HomeRoast Digest


Topic: The Beauty Queen vs Plain Jane (11 msgs / 469 lines)
1) From: Les
Well, I was late to work this morning after doing some extensive cupping.  I
wish I had written down the name of the bean that I used for this test.  It
was a bean that Jeff brought from Royal Coffee.  It is a nice Colombian  I
also roasted the Panama Gesha in both machines.  I tried to keep the
profiles as close to the same as possible.  So the first test was a blind
cupping with the identity of each coffee on a piece of tape on the bottom of
each cup.  I used 4 standard cups and I used my standard 2 scoops of beans
for each cup with hot water poured over each cup.  First off I had no
trouble picking out the Colombian and the Gesha and pairing them.  Color
after grinding on all four was very consistent at a nice City - City Plus.
I am not going to assign a number rating to this cupping experience.
So here goes:  Dry fragrance:  cup 1 there was a marked sharpness that cup 2
didn't have.  This was also true of cup 4 vs cup 3.  All four had very nice
aromatics.  The Gesha coffees had some nice fruit hints where as the
Columbia had some nice mellow chocolate with vanilla.
Wet aroma:  I really couldn't tell much difference between the two cups of
two, However the Gesha really strutted her fruity aromas and the Columbia
its mellow attributes.
Brightness: Cup 1 and cup 4 were brighter than cups 2 and 3.  I also think
that cups 2 and 3 had a clearer brightness.  I would draw the analogy to the
ringing of a fine crystal cup vs a kitchen glass.  I would say it had a
crispness to the brightness, or more definition that cups 1 and 4.  There
was a hint of bitterness in cups 1 and 4.
Flavor-Depth: Cups 1 and 4 had more flavor and depth of character.  It was
almost like a 6 layer cake vs a 3 layer cake.
Finish-Aftertaste:  There was the least amount of difference here.  I would
say cups 1 and 4 had a slightly cleaner aftertaste.
So who was the winner?  I would have to say I am the winner because I have
added some more knowledge to my skill set.
I would have to rate cups 1 and 4 better than cups 2 and 3.  How much
better, not much!  I flipped over the cups and cups 1 and 4 were from the
San Franciscan and cups 2 and 3 where from RK drum.  How great was the
difference?  Not as much as I was thinking there would be,  I was expecting
no difference of a real contrast, that didn't happen.  I am suspecting that
chaff burning might be causing some of the difference.  One great thing the
San Franciscan does is remove chaff.  I am also wondering if the more gentle
rolling of the beans might make a difference too.  Since there is a $4,
000.00 spread in price (a $1,000.00 RK set-up would be using all new and top
if the line gear), is there that much difference in the roast?  I don't know
for sure.  It depends on where your values are.  According to my
calculations based on the figure that Jeff gave me, and what I know it costs
for gas to run my RK drum, it would take 25,000 roasts to hit the break even
point with the San Franciscan's higher efficiency.  So on to the brew test:
My unknowing tester, my wife Becky, made the following comment after serving
her a cup of each: "I would like a second cup of the last coffee you served
me."  That was the Colombian from the San Franciscan.  Her other comment
was, "I think it would be fun to learn how to roast on one of those."
referring to the San Franciscan.
Conclusions:  The French Press of  the two roasts were even less different
than the cupping.  However, there was a clarity in the cups from the San
Franciscan that wasn't there with the RK drum.  To be real honest I am
seriously considering an upgrade.  However I am going to starting thinking
about chaff removal in the RK first.  I did notice a marked improvement in
my RK about 6 months ago when I began vacuuming out all the chaff after
every roast.  The second thing I am going to do is make a funnel for my RK
drum and preheat the drum as well as the BBQ before introducing the beans to
see if that helps. The third thing I am going to do is add a modification
that one homeroaster came up with to my RK. to see if it helps.   The fourth
 thing I am going to do is start a new savings account!  With that said, I
still really like the roasts I am getting from the RK drum.  Having
experienced a small roaster that is of similar size as my RK taught me a lot
more than the 6 kilo commercial roasters I have had the chance to play
with.  So, my next project is to see if I can figure out a way to collect
more of the chaff so it doesn't burn.  Any suggestions?
Les

2) From: Brett Mason
Les, I am thinking the commercial roasters implement a hot-air blower that
helps lift the chaff out of the tumbling beans, out a vent, into a
collector, with the hot air returning into the roast chamber....  Is that a
misunderstanding, or a model to try?
Brett
On 10/31/07, Les  wrote:
<Snip>
-- 
Cheers,
Bretthttp://homeroast.freeservers.com

3) From: Floyd Lozano
maybe some slits along the circumference of the drum (connect the dots)  I
have noticed that as the chaff dries, it flakes off and breaks up, falling
out of the drum already.  Some doesn't reache this point and doesn't burn
off either - it sits in the drum, being all papery and brown.  There's less
than a tablespoon of chaff in the drum for most coffees I roast.  There's
double that much sitting outside the drum on the diffuser plate, and it's
blackened and curled.  I asked an earlier question of the list and the
responses seemed to be it barely matters..
If I had to design some sort of diffuser that didn't let chaff sit directly
under the drum it would simply be a inverted V, like the roof of a house,
about a 20 degree slope, so the chaff thrown off the drum slid down the V
into the corners of the grill, away from the flames and away from the drum.
I may actually try that, as my sheet metal diffuser is fairly thin (3/32 of
an inch if that)
Brett's model is likely the right one but the mounting of the RK drum
(lowers cost, has limitations) prevents a clean solution to this problem.
You can't poke a hole in the center of the drum to vent out, cause that hole
has a pole in it, and the pole spins the drum!  I think the commercial
style roasters are not axially mounted at all, but rather sit mounted on
bearings (or something that acts as a bearing, one of you mechie types can
insert appropriate device to reduce rotational friction and withstand
scorching heat) along the front and rear rims with open ends, or fairly open
ends, with one being geared for rotation with a worm gear or chain, and the
other walled off by the front of the 'box' that also has a hole for a trier,
a bean mass thermoprobe, and of course a big ol' dump chute.  I still think
something like this could be build for a lot less than 4K, but it would
definitely be a labor of love and take a lotta metalworking tools.
brainstorm!- mount a couple small fins on the outer edge of the RK drum.  No
more than 1/2 to 1"  -  the rotation of the drum would turn them into a fan,
and these would blow the chaff right of your collector.  Angle them to blow
into whatever corner you choose (angling way harder to mount though).  If
you only put a couple on, and make sure they are rounded on the outer edge,
you won't cut yourself when you dump the thing.  This will only work well if
you have the high speed motor (I got the 53/56 RPM thing, it's easily
turning fast enough to fan the falling chaff away).  And yes, this may also
act to blow hot air out of your grill, so you may want to take that into
consideration too.  Nothing is perfect!
-F
On 10/31/07, Les  wrote:
<Snip>

4) From: James Raven
Thanks for your respectful insight on some equipment Les, Your experience h=
elps everyone. Learn people learn!!!  Knowledge for free, gotta love it. 
Thanks Les.
From: homeroast
To: homeroast
Subject: Re: +The Beauty Queen vs Plain Jane
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:21:35 -0500
Les, I am thinking the commercial roasters implement a hot-air blower that =
helps lift the chaff out of the tumbling beans, out a vent, into a collecto=
r, with the hot air returning into the roast chamber....  Is that a misunde=
rstanding, or a model to try?
Brett
On 10/31/07, Les  wrote:
Well, I was late to work this morning after doing some extensive cupping.  =
I wish I had written down the name of the bean that I used for this test.  =
It was a bean that Jeff brought from Royal Coffee.  It is a nice Colombian =
 I also roasted the Panama Gesha in both machines.  I tried to keep the pro=
files as close to the same as possible.  So the first test was a blind cupp=
ing with the identity of each coffee on a piece of tape on the bottom of ea=
ch cup.  I used 4 standard cups and I used my standard 2 scoops of beans fo=
r each cup with hot water poured over each cup.  First off I had no trouble=
 picking out the Colombian and the Gesha and pairing them.  Color after gri=
nding on all four was very consistent at a nice City - City Plus.  I am not=
 going to assign a number rating to this cupping experience.
So here goes:  Dry fragrance:  cup 1 there was a marked sharpness that cup =
2 didn't have.  This was also true of cup 4 vs cup 3.  All four had very ni=
ce aromatics.  The Gesha coffees had some nice fruit hints where as the Col=
umbia had some nice mellow chocolate with vanilla.
Wet aroma:  I really couldn't tell much difference between the two cups of =
two, However the Gesha really strutted her fruity aromas and the Columbia i=
ts mellow attributes.
Brightness: Cup 1 and cup 4 were brighter than cups 2 and 3.  I also think =
that cups 2 and 3 had a clearer brightness.  I would draw the analogy to th=
e ringing of a fine crystal cup vs a kitchen glass.  I would say it had a c=
rispness to the brightness, or more definition that cups 1 and 4.  There wa=
s a hint of bitterness in cups 1 and 4.
Flavor-Depth: Cups 1 and 4 had more flavor and depth of character.  It was =
almost like a 6 layer cake vs a 3 layer cake.
Finish-Aftertaste:  There was the least amount of difference here.  I would=
 say cups 1 and 4 had a slightly cleaner aftertaste.
So who was the winner?  I would have to say I am the winner because I have =
added some more knowledge to my skill set.
I would have to rate cups 1 and 4 better than cups 2 and 3.  How much bette=
r, not much!  I flipped over the cups and cups 1 and 4 were from the San Fr=
anciscan and cups 2 and 3 where from RK drum.  How great was the difference=
?  Not as much as I was thinking there would be,  I was expecting no differ=
ence of a real contrast, that didn't happen.  I am suspecting that chaff bu=
rning might be causing some of the difference.  One great thing the San Fra=
nciscan does is remove chaff.  I am also wondering if the more gentle rolli=
ng of the beans might make a difference too.  Since there is a $4, 000.00 s=
pread in price (a $1,000.00 RK set-up would be using all new and top if the=
 line gear), is there that much difference in the roast?  I don't know for =
sure.  It depends on where your values are.  According to my calculations b=
ased on the figure that Jeff gave me, and what I know it costs for gas to r=
un my RK drum, it would take 25,000 roasts to hit the break even point with=
 the San Franciscan's higher efficiency.  So on to the brew test:  My unkno=
wing tester, my wife Becky, made the following comment after serving her a =
cup of each: "I would like a second cup of the last coffee you served me." =
 That was the Colombian from the San Franciscan.  Her other comment was, "I=
 think it would be fun to learn how to roast on one of those." referring to=
 the San Franciscan.
Conclusions:  The French Press of  the two roasts were even less different =
than the cupping.  However, there was a clarity in the cups from the San Fr=
anciscan that wasn't there with the RK drum.  To be real honest I am seriou=
sly considering an upgrade.  However I am going to starting thinking about =
chaff removal in the RK first.  I did notice a marked improvement in my RK =
about 6 months ago when I began vacuuming out all the chaff after every roa=
st.  The second thing I am going to do is make a funnel for my RK drum and =
preheat the drum as well as the BBQ before introducing the beans to see if =
that helps. The third thing I am going to do is add a modification that one=
 homeroaster came up with to my RK. to see if it helps.   The fourth  thing=
 I am going to do is start a new savings account!  With that said, I still =
really like the roasts I am getting from the RK drum.  Having experienced a=
 small roaster that is of similar size as my RK taught me a lot more than t=
he 6 kilo commercial roasters I have had the chance to play with.  So, my n=
ext project is to see if I can figure out a way to collect more of the chaf=
f so it doesn't burn.  Any suggestions?
Les
--
Cheers,
Bretthttp://homeroast.freeservers.comWindows Live Hotmail and Microsoft Office Outlook  together at last. =
Get it now.http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/outlook/HA102225181033.aspx?pid=CL10062=6971033=

5) From: Eddie Dove
Les,
Fascinating ... I devoured every word.  Thank you!
A question ... you wrote, "The third thing I am going to do is add a
modification that one homeroaster came up with to my RK. to see if it
helps."
Perhaps I just missed it, but what is that modification or where can I find it?
Thank you again, Les.
Eddie
-- 
Vita non est vivere sed valere vita est
Roasting Blog and Profiles for the Gene Cafehttp://southcoastcoffeeroaster.blogspot.com/

6) From: Jim Gundlach
On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:58 AM, Les wrote:
<Snip>
Les,
       My guess is that the chaff is burning as it falls from the drum  
to the defuser or the burners.  I would almost have to watch it roast,  
probably not easy to do without a window. If there is some way to  
deflect the chaff as it fell from the drum it might be relatively easy  
to fix.  If not, and my guess is that there are sufficient thermal  
currents in the BBQ to cause the chaff to float around in all kinds of  
directions before it gets to the fire and burns so a deflector  
designed based on the chaff falling straight down would probably not  
work.  Given this thinking,   a circulating fan with filter attached  
to the BBQ might be relatively inexpensive and not too difficult to  
put in.
       You might be picking up the improved flavors I found when I  
added the heat gun to the wok roasting, instead of scorching the chaff  
in the wok, the heat gun would blow it out over the kitchen where it  
created a slow burn of another type in my wife.
      Pecan Jim

7) From: Marty Wooten
Les,
 
Thank you for the cupping review and the report on the San Franc=
iscan. At that price I think I will have to continue being happy with my RK=
 set up for a while. I also vacuum the chaff after each roast - that would =
have been my suggestion.
 
Did you call the person that stopped by with=
 it a friend? Now that you are debating an upgrade are they still ;o)
 =
Marty
----- Original Message ----
From: Les 
To: homeroast
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, =
2007 11:58:06 AM
Subject: +The Beauty Queen vs Plain Jane
Well, I=
 was late to work this morning after doing some extensive cupping.  I wish =
I had written down the name of the bean that I used for this test.  It was =
a bean that Jeff brought from Royal Coffee.  It is a nice Colombian  I also=
 roasted the Panama Gesha in both machines.  I tried to keep the profiles a=
s close to the same as possible.  So the first test was a blind cupping wit=
h the identity of each coffee on a piece of tape on the bottom of each cup.=
  I used 4 standard cups and I used my standard 2 scoops of beans for each =
cup with hot water poured over each cup.  First off I had no trouble pickin=
g out the Colombian and the Gesha and pairing them.  Color after grinding o=
n all four was very consistent at a nice City - City Plus.  I am not going =
to assign a number rating to this cupping experience. 
 
So here goes: =
 Dry fragrance:  cup 1 there was a marked sharpness that cup 2 didn't have.=
  This was also true of cup 4 vs cup 3.  All four had very nice aromatics. =
 The Gesha coffees had some nice fruit hints where as the Columbia had some=
 nice mellow chocolate with vanilla. 
 
Wet aroma:  I really couldn't t=
ell much difference between the two cups of two, However the Gesha really s=
trutted her fruity aromas and the Columbia its mellow attributes.
 
Bri=
ghtness: Cup 1 and cup 4 were brighter than cups 2 and 3.  I also think tha=
t cups 2 and 3 had a clearer brightness.  I would draw the analogy to the r=
inging of a fine crystal cup vs a kitchen glass.  I would say it had a cris=
pness to the brightness, or more definition that cups 1 and 4.  There was a=
 hint of bitterness in cups 1 and 4. 
 
Flavor-Depth: Cups 1 and 4 had =
more flavor and depth of character.  It was almost like a 6 layer cake vs a=
 3 layer cake.   
 
Finish-Aftertaste:  There was the least amount of d=
ifference here.  I would say cups 1 and 4 had a slightly cleaner aftertaste=
.
 
So who was the winner?  I would have to say I am the winner because=
 I have added some more knowledge to my skill set.
 
I would have to ra=
te cups 1 and 4 better than cups 2 and 3.  How much better, not much!  I fl=
ipped over the cups and cups 1 and 4 were from the San Franciscan and cups =
2 and 3 where from RK drum.  How great was the difference?  Not as much as =
I was thinking there would be,  I was expecting no difference of a real con=
trast, that didn't happen.  I am suspecting that chaff burning might be cau=
sing some of the difference.  One great thing the San Franciscan does is re=
move chaff.  I am also wondering if the more gentle rolling of the beans mi=
ght make a difference too.  Since there is a $4, 000.00 spread in price (a =
$1,000.00 RK set-up would be using all new and top if the line gear), is th=
ere that much difference in the roast?  I don't know for sure.  It depends =
on where your values are.  According to my calculations based on the figure=
 that Jeff gave me, and what I know it costs for gas to run my RK drum, it =
would take 25,000 roasts to hit the break even
 point with the San Franciscan's higher efficiency.  So on to the brew test=
:  My unknowing tester, my wife Becky, made the following comment after ser=
ving her a cup of each: "I would like a second cup of the last coffee you s=
erved me."  That was the Colombian from the San Franciscan.  Her other comm=
ent was, "I think it would be fun to learn how to roast on one of those." r=
eferring to the San Franciscan. 
 
Conclusions:  The French Press of  t=
he two roasts were even less different than the cupping.  However, there wa=
s a clarity in the cups from the San Franciscan that wasn't there with the =
RK drum.  To be real honest I am seriously considering an upgrade.  However=
 I am going to starting thinking about chaff removal in the RK first.  I di=
d notice a marked improvement in my RK about 6 months ago when I began vacu=
uming out all the chaff after every roast.  The second thing I am going to =
do is make a funnel for my RK drum and preheat the drum as well as the BBQ =
before introducing the beans to see if that helps. The third thing I am goi=
ng to do is add a modification that one homeroaster came up with to my RK. =
to see if it helps.   The fourth  thing I am going to do is start a new sav=
ings account!  With that said, I still really like the roasts I am getting =
from the RK drum.  Having experienced a small roaster that is of similar si=
ze as my RK taught me a lot more
 than the 6 kilo commercial roasters I have had the chance to play with.  S=
o, my next project is to see if I can figure out a way to collect more of t=
he chaff so it doesn't burn.  Any suggestions? 
 
Les

8) From: Peter Z
Turbo ovens recirculate hot air, they are made for that.
Mount a supentown equivalent on the BBQ grill in a convenient place, 
attached so that it sucks the chaff through a filter... nahh the smoke 
from the chaff would just be recirculated!
Just a thought though.
PeterZ
Jim Gundlach wrote:
<Snip>

9) From: RK
SNIP from Jim Gunlach:
<Snip>
Its not very hard to install a fan on your gas grill, similar to the air
circulation in more expensive commercial roasters.
Terry Davis of Ambex Roasters has been trying for a couple of years to get
me to do this.
The fan could be used to remove the chaff from the drum and grill and also
as a roasting aid.
The V shaped diffuser is a great Idea from a previous post. and less
expensive.
ED Needham installed a fan to exhaust the smoke from his set up and mounted
it on the exhaust port of his grill.
I know another roaster that has his exhausting out the top of the grill and
there is no reason you could not pull it out the bottom either.
Several nice blasts of air during the roast session should do the trick.
I believe Air flow will improve the roast and recirculating it will reduce
the amount of propane needed to complete the roast, removing the chaff will
give you a  cleaner cup of coffee, that some prefer.  I hope to someday get
around to doing this to my grill but finding time is another thing, untill
then I will continue on as before.
Just my thoughts
Cheers
Ron Kyle
RK

10) From: Homeroaster

11) From: miKe mcKoffee
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.
Some of the newer drum roasters do recycle the hot air. However the SF1
isn't close to that class with IIRC ~$10k price uplift over without heat
capture air recycle which is more the norm. 
 
Kona Konnaisseur miKe mcKoffeehttp://www.mckoffee.com/Ultimately the quest for Koffee Nirvana is a solitary path. To know I must">http://www.mcKonaKoffee.comURL to Rosto mods, FrankenFormer, some recipes etc:http://www.mckoffee.com/Ultimately the quest for Koffee Nirvana is a solitary path. To know I must
first not know. And in knowing know I know not. Each Personal enlightenment
found exploring the many divergent foot steps of Those who have gone before.
Sweet Maria's List - Searchable Archiveshttp://themeyers.org/HomeRoast/ 
From: homeroast-admin
[mailto:homeroast-admin] On Behalf Of Brett Mason
Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 9:22 AM
Les, I am thinking the commercial roasters implement a hot-air blower that
helps lift the chaff out of the tumbling beans, out a vent, into a
collector, with the hot air returning into the roast chamber....  Is that a
misunderstanding, or a model to try? 
Brett


HomeRoast Digest