OPTICAL SORTER. Bob Bertheau - Senior Director of Winemaking

Transcription

1 OPTICAL SORTER Bob Bertheau - Senior Director of Winemaking

2 Key Technology VitiSort History: Used prototype for 2012 and 2013 vintages Purchased one of first official products for 2014 vintage Processed 1740 tons in both hand and machine picked Technical Specs: Uses vibrating screen coupled with high speed camera and air jets 9 long, 4 wide, 6 tall at highest point Requires 220 volt electrical and compressed air Processes maximum of 5 tons per hour, but averages 2-3 3/5/2015 2

3 Features MOG Eliminator Shaker Table Seeds and pedicels fall through Juice recovery system beneath Functions to deliver fruit at even pace Optical Sorting RGB color camera High intensity light Onboard image processing 128 air ejector valves 3/5/2015 3

4 Control Panel and Software Waterproof touch screen control panel Access to pixel and color adjustments to dial in each batch of fruit Dual display automatically refreshes to show actual image and graphic of what is being rejected Possible to create custom programs for varieties and vineyards and to detect such things as hail damage 3/5/2015 4

5 Supporting Equipment GRIP (Grape Receiving and Inspection Platform) supplied by Key Pellenc SP Winery M Destemmer (3-8 tons/hour) Della Toffola Peristaltic Pump 4-inch must line 3/5/2015 5

6 Results 3/5/2015 6

7 2014 Reject Percentages by Weight by Variety Cabernet Hand Picked Averages Machine Picked Averages Stems Reject Stems Reject 5.95% 4.04% 2.35% 3.74% Merlot Hand Picked Averages Machine Picked Averages Stems Reject Stems Reject 6.15% 4.37% 3.10% 7.38% Syrah Hand Picked Averages Machine Picked Averages Stems Reject Stems Reject 5.01% 4.58% 3.07% 4.87% Malbec Hand Picked Averages Machine Picked Averages Stems Reject Stems Reject 5.49% 3.61% n/a n/a Mourvedre Hand Picked Averages Machine Picked Averages Stems Reject Stems Reject 5.94% 4.05% n/a n/a 3/5/2015 7

8 Lessons Learned Overall Averages Hand Pick Machine Pick Vintage Stems Reject Stem Reject % 5.85% 1.57% 5.21% % 7.15% 2.14% 7.23% % 4.20% 2.56% 4.29% Vintage and variety matter. E.g. Merlot is much more difficult to destem, and therefore more challenging for sorter. Programs for vineyard and block are vital; adjusting on the fly is not as effective. Lost library of programs when we switched from prototype to new model in 2014 and decreased functionality. Supporting equipment makes a difference on quality and efficiency quality of harvester in vineyard, even flow of fruit, efficiency of destemmer, gentleness of must pump. Sorter is a link in the chain. It is not a silver bullet. A different kind of must dictates (and provides the opportunity for) different fermentation techniques in order to make the best wine. 3/5/2015 8

9 Challenges Machine vs. Hand Machine Picked Fruit Juice! Juice recovery system can get overwhelmed and juice is lost (improvements coming in 2015). All machinery gets sticky and requires more cleaning and monitoring than hand picked fruit. Juice can flow across shaker table and fall past camera, which can cause camera to malfunction and require restart of machine. Hand Picked Fruit Slower throughput than machine picked fruit. More bins to dump, wash, and move. More stems can require slower speeds for destemmer and GRIP machine, which means less fruit falling onto sorter. 3/5/2015 9

10 Large Scale Receiving(Control) AKA - The MOG Monster, AKA The MOG Buster tons/hour Custom designed receiving hopper with oversized auger Conveyor to deliver fruit to destemmer Two-level vibrating sorting table top layer catches bigs, bottom layer allows smalls to fall through Initially adopted in 2009, updated in Moyno must pump into 4 inch must lines 3/5/

11 The Wines Non-Optically Sorted (B3) vs. Optically Sorted (B4) 21.5 T machine harvested 10/3/14 Receiving brix = 28.1 EtOH target = 14.8% (adjusted via saignee and waterback) Nitrogen target = 250 ppm (adjusted from 96 ppm via DAP and Nutri2 additions) Fermentation Tmax = 85F Pumpovers via irrigator 2 min/ton during fermentation peak Drained 10/10/14 AM Drain tank brix = T (adjusted weight) machine harvested 10/3/14 Receiving brix = 28.3 EtOH target = 14.8% (adjusted via saignee and waterback) Nitrogen target = 250 ppm (adjusted from 102 ppm via DAP and Nutri2 additions) Fermentation Tmax = 85F Pumpovers via irrigator 1.5 min/ton during fermentation peak Drained 10/10/14 PM Drain tank brix = 5.9 3/5/

12 Current Data Non-Optically Sorted (B3) vs. Optically Sorted (B4) Filled to barrel at RS dryness, native MLF in barrel KMBS addition 2/10/15 F/TSO2 = 36/53 ppm ph = 3.76 TA = 0.58 g/100ml EtOH = 15.11% VA = g/100ml Filled to barrel at RS dryness, native MLF in barrel KMBS addition 2/10/15 F/TSO2 = 33/49 ppm ph = 3.76 TA = 0.56 g/100ml EtOH = 15.27% VA = g/100ml 3/5/