Huky Roaster? - Page 2

Discuss roast levels and profiles for espresso, equipment for roasting coffee.
User avatar
slickrock
Posts: 272
Joined: 13 years ago

#11: Post by slickrock »

Bkeef wrote:The Huky is available in a Solid drum too.

I would like to know which option would be better... Solid drum or half direct?

<image>
If the solid drum is chosen, then one would feel compelled to compare it to the Quest M3, and probably power users of the that roaster (Jim, Arpi, etal.) could lend comment here. The Huky drum size is larger than the M3, but not appreciably larger: 13cm vs 11cm in diameter and 17cm vs. 16cm in length. Drum thickness is 2.5mm, like the first batch of M3 roasters, but the drum thickness of the M3 has since reduced down to 2mm, I believe.

Question is: if the drum is larger by 736 cu cm, how does this roaster have twice the capacity of the M3 without sacrificing roast quality with twice the bean charge? Does the Huky have better heat capacity? Would the high heat delivery of gas burner make the difference? Better circulation from gas convection?
Do perforated drums allow greater roast capacity over solid drums?

Anyone with experience with the roaster car provide feedback on full batch roast performance?
07/11/1991, 08/21/2017, 04/08/2024, 08/12/2045

Advertisement
User avatar
another_jim
Team HB
Posts: 13871
Joined: 19 years ago

#12: Post by another_jim »

Shop roasters tend to be fan ventilated solid drums, rather than the old Burns design of draft ventilation through a perforated drum. But a solid drum without a good ventilating fan would not work well. Don't know how powerful the Huky's ventilation is, or how many CFM per pound are actually needed for solid drums roasters.
Jim Schulman

User avatar
slickrock
Posts: 272
Joined: 13 years ago

#13: Post by slickrock »

Jim, for comparison to this roaster, what are the primary factors limiting bean charge weight with Quest M3? Is it the amperage/wattage of the heating elements operating at 110V? Is the heat capacity and size of the of the drum? Or is the amount of air circulation or flow design of the roaster?

It would seem that with direct gas burner, warm up would be quite fast and a high MET (within limits of course to prevent ashiness and tipping) could easily be held/controlled, and without the need for housing insulation. Commensurate with this (based on you comments) would be a the need for good and strong air flow to facilitate heat transfer from the the drum to the beans?
07/11/1991, 08/21/2017, 04/08/2024, 08/12/2045

User avatar
another_jim
Team HB
Posts: 13871
Joined: 19 years ago

#14: Post by another_jim »

Suppose you want to increase your load of beans and keep the same timing profile. You will have to raise the MET to accomplish this, since you need to transfer more heat, in the same amount of time, via the same delivery channel. In terms of trading off profile time and MET, the Quest reaches its limit on graceful roasting at around 200 grams and becomes unacceptable above 250.

To raise this, you would need to raise both the heat input and the airflow. Even when this is done, eventually the drum itself would make even heat transfer impossible. I'm guessing you could increase heat and airflow to do 300 to 350 grams evenly, but no more than that; however, I do not know how to design drum roasters, I'm merely talking about the my experience with different loads on roasters I've used.

The gas version of a roaster has much more heat input than its electric equivalent (1000 watts is only about 3400 BTU/h); so a small gas roaster has the heat for higher loads. But it would also require higher airflow and drum speeds to maintain low and even ETs. At 50 rpm, the Huky is the same as the Quest; I think the high capacity shop roasters turn faster than that.
Jim Schulman

User avatar
jammin
Posts: 753
Joined: 14 years ago

#15: Post by jammin »

At 50 rpm, the Huky is the same as the Quest
The larger diameter drum will yield higher tangential velocity at the same RPM.

lukas
Posts: 10
Joined: 16 years ago

#16: Post by lukas »

The Huky also has much better agitation vanes in the drum compared to the quest. Lest not forget that in the considerations of whether or not it's possible to achieve a well-working higher capacity batch size with just a slightly larger drum size.

User avatar
slickrock
Posts: 272
Joined: 13 years ago

#17: Post by slickrock »

another_jim wrote: The gas version of a roaster has much more heat input than its electric equivalent (1000 watts is only about 3400 BTU/h); so a small gas roaster has the heat for higher loads. But it would also require higher airflow and drum speeds to maintain low and even ETs.
Ok, here are the specs to the Huky 500 fan, claiming a 230CFM air flow: 6" Huky Fan

Does anyone know the specs to Quest M3 fan for comparison? Does this flow seem adequate for the solid drum configuration and the 500g capacity limit?

Also, going back to the solid drum question, are there a specific downsides to going with a perforated drum, even though it is not the shop roaster's norm. Is it more difficult to control roast cycle? Does it make it easier/harder to control roasts via air flow? Does it produce suboptimal roasts for short,medium, or long roast cycles? Is it harder to do longer roasts? ,etc. What was about the Burn's design that no long curries favor today?
07/11/1991, 08/21/2017, 04/08/2024, 08/12/2045

Advertisement
User avatar
another_jim
Team HB
Posts: 13871
Joined: 19 years ago

#18: Post by another_jim »

slickrock wrote:What was about the Burn's design that no long curries favor today?
No forced ventilation means slower and less flexible profiles. Probably not an issue with a ventilated and perforated drum.
Jim Schulman

User avatar
slickrock
Posts: 272
Joined: 13 years ago

#19: Post by slickrock »

Didn't know the Burns design didn't involve forced air flow. Same questions still stand, assuming both solid and perforated drums involve forced air. Is there no specific downsides or is the "drum roast" personality somehow less achievable when not a solid drum?

Also, I since found a post that has the fan specs for the M3 here: M3 Fan.
The CFM numbers are an order of magnitude smaller, but I doubt this is the case... perhaps units are not equivalent.
07/11/1991, 08/21/2017, 04/08/2024, 08/12/2045

User avatar
CoffeeRoastersClub
Posts: 63
Joined: 13 years ago

#20: Post by CoffeeRoastersClub »

So basically the papst fan that the chaff tray is sitting on both cools the beans at the end, and while roasting pulls air through the roaster along with roasting debris (chaff, etc.) and also in the process evacuates the roasting smoke. This roaster would need to be used in a very well ventilated room if setup as such, correct?

Len
"I'll quit coffee. It won't be easy drinking my Bailey's straight, but I'll get used to it." ~TV show Will & Grace