Aillio Infrared Bean Temperature Sensor IBTS - Page 3

Discuss roast levels and profiles for espresso, equipment for roasting coffee.
User avatar
hankua

#21: Post by hankua » Jan 21, 2019, 12:26 am

drgary wrote:For installations other than the Aillio, why not install the IR sensor along with conventional thermocouples? You would be seeing the usual TC readings and anything the IR picks up faster than the TC would.
I'm guessing the Artisan team will eventually come up with an open sourced solution for interpreting data from an IR sensor, providing someone develops a usable unit that fits into the tryer opening. Definitely an opportunity for a tech savvy coffee geek 8)

User avatar
TomC
Team HB

#22: Post by TomC » Jan 21, 2019, 12:29 am

Almico wrote:How does IR react to glass? If would be nice to be able to just shine it through the sight glass.
It doesn't "see" the germanium glass, which is why they chose it. But the problem remained, shmutz and coffee chaff dust and oil would still deposit on that glass too, causing problems.

Aillio

#23: Post by Aillio » Jan 21, 2019, 1:02 am

Hi guys

crunchybean, Jake_G,
You are right about that the fact that the emissivity changes during roasting, and we are aiming to get the most accurate temperatures around 180°C.
For us its not about getting the most accurate temperature down to the last digit, but rather consistency.


Balthazar_B
We are working on a test setup to measure emissivity for different varitals at different roast degree. From what we have seen up until now, it does not change much.


Almico
Down to 200g batch sizes only the beans are picked up, less than that, and you need to lower your drum speed for better results.
The IBTS has a 12° viewing angle aimed at the middle of the bean mass. Obviously the vanes will have a different temperature / emissivity which shows up as noise. The algorithm gets rid of the data from the vanes. Another way would be to have a sensor on the drum to detect the position of the vanes. Then we could sample the temperature only between the vanes, but it would not be compatible with older Bullets. We are doing everything we can to make things backwards compatible.
Bean charge weight hugely influences the temp readings for traditional bean probes.


EddyQ
We are using a FIR digital filter which currently has a lag of only 10 seconds. Most probes lag 1-3 minutes. As you hint, IR probes are very hard to implement- very tricky and error prone. We spend the last 6 month testing it, and I can say that it makes roasting much more predictable- and I would never go back myself.

Compared to traditional sensors, this IR sensor has so many advantages that its a no brainer.

Jonas
★ Helpful

crunchybean

#24: Post by crunchybean » Jan 21, 2019, 1:04 pm

Aillio wrote:Hi guys

crunchybean, Jake_G,
You are right about that the fact that the emissivity changes during roasting, and we are aiming to get the most accurate temperatures around 180°C.
For us its not about getting the most accurate temperature down to the last digit, but rather consistency.

Jonas
Are you picking up any extra temp fluctuations from the beans as the moisture loss peaks. Would that also alter the readings? (Assuming it's around the 180C/1C area?) any Insights from an IR user? Also three cheers to you for backwards compatibility. For that you are at the top of my list when I decide to roll over for a bigger roaster.

cebseb

#25: Post by cebseb » Jan 21, 2019, 9:59 pm

Compared to traditional sensors, this IR sensor has so many advantages that its a no brainer.

Jonas
Hey Jonas,

Are you acquiring data comparing legacy sensors on older bullets and the new IBTS sensor? I was wondering if it would be possible to bake in the compensation for the readings into Roast Time for folks that may not want to update to the new sensor or is unable to do so? I'm planning on upgrading unless it is cost prohibitive. Also, I saw Monday as the availability for the sensor on the Facebook group. Is that accurate?

Thanks

Sebastian
Full stop. No half measures. Thankful to be in such a supportive community.

false1001

#26: Post by false1001 » Jan 21, 2019, 10:25 pm

I think I generally agree that some form of IR is the future of temp logging. It's cheap, relatively simple, low latency, and highly consistent. All attributes that you want for temp logging.

I do think there are some valid concerns though. Beans aren't a uniform color, even within lots. How does this sensor deal with chaff while it's still on the bean but about to be shed? Some beans roast much darker than others as well. I'm curious what the Bullet R1's sensor aperture is, since all of this makes me think due to bean agitation/movement and the need for lower variation in color changes the IR sensor is observing an area larger than what one would traditionally envision with a thermocouple. Smoke can effect readings a decent amount as well but I think there are newer methods that don't have this limitation. Last is the emissivity adjustment, which is the easiest critique but probably the most valid. Jonas is correct, consistency is what matters most. But that's a double edged sword with IR sensors, since the reason consistency matters is because the derivative of the temperature curve is far more important than the actual temperature curve itself. If you adjust for one end of the spectrum or another you're manipulating the shape of that curve. When comparing curves between roasts on a single roaster that might not be a problem, but it definitely removes some of the reproducibility between R1s and almost completely removes it when comparing roast curves between different machines. I believe many modern IR devices allow for adjustments based on a curve or table, is this possible the R1's implementation? Last, IR sensors will fail more often than thermocouples and be more difficult to troubleshoot.

I do wish you guys at Aillio all the best though, i'll be looking to pick up one of the March shipment R1s.

Aillio

#27: Post by Aillio » Jan 22, 2019, 1:03 am

crunchybean
I am not sure, as we still don't have that much data to compare it to. Time will tell

cebseb
It will not be possible to compare data between the two sensors as the new one is pointed downwards, and the old one up.
Also, the emissivity is different, and there is no germanium window that also changes the reading.
The new IR sensor will only cost US$60 (+shipping)- for all the parts needed to upgrade.

false1001
The sensor is measuring a pretty large area, so it will be an average of lots of beans.
We had tons of concerns when we first started the development, but what I have learned is that mostly these concerns are just that -concerns. What hits you are the things you didn't think about.
A normal probe lag will also vary based on the humidity in the roast chamber. If its very humid, the heat transfer will be faster than in a dry environment.
We looked at altering the emissivity during roasting, but it would be almost impossible to define when the emissivity would be at different times.
When we compare roaster to roaster with the new IBTS we can now get much much better consistency, and as you said yourself, this is key.

cebseb

#28: Post by cebseb » Jan 22, 2019, 2:30 am

Aillio wrote: cebseb

The new IR sensor will only cost US$60 (+shipping)- for all the parts needed to upgrade.
That price is far more palatable than I had hoped. Fantastic.
Full stop. No half measures. Thankful to be in such a supportive community.