Maybe steam boilers just don't make dry steam, but does it matter? - Page 3

Need help with equipment usage or want to share your latest discovery?
Giampiero
Posts: 851
Joined: 8 years ago

#21: Post by Giampiero »

Maybe not very related to the OP, but many years ago i did tried to get dry steam adding a thermocoil ( if i recall well it was working at 200 celsius degrees) just before the steam valve, yes the steam was very dry but the time to reach the milk at proper temp was longer than usual.
Anyway a bit of condensation was always present at the beginning once just open the steam valve.

Mike-R (original poster)
Posts: 286
Joined: 14 years ago

#22: Post by Mike-R (original poster) replying to Giampiero »

Nice! This is the first I've heard of a superheater on an espresso steam boiler.

It make sense (thermodynamically) that the dry steam takes a little longer. Taking longer has benefits of course... more time to stretch, more time to texture, and a little less water added to the milk.

Most of the condensation you saw is probably from low spots in the line. If the tubing and valve were designed to be free-draining back to the boiler (which they never are), there would be very little or no water to purge.

On my Synchronika, I noticed that the steam tubing is routed with the high point over the boiler rather than over the valve, so the entire length of the tubing retains water. Seems like it's not ideal, but it fully purges within a few short seconds so I don't mind.

ira
Team HB
Posts: 5528
Joined: 16 years ago

#23: Post by ira »

As I understand it, the Slayer Steam uses a thermo block between the steam boiler and the wand to increase the steam temperature for shops that primarily make Latte sized drinks. I was told they applied for a patent on the idea, no clue if it was granted.

Giampiero
Posts: 851
Joined: 8 years ago

#24: Post by Giampiero replying to ira »

That's an interesting news, a thermoblock/ thermocoil was the only possible cheap solution for me so i did it, knowing now that Slayer did the same and even patented the idea, make me feel worry...if i can't prove that i did it before them :lol:

ira
Team HB
Posts: 5528
Joined: 16 years ago

#25: Post by ira »

Being told it was patented on the floor of a trade show often has nothing to do with reality and more to do with marketing, so check if there is actually a patent before reacting if it matters.

Milligan
Supporter ❤
Posts: 1523
Joined: 2 years ago

#26: Post by Milligan »

I went from 1.5bar to 2.0bar recently and it made a world of difference in microfoam quality. I was originally under the impression that lower pressure could achieve the same outcome but it would take longer. Some advice I read was it was easier to learn when steaming took longer. I do not believe that to be the case at all. I could not get enough roll at lower pressure to incorporate the foam properly. Moving up to 2.0bar was night and day. Perhaps some of that is due to drier steam as well.

I notice that the purge evacuates the water faster and the steam seems to be drier visibly. The lower pressure has visible water even after a lengthy purge. It would be interesting to weigh the steamed milk before and after using 1.5bar and 2.0bar to see if there is a difference in additional water weight. I can do this and report back.

User avatar
baldheadracing
Team HB
Posts: 6275
Joined: 9 years ago

#27: Post by baldheadracing »

The optimal steam tip hole size varies. We have the formula explained by, and thanks to, RPavlis (RIP).

- Optimal steam tips
- Testing small lever steam capacity and output
-"Good quality brings happiness as you use it" - Nobuho Miya, Kamasada

Milligan
Supporter ❤
Posts: 1523
Joined: 2 years ago

#28: Post by Milligan replying to baldheadracing »

Thanks for those. It seems there was a mismatch between my orifice size vs steam pressure that I blindly fixed by playing with boiler temperature. I get blended microfoam all the way through since I dialed that in. Now I know why :oops:

Mike-R (original poster)
Posts: 286
Joined: 14 years ago

#29: Post by Mike-R (original poster) »

So I think I've reached a conclusion to my original question. I cleaned my level probe and I'm getting much drier steam, i.e. less spitting. And as a result, my steamed milk is much silkier.

If you're interested in more detail...

The level probe in my machine had a coating (maybe scale, maybe something else) covering about an inch of length. After scrubbing the probe, I fired up the machine and the spitting was barely noticeable. Before cleaning I could see and hear the spitting, whereas now I can only just barely see but not year the spitting.

The drier steam is making a big difference in the ability to steam milk. Previously I couldn't get really silky microfoam with any of my pitchers, but now I can get it with any of my pitchers.

In the videos I linked in my original post, I noticed that the spitting can be seen and heard. This makes me wonder if this is a common, undiagnosed problem that others are having.

So I think if someone wants to improve the quality of their steamed milk and they notice that they have audible spitting noises from their wand, they can try cleaning the probe to see if that brings the level down and gives them drier steam. If anyone does try it after reading this, I would be interested to hear your result.

Post Reply