Dieter01 wrote:Randy, have you tried doing a roast comparing this latest BT installment with your chute approach? Would be interesting to see how much they differ.

I haven't compared one to the other, but I have seen that the reported temps of the new probe seem consistent roast-to-roast looking at when the drying phase ends as well as crack temps, and that was all I needed. There are probably ways to bet more accurate readings, but consistency was all that I was after, and this was close enough to work for me.

cafeIKE wrote:Probably 1000's of times per day cars are jump started from a fully charged to a completely discharged battery and there are no explosions when the spark jumps.

I once had a battery explode when it sparked upon making the second jumper cable connection, so I know it can happen. I am a little extra anal on this subject as a result of that experience.

Jim

Wow! First hand confirmation. It's something we've all read about.

I've seen batteries explode when a spanner was dropped across the terminals or the polarity reversed, especially on old Positive ground vehicles when a novice connected Gnd to Gnd instead of Pos to Pos and Neg to Neg when jumping from a Negative ground vehicle.

Can you remember the conditions? The reason I ask is in over 50 years of messing about with car, motorcycle and boat electrics, I've never seen it happen or known anyone who has when done correctly.

I never claimed it was done correctly

Circumstances were a borrowed vehicle, a dead battery, poor lighting, a red battery lead on the negative terminal, and a black battery lead on the positive terminal. Beyond the battery and a few inches of the leads, I couldn't see much, and assumed the red=positive, black = negative convention. I didn't know then that the car owner had replaced the negative lead and used a red wire.

I had my + jumper cable connected. As soon as I touched the - jumper to the "negative" post on the battery, it sparked and blew.

I am a little smarter now and always make the negative connection to something remote from the battery. But I have a great deal of respect for the combination of hydrogen and sparky things.

Jim

Randy G. wrote:I haven't compared one to the other, but I have seen that the reported temps of the new probe seem consistent roast-to-roast looking at when the drying phase ends as well as crack temps, and that was all I needed. There are probably ways to bet more accurate readings, but consistency was all that I was after, and this was close enough to work for me.

Was that something you failed to achieve with your BT sensor through the chute approach? Problems with inconsistent data I mean...

Chute probe is very consistent. Just inelegant.

IMO, the probe near the wall is not far enough into the mass for optimum sensing of the beans.

Chute probe is very consistent. Just inelegant.

IMO, the probe near the wall is not far enough into the mass for optimum sensing of the beans.

I don't agree, the BMP probe from the rear wall can be placed as close to the drum as wanted ( I left mine just high enough to let a row of beans pass underneath it) and can extend out to almost touching the drum arm. The big advantage I see in doing the probes through the chute is not drilling the back wall out and in case of a mistake the chute cover is only a $10 part.

Randy, it would be interesting to see a comparison of the two profiles if you can find the time!

Dieter01 wrote:Randy, it would be interesting to see a comparison of the two profiles if you can find the time!

I have been very busy preparing a new (non-coffee) venture. The thermometer actually worked quite well. I installed the probes because I was hoping to get a way to log data and graph it more easily. As it turns out, there is something wrong with the meter or the cable because the computer will not communicate with t, so all the data logger does is log data, and I have to scroll through and enter it by hand into the spreadsheet.

But to answer the other question, the probe through the bean loading door works fine and the data compiled that way is useful and accurate enough. For repeatable results it is important to fasten the probe in the door so it doesn't slide- it is also important because if it hits the drum it is instantly reformed half-way to becoming a pretzel. .

Randy G. wrote: For repeatable results it is important to fasten the probe in the door so it doesn't slide- it is also important because if it hits the drum it is instantly reformed half-way to becoming a pretzel. .

When I had my probe mounted through the chute cover I had to lock it in place with some epoxy or else the bean mass would move it around. It also made removing & reinstalling the cover a pain plus having the cord dangling off the top of the machine got old. My advice is to put the time into a through the wall installation. You will be much happier in the long run.

By the way the price shown on the Omega XCIB-K163 page you linked is actually $7 higher then what they charge for that t/c. They are built to order & there is a 5-7 day lead time.