by DJR on Sat May 28, 2011 1:07 am
Rich, I think you are way over thinking the project. First, have you done a lot of roasting yet? If not, I highly suggest using the heat gun approach for 200 or 300 batches. After that you will have a real feeling for what is happening and when to stop it (which is the most important thing). In my opinion the heat gun approach is the best learning tool. If your needs are small, it never needs to be upgraded.
Once you have the roasting down, it will become obvious what is and isn't important. Avoiding gas fumes isn't important, in my opinion. PIDing (ramp soak cool) the machine before you understand its thermal properties is premature. A variable speed motor is totally unnecessary, but you could use it to build something else, like a knife sharpener.
Chaff collection may or may not be important depending on your design. Kendall's closed design needs it, I guess, but I'll be interested to see if the final design makes a good roaster. I have some reservations, though I applaud Kendall and everyone who is tinkering away.
I think the most important part of the design (assuming you have enough heat to heat the beans and rotation to keep them heating evenly and avoid burning) is not a temp probe, fan, chaff collector, dumping mechanism etc., but the ability to be as close to the roast as you were when you were using a bowl and heat gun. Then you can really be on top of what needs to be done. The more steps you are away from the beans, the more likely you will not have good control. If you need to wait seconds to use a tryer, you are waiting too long.
The Sumatra I've been roasting has a very short window going from C+ to C++-- less than a minute. I want to pull it at C+ and stop the roast at that point, not let it coast all the way past 2d crack. So I need to be able to see what's going on and dump it in a few seconds and cool it in a few more seconds.
Sorry for the lecture. I'm not an expert yet, but after 300 heat gun roasts and more than 300 using my "2 pound" homemade roaster (that costs way less than $200 in materials), I've learned that for me, at least, it is better to get a feeling about the properties of the machine before making decisions on cosmetics, automation, instrumentation, etc. (I use an infrared thermometer as one data point -- smoke and smell as another and elapsed time as another).
I'm now toying with the idea of not a PID, but using an Arguino to control the roast. The thought would be to allow a semi-interactive user interface that allowed changing ramps on the fly. If the roaster is to be able to respond to this sort of control, however, it has to have thermal characteristics that allow it to do so. For me, this means the machine should not be a heat sink, that it should have enough power to drive like a car -- put your foot on the gas-- it goes. Take it off, it slows down fast. If you don't have this, you can still do ramps, but they still might not match the profile you want. I might not go ahead with the Arguino project. It isn't keeping me up thinking about it...
Good luck with your roaster. I really suggest you take an incremental approach and let it evolve. You could spend 80% of your effort on stuff that you don't use or doesn't work or you don't like if you try to design it all at once. Or you could if you really want to do that, just knock off a commercial roaster. Nothing wrong with that.