We produced the concept of a flow through cell version of a Pioreactor which could therefore control any size of Pioreactor for a UK-Kenya Alternative Proteins Global Innovation Network grant application and managed a rather nice TRL4 Kombucha demonstrator. We set it as a Harvey Mudd Clinic stretch goal, but on reading @gerrit 's From Pioreactor to FlavorReactor post, I thought I’d better start writing up our work to date at pioflo.org - does it make sense? And what should we do next?
Nice write-up of the kombucha experiment over on the wiki, @Martin ! So instead of using a second peristaltic pump to move the liquid back, you let it overflow through the tubes? Interesting.
Would you mind sharing your Pioreactor setup/configuration on the wiki too, e.g. were you running the pump constantly, or at certain intervals?
Thanks @gerrit, yes all good points:
I was actually using a pump to move the liquid back, then letting the suction from this draw in the kombucha from the beaker. I’ll clarify that in the writeup.
And yes, I intend to add to it both with the Pioreactor setup/config (the pump was running at intervals, but I couldn’t remember what they were & need to get back to the lab to check) and with the later data which showed some more interesting results. I wonder on the latter whether I should do a video first to avoid spoilers…
The big question is how do we best scale this next. I think the biggest difference will be tubing diameter between the CSTR and the Pioreactor. Step 1 would be to use as large bore tubing as could be accommodated on a 20ml vial cap. Step 2 would be going full bore, pumping through the Pioflo from bottom to top. Step 2 would clearly require significant physical modifications to the Pioreactor.
In order to avoid buying redundant kit, I’d next like to get a pump that the Pioreactor can control for Step 1 that could also accommodate full bore tubing for Step 2.