SSP 98mm Lab Sweet Coming 2023 - Page 4

Grinders are one of the keys to exceptional espresso. Discuss them here.
coffeeOnTheBrain

#31: Post by coffeeOnTheBrain »

I thought "false rumors" is the title of this thread :twisted:

franklin270h

#32: Post by franklin270h »

ducats wrote: What do you mean by "linear" speed? I get how a burr's outer edge moves at more speed due to greater distance traveled but at same rotations per minute compared to inner edge, but what kind of modifier does "linear" imply? The speed on the burr increases at a constant rate the further out on the radius you go? Or does it describe the relationship between different burr sizes?.
Essentially that, that the speed increases at a constant rate. Much of grinding is a factor of impact physics, and angular velocity doesn't matter in impact physics, linear velocity does. A bigger burrs is effectively "faster" than a smaller burr, assuming the other variables are the same.

The edge of a burr is the most aggressive part of any burr, and why the finish geometry makes the biggest difference in the cup. It will affect aggressiveness, amount of fines produced, as well as how efficiently the burrs eject grounds. 80mm and 98mm aren't as dramatically different as say 64 to 98, but there are differences. And cast burrs are very expensive to prototype.

Variable rpm is a consideration too, though people seem to have mixed results. The crushing style burrs (MK Cast, 98mm SSP LU & HU) don't seem to be as affected by rpm changes as cutting burrs like the lab sweets and most others.

Acavia

#33: Post by Acavia »

franklin270h wrote:
A 98mm burr has a longer grind path and higher linear speed at the edges so is going to be more aggressive (more fines, heat, uniformity at the expense of clarity/acidity) than an 80mm burr, if geometry is the same. 80mm LS already pivots to body over clarity/acidity but pushing it to 98mm would move even further in that direction and pretty much just be another SSP espresso burr option on the pile, though it would probably be more forgiving and less finicky than the machined burrs. 64 mm clarity over 80mm is for a similar reason- shorter grind path, less linear speed at the edges makes 64mm burr effectively less aggressive than the 80mm variant from a similar burr design. Also more difficult to make espresso with for the same reason.
Just throwing out a flip side: The smaller burrs are going to have a less exit area, and therefore if using the same total coffee dose, the coffee in front of the path is going to bottleneck more coffee behind it in the smaller burrs than the larger burrs. So more coffee will spend more time popcorning around behind the front coffee, getting nicks and pieces (fines) knocked off it in the smaller burrs than the same coffee in larger burrs. Also, the more bottlenecked coffee, in the smaller burrs, will compress into each other also producing fines from that more compressed impact possibly.

malling

#34: Post by malling »

Acavia wrote:Just throwing out a flip side: The smaller burrs are going to have a smaller exit path, and therefore if using the same total coffee dose, the coffee in front of the path is going to bottleneck more coffee behind it in the smaller burrs than the larger burrs. So more coffee will spend more time popcorning around behind the front coffee, getting nicks and pieces (fines) knocked off it in the smaller burrs than the same coffee in larger burrs. Also, the more bottlenecked coffee, in the smaller burrs, will compress into each other also producing fines from that more compressed impact possibly.
First of all a smaller burr grinder can hold less coffee between the burrs and the feed is typically also noticeable slower into the burr not just because of restrictions on the feeding end of the burrs themselves but equally much because of the space that leads into the burrs are typically much narrower and more restrictive. A 98mm EK that with its vertical mounted burrs can grind a 18g dose in something like 2sek a bit slower with the turkish and titus carrier/feeder. A vertically or tilted 64mm with same 1400 RPM typically take around 10-20sek in most cases. You can clearly see on top how slowly it feed on an Ode vs an EK grinder both uses the same fundamental design. On the EK the grinder swallow the whole dose at once while it take seconds before the entire dose has even went into the burrs of the Ode and other grinders sharing a similar design.

I done multiple sifting and I seen no proof that smaller burrs by nature produces more fines because of bottle neck, my cast 64 ssp burrs produce no more then the cast EK Coffee burrs in fact it produces less. I also did not noticed any
difference between the HU98 and the MP64 that was larger then the difference of coffees.

There is a difference in the middle fractions and the shape of the particles but fines and boulders I haven't really seen any difference that was worth of notice.

That said it's going to be noticeable differently how a burrset performs if mounted vertically or horizontally, your more likely to run into bottlenecks with horizontal then vertical

franklin270h

#35: Post by franklin270h »

Acavia wrote:Just throwing out a flip side: The smaller burrs are going to have a less exit area, and therefore if using the same total coffee dose, the coffee in front of the path is going to bottleneck more coffee behind it in the smaller burrs than the larger burrs. So more coffee will spend more time popcorning around behind the front coffee, getting nicks and pieces (fines) knocked off it in the smaller burrs than the same coffee in larger burrs. Also, the more bottlenecked coffee, in the smaller burrs, will compress into each other also producing fines from that more compressed impact possibly.
Interestingly there was a recent-ish thread on the phenomenon there that that's the case for sure, it was discussing why the Peak/Lab Sweet burrs perform differently in Lab Sweet vs Peak/E80 grinders, and the exit chute flapper played a part by restricting the flow of grounds exiting the grinder. I've noticed similar when grinding bags of coffee, if the chute gets filled up and flow stalls then what's being ground tends to turn to powder. Oppositely, I've seen similar with auger feed rate on grinders like the EK, or the Bunn versus gravity fed grinders like the Dittings or others. Faster feeding augers saturate the burrs more quickly especially single dosing, and do affect your distribution to a degree toward making more fines (but probably would risk overloading the motor if you were grinding very fine espresso or turkish)

Of course one can always restrict feed rate themselves by dropping in the dose little by little, and see how it goes for them.

malling

#36: Post by malling replying to franklin270h »

Probably designed burrs entry/feed is designed so the output restraints don't result in the bottle neck, instead you make the bottle neck the entry point of the burrs so the burrs are feed much slower. Most decent designed grinder has also made space restrictions etc. into the feeding part it self so the burrs only is feed a certain amount. If you just design the feeding space the same as a large then you can run into issues, also bottle neck is more often not actually not caused by the burrs but by the anti clumping flap in the chute and insufficient designed chamber that doesn't expel the grind fast enough causing a bottle neck, this problem hower isn't present on vertical mounted.

Torbj0rn

#37: Post by Torbj0rn »

Has anyone ordered it yet? :)


uncola

#38: Post by uncola »

That's 80mm. Isn't this thread about 98mm?

AlternativeHam

#39: Post by AlternativeHam »

Yes, but I'm pretty sure somewhere in this thread there is an email from Hansung saying they decided to not do 98mm.