Slight modification to the Weiss Distribution Technique

Beginner and pro baristas share tips and tricks.
Nickk1066

#1: Post by Nickk1066 »

I've been playing with this recently and I've found that simply stirring around the Z axis (ie around and around) doesn't do much for me - in fact it seems to make the pour worse.

However I've noted a much better method if the grounds are broken up perpendicular to the Z axis (ie X,Y) with a fork. In essence lifting the coffee from deep within the basket and the prongs sifting and breaking the clumps.

The only next step I perform is to smooth off with a straight edge. Then do a tamp without tapping or any funky business. Then I'll pre-infuse for 10 seconds and once the first drops start I'll recock the lever to get a bit more coffee!

The result seems to work for me - I get no blonding on pour now whereas with the weiss distribution I'd still get blonding *shrug*.
Barista - applied pre-emptive hydro-thermodynamicist.
(#208)

User avatar
Randy G.

#2: Post by Randy G. »

Without further details,it is difficult to say why one method is superior to the other, but there may be more going on here. For example, it is possible that your "fork lift" method could be adding more air to the coffee so that when you level off before tamping you are actually creating a fluffier grind and so you end up using a lower mass of coffee (you were using to much coffee previously).
Espresso! My Espresso! - http://www.EspressoMyEspresso.com
LMWDP #644

popeye

#3: Post by popeye »

Nickk1066 wrote:with a fork
In my estimation, a fork would be too coarse. Anything significantly wider than an individual grain of coffee would tend to push the coffee around, throwing off distribution, rather than fixing it. Even with a needle, I use a swirling motion, going from the outside of the basket and ending in the center. This results in a slightly less dense center, and helps prevent edge channeling. If the center consistently flows fast for you, you can always reverse, and swirl from the center out. But the circular motion helps keep distribution uniform, even though the needle is very thin. Sometimes i'll even do two "levels" - I'll WDT the entire basket, then just WDT the top half. If I had a needle that didn't push ANY coffee, this wouldn't be an issue. However, finding a needle smaller than a grain of coffee is no easy thing. If you're using the fork, give a needle a try. Stick it in the eraser nub of a pencil.
Spencer Weber

User avatar
Marshall

#4: Post by Marshall »

popeye wrote:Even with a needle, I use a swirling motion, going from the outside of the basket and ending in the center. This results in a slightly less dense center, and helps prevent edge channeling. If the center consistently flows fast for you, you can always reverse, and swirl from the center out. But the circular motion helps keep distribution uniform, even though the needle is very thin. Sometimes i'll even do two "levels" - I'll WDT the entire basket, then just WDT the top half.
O.K. After accusing WDT fans of being anal-compulsive fetishizers :D , I finally accepted (sort of) that it might be of some (minimal) help to owners of cheaper or doserless grinders. But, now I'm flummoxed. What is it you think your Super Jolly fails to deliver that needs fixing with these rituals?
Marshall
Los Angeles

Endo

#5: Post by Endo »

Yogurt cups and taxidermy needles? Too many MacGyver Baristas around here if you ask me. Although it is entertaining to see what will come up next.
"Disclaimer: All troll-like comments are my way of discussing"

Nickk1066

#6: Post by Nickk1066 »

Marshall wrote:WDT fans of being anal-compulsive fetishizers :D
That would be the case if the needle was attached to an antistatic device too!

Bar based antistatic and point based antistatic is about £300 including power supply.. still waiting to hear how much a ring based one would be from another vendor. Still a bit too expensive - trying to find a solution in the £100 bracket.
Barista - applied pre-emptive hydro-thermodynamicist.
(#208)

User avatar
Randy G.

#7: Post by Randy G. »

There are situations where the use of some technique, such as the WDT, is required for consistent results. Some grinders create such a dense grind as well as such a clumpy grind that without the WDT a great percentage of pulls will result in channeling or other extraction faults.

EXAMPLE: I found I got better results when using the doser Rocky by employing the WDT, but since getting the Kony I have never had to do so. The Kony creates a grind with almost no clumping, and the doser takes care of any problematic clumps that do appear.

Back to the WDT... IMO, if you have to use the WDT or similar method to get good distribution then it is to compensate for other problems such as clumping or a doser or exit chute that makes it difficult to get good distribution when filling the PF.

Bottom line: do what you have to do in order to get good extractions, but don't go out of your way with unnecessary preparation steps. Find what works and eliminate steps which are unnecessary. How do you find out what is unnecessary? Experiment and simplify.
Espresso! My Espresso! - http://www.EspressoMyEspresso.com
LMWDP #644

Nickk1066

#8: Post by Nickk1066 »

Bottom line: do what you have to do in order to get good extraction
Agreed. I think in this case the lift & sieve does fluff the grounds and causes a natural distribution.
Barista - applied pre-emptive hydro-thermodynamicist.
(#208)

User avatar
HB
Admin

#9: Post by HB »

Marshall wrote:What is it you think your Super Jolly fails to deliver that needs fixing with these rituals?
I have three test grinders: Mazzer Mini, Super Jolly, and Robur. The WDT helps the consistency of the Mini extractions, but the combination of Andy's doser modification and good doser handle thwacking does 80% of the same job. The Super Jolly with doser doesn't demand the WDT treatment, but it doesn't hurt either. The Robur is a dose and go grinder.

I understand that some of theses "rituals" seem over the top, but I only have time for two or three pulls during the week. If an extra 40 seconds in preparation time increases the likelihood of an exceptional espresso, I'm all for it.
Nickk1066 wrote:I think in this case the lift & sieve does fluff the grounds and causes a natural distribution.
Even when I use the WDT, I try to minimize the stirring otherwise the taste profile changes and not for the better.
Dan Kehn

User avatar
dsc

#10: Post by dsc »

Hi everyone,

since I did my successful wire mesh conversion I have put away the needles and brushes, but I would still recommend my DIYed tool if you want to try a modified version of the WDT:

Image

It should do what you want fast and effective, it can fluff, it can move (without compressing) and can declump:)
Nickk1066 wrote:Bar based antistatic and point based antistatic is about £300 including power supply.. still waiting to hear how much a ring based one would be from another vendor. Still a bit too expensive - trying to find a solution in the £100 bracket.
You are aware that it uses a high voltage power supply? I had an idea of adding a ring based one to my funnel, but in the end dropped that because of the PSU.
HB wrote:Even when I use the WDT, I try to minimize the stirring otherwise the taste profile changes and not for the better.
I agree, it also affects the way the extraction goes and has something to do with fines migration and moving them around in the basket.

Regards,
dsc.