did he compared all of his experiments to a 2 year old system that he had made no changes to. Briefly here are the results: the 2 year old with no changes 19.2 gallons per tap, Leader stubby with check valve adapter 20.8 gallons per tap, new spout and drop 26.4 gallons per tap, New Zap Bac spout and drop 28.7 gallons per tap,all brand new tubing, spouts, drops etc. 35.4 gallons per tap. Cornell has a lot more data on the Zap-Bac spouts on 5/16 gravity systems and years of vacuum system data. You also have to keep in mind that these spouts were designed for multi season use. I suggest 3 years. I hope this helps explains a few things. There will be more research done durning the 2019 season.

I cannot find any research from Steve Childs on the Zap Bac. I looked on Cornells site. The numbers your posting seem a little odd. Research has shown that a two year old system only will drop about 5+/-% in GPT. It is on the third year that the CV2 spouts start paying for themselves. The numbers you are showing suggest there is a 8 GPT difference between Zap Bac and CV2 spouts on the second year. What the numbers are not showing is the size of each tree and how many trees were used in each situation. Can someone please steer me in the right direction in finding this research? The U-Tube video tells me nothing. The research numbers on the CV2 spouts are very detailed. I would like to see/read the same detailed research on the Zap Bac. Thanks

Spud

[DrTimPerkins]

I cannot find any research from Steve Childs on the Zap Bac. I looked on Cornells site. The numbers your posting seem a little odd. Research has shown that a two year old system only will drop about 5+/-% in GPT. It is on the third year that the CV2 spouts start paying for themselves. The numbers you are showing suggest there is a 8 GPT difference between Zap Bac and CV2 spouts on the second year. What the numbers are not showing is the size of each tree and how many trees were used in each situation. Can someone please steer me in the right direction in finding this research? The U-Tube video tells me nothing. The research numbers on the CV2 spouts are very detailed. I would like to see/read the same detailed research on the Zap Bac.

Steve has done some work on the Zap-Bac, and presented it here and there. It hasn't yet been presented in a multi-year summary, but I think he has plans to do that at some point. The data presented in that post you quoted is somewhat "cherry picked" in my opinion, and not representative of the totality of results. Kind of like saying that my Ford F350 got 88 mpg, but not mentioning that it was while you were coasting downhill. I guess that is the difference between research and advertising. From what I have read of Steve's work and from our work at UVM, on average over the lifetime of a spout, silver falls out about mid-way between using a new spout and using a new drop. The "net profit" calculation ends up falling out about the same...about half way between a new spout and a new drop...basically about in the same range as using isopropyl alcohol (which is ILLEGAL in the U.S.).

It is a bit hard to interpret the results because (I believe), in one of the trials, Steve reamed out the Zap-Bac spout with a wire brush on a drill to expose more new surface (and thus more silver), which would greatly increase the performance, but also add a lot to the cost of using the spouts and isn't suggested.

In general, based upon a lot of research from multiple sources, from best to worst, in terms of sap yield:

New Drop+Spout > Bleach > CV=CV2 > IPA > Zap-Bac > New Spout > H2O2 > H2O > Old Spout

In terms of net profit:

New Drop+Spout = Bleach = CV > IPA = Zap-Bac > H2O > Old Spout > H2O2

(note that this is with a new Drop+Spout on a 3 yr rotation, and that bleach cleaning is done with a LONG contact time -- short contact time with almost all sanitizer is NOT effective. You may also see that H2O2 aka Peroxide is worse that an old spout in terms of net profit...this is because it is costly and not terribly effective).

The actual net profit results depend upon your yields, your costs, and the price you sell your sap or syrup for.

To add to the history....at the time that PFA tablet was developed in the 1950's silver was also tested. It was rejected at the time because the effect didn't last the entire season (they squirted a solution of oligodynamic silver into tapholes). At UVM PMRC we tested nano-silver embedded in spouts starting in 2008, but dropped it after a few years because we found performance dropped off over time, because we were concerned about it not being allowed in certified organic maple production, and because we didn't know the fate of the silver that was released. I think we actually wrote out the patent application, but didn't submit it.

[DrTimPerkins]

If you look at the 2018 research that Steve Childs did he compared all of his experiments to a 2 year old system that he had made no changes to. Briefly here are the results: the 2 year old with no changes 19.2 gallons per tap, Leader stubby with check valve adapter 20.8 gallons per tap, new spout and drop 26.4 gallons per tap, New Zap Bac spout and drop 28.7 gallons per tap,all brand new tubing...

In case it wasn't clear to everyone from the above (and from reading Steve's full results in The Maple News)....the Zap-Bac data for 2018 was also on NEW 5/16" DROPS, so the results presented are due to a COMBINATION of new drops and net Zap-Bac spouts. In contrast, the Leader Stubby/CV were on 2-Yr old used 3/16" systems. These are apples and oranges type comparisons. 5/16" tubing systems are well understood in terms of sanitation issues. 3/16" tubing systems have both sanitation and clogging issues that result in yield decreases.

[spud]

Thank you Dr. Tim for separating facts from Fiction. Not only is the Zap Bac truck rolling down a steep hill but it's also full of new drops.

Spud

[DrTimPerkins]

Since I have dealt with this subject quite a lot since about 2008, I went back to the primary literature on this for actual numbers. As I said, Steve Childs (Cornell) has done the bulk of the research on the silver spouts. From 2010-2013 he compared new spouts and drops, CV spouts, and silver spouts all against old spouts and drops.

I made a quick graph from these data, shown in the attached figure.

Summary.JPG

A little explanation is important here as well:

This is all from controlled studies, with vacuum, on 5/16" tubing.

The second year (2011) Steve tested silver spouts, he ran a wire brush through them to create a fresh surface. This is not typical practice.

It should also be noted that 2012 was a TERRIBLE year for ANY type of sanitation to be effective.

So the final averages over those 4 yrs are:

New drop and spout = 102% improvement (almost always the best in terms of sap yield, but the cost drops the net profit, so typically drops are replaced every 3 yrs)
CV spout = 75% improvement (generally falls below total drop+spout replacement, but is cheaper to do, so net profit is about equal or higher than drop replacement unless yields are extremely high and you're retailing most of your syrup, or your materials+labor costs are very low)
Silver spout = 46% improvement (intermediate in terms of yield improvement)

It isn't shown in these data, but in general, over MANY years and MANY studies at UVM PMRC and Cornell, we see that a new spout along gives about a 31% improvement alone.

If you go with only the first three years, you get 98.7%, 78.3%, and 50.7% improvement.

The source material for these results from the Cornell Tubing Notebook is shown below in case anyone is interested. They are taken from the Vacuum side, only from the controlled studies done at Arnot.

HistoryNewDrop.JPG

HistoryCV.JPG

HistorySilver.JPG

[spud]

Thank you Dr. Tim for the information. So the charts are telling me that the Silver spouts are the least effective of the three options. In fact if it was not for the mid season wire brush through the silver spout then the silver spout would not even be worth mentioning. It also appears these test were all done with NEW spouts ( both CV2 and Silver ). The Promotional ad on the U-Tube video suggest the Silver spouts can be used for 3 years. I'm willing to go out on a limb and say NO spout should be used for three years in todays sugaring industry.

Spud

[mountainvan]

For me last year was the end of using the cv spouts. After the sap started again my bushes with zap bac kept going, the cv bush stopped mainly due to them being plugged up. I’m sure someone will say it was an abnormal year, but that seems to be the new norm. Also, if you have not used the product directly you might want to stay on the trunk of the tree.

[heus]

For me last year was the end of using the cv spouts. After the sap started again my bushes with zap bac kept going, the cv bush stopped mainly due to them being plugged up. I’m sure someone will say it was an abnormal year, but that seems to be the new norm. Also, if you have not used the product directly you might want to stay on the trunk of the tree.

This is EXACTLY my experience with the cv2's as well. I will never again be able to trust a spout that has a moving part that easily plugs up. I realize they work great for others, but in MY situation, in my woods, with my trees, and my weather, they have cost me alot of sap the past few years.

[DrTimPerkins]

For me last year was the end of using the cv spouts.

Van...Not meaning to be argumentative, but just trying to understand. You have said in numerous posts since the CV first came out that you didn't like them, they didn't work, you wouldn't use them, and have praised the the silver spout. Given that, WHY are you still using them at all?

Heus...I don't know your situation, but would certainly be happy to hear more about how you're using them to try to understand why they (seemingly) aren't working for you. Send me an email Timothy.Perkins@uvm.edu if you like with some details of your operation and experience with CVs and other spouts.