Measuring group static brew pressure versus flowing

Beginner and pro baristas share tips and tricks for making espresso.
HooHaw
Posts: 29
Joined: 18 years ago

#1: Post by HooHaw »

Should I allow a flow (eg, 2 oz-25 s) when measuring group pressure? Or is measuring static pressure the correct method?

I've been lurking for about a year now and as I understand it group pressure is taken with no flow (or leaks). :?

User avatar
HB
Admin
Posts: 21971
Joined: 19 years ago

#2: Post by HB »

Bob suggested this setup:
bobroseman wrote:It seems to me that if your going to measure brew pressure and make adjustments, then you need to know the exact pressure that you have while pulling a shot. Most portafilter gauges measure only the static pressure at the brew head when the by-pass valve has opened. That is not the pressure you are getting when you are brewing espresso. The attached photo is a simple mod I made to the gauge I bought from Chris Coffee. I can adjust the needle valve to allow precisly 2 oz of water to flow in 25 seconds while reading the pressure. On my machine, the resulting pressure is 8 bar, as seen in the inset.

Image

here it is in use:

Image
The static pressure reading for vibratory pumps runs slightly higher than the actual brewing pressure, on the order of 0.5 bar. The difference for a rotary pump machine's static versus flow rate reading is even smaller.
Dan Kehn

DavidMLewis
Posts: 590
Joined: 19 years ago

#3: Post by DavidMLewis »

HB wrote:The static pressure reading for vibratory pumps runs slightly higher than the actual brewing pressure, on the order of 0.5 bar. The difference for a rotary pump machine's static versus flow rate reading is even smaller.
Depends on whether or not the machine has a gicleur. With one, the difference can be much larger.

Best,
David

robinje
Posts: 4
Joined: 18 years ago

#4: Post by robinje »

The pressure gauge on my Anita measures roughly 0.2 bar lower when pulling a shot versus using a blind filter. If there's a flaw in my technique where I dose too little, don't tamp sufficiently, or grind too course, the difference is on the order of 0.3-0.5 bar. I assume this is because the puck is not offering as much resistance (back pressure) as it does when my technique is "better". I have my brew pressure set at 9.0 bar using a blind filter. From the factory, it was set around 10.5 bar, but changing it was a very simple procedure.

Hope this helps...

Jim

HooHaw (original poster)
Posts: 29
Joined: 18 years ago

#5: Post by HooHaw (original poster) »

I guess if one takes pain to measure temperature with flow then one should also do so with pressure, right?

Thanks for the link Dan.

More tweaking to the PF gauge then! It won't cost much more...

gscace
Posts: 751
Joined: 19 years ago

#6: Post by gscace »

HB wrote:Bob suggested this setup:


The static pressure reading for vibratory pumps runs slightly higher than the actual brewing pressure, on the order of 0.5 bar. The difference for a rotary pump machine's static versus flow rate reading is even smaller.
dunno how I missed this thread. Actually the difference in pressure can be very large. On one vibe pump equipped machine that I measured, the difference between flowing at the rate I set for thermofilters was about 65 psi compared to static. That's 135 psi static and 70 psi under flow conditions. The manufacturer was very interested to learn this and his quick attention vastly improved the coffee.

Rotary pump machines with little flow restriction may see little pressure drop. Small diameter gicleurs, long flow paths, small passageways, and proximity and configuration of group solenoids all affect pressure drop under flow conditions. Sweeping the difference under the rug is a very bad idea, because it can vary widely and complicate machine setup needlessly. I propose that folks measure under flowing conditions. It will become much easier to do so in the very near future.

-Greg

User avatar
old442
Posts: 120
Joined: 17 years ago

#7: Post by old442 »

gscace wrote:
I propose that folks measure under flowing conditions. It will become much easier to do so in the very near future.

-Greg
Would this be in reference to the device I saw on your counter next to the fridge?
If so I want one!

Kurt
Kurt
LMWDP 114

gscace
Posts: 751
Joined: 19 years ago

#8: Post by gscace replying to old442 »

Yup.

-Greg

User avatar
cannonfodder
Team HB
Posts: 10493
Joined: 19 years ago

#9: Post by cannonfodder »

Now you did it, the cat is out of the bag. What device?
Dave Stephens

gscace
Posts: 751
Joined: 19 years ago

#10: Post by gscace replying to cannonfodder »

I'm gonna make a version of the thermofilter that's a complete technician's diagnostic tool for setting brewing parameters. So it'll do the normal temperature thing, and also measure pressure under the flow conditions specified in the WBC machine testing protocol. I may make other flow rates available. I'm may also offer an electronic pressure transducer option, with logging capability. There's an option for NIST traceability for the pressure measurement from the gauge manufacturer, so if folks have need for that (such as devices used to set up competition machinery), then it'll be available. It's a pretty sweet device, actually. It'll make it so that people can do a better job of machine setup and quality control, because the measurements get done under conditions more approximating real use, and it uses a much better pressure gauge than is currently being supplied on static pressure measuring systems.

-Greg

Post Reply