Conical or Spherical?

Icefever

Ok bear with a newbie....

I'll need a 4"x 2" reducer at some time soon....but what's the difference between the Conical...(which I thought would be correct for the job) and a Spherical. The only thing that comes to my mind is the Spherical would act a little like a pot....or help, as I have a 2" copper pothead that I use at the moment on the T500, and want to try on this new Milk Can.

Cheers Guys. ;)

Sunshine

the height. Some people are happy if they can reduce the height of the complete still a bit.

Kapea

Conical makes for a smoother flow transition. Spherical makes for a more turbulent flow transition. Both flows have their uses.

Icefever

@Sunshine said: the height.

I can see now, 44mm....thanks.

@Kapea said: Conical makes for a smoother flow transition. Spherical makes for a more turbulent flow transition. Both flows have their uses.

Which is which??? as I like to run Vodka also Rum. ;)

Sunshine

honestly, I don't think you will feel much difference by 4". If the reducer is bigger, it can be of significance.

Myles

Probably cosmetic. You can go from 4 to 2 in a flat plate reducer (with a 2" ferrule put into a 4" endcap). A lot depends on whether you need the volume between the 4" and the 2" for any purpose.

Personally I like the bowl reducers.

SDeurope

We usually use the conical reducer below a column, and the spherical one above the dephlegmator, except when we need more space for the down coming arm due to reduced column height (like when having only 3 bubble sections), then it's the conical above the dephlegmator as well. Otherwise it's just optical preference, and for that reason I don't like the end cap reducers in a column.

Icefever

Cheers guys.. ;) I have no problems with ceiling/roof height as in the outhouse it's about 14/15 feet head room....so I'll think about it over the week to come..