Posted Mon Jun 18, 2012, 8:11pm Subject: Re: Options for Brewing a single Mug that are forgiving of pour technique?
Not got much to offer other than the 3 cup Chemex is far inferior to the 6 cup that is my go to method. I never use mine.
It's no use to you but the Aeropress is my single mug solution. In your case I'd suggest the Hario TCA 2 or 3 syphon with the cloth filter. Finicky to use but way more consistent than single cup pot over solutions.
Posted Tue Jun 19, 2012, 12:04am Subject: Re: Options for Brewing a single Mug that are forgiving of pour technique?
Netphilosopher has an interesting idea there but I question one specific piece where he states-
280/14 = 20g of coffee, so you'll need 320g of hot brew water. You'll get about 280g of coffee but with this method your strength will taste best if you get around 1.23% or so.
with a 1.23% TDS you would have an extraction of 17.22%, outside of the ideal window of extraction which is 18-22%. I'm not saying that's bad, if you like the taste it is good but there are a lot more quality flavors and sugars left in the bean at that extraction. This is probably a moot point for you, jaybar, as I suspect you do not have a refractometer. But if you get that ratio between 19-20% extraction (which is a more ideal window for sweetness and flavors) the strength/TDS will be between 1.36-1.43%, respectively. That strength is on the outside of what Americans tend to be used to, but still falls within Euro/Norwegian standards (these "standards" were established in the '50s mind you, but still what most American companies brew their coffee within. The American standard is 1.15-1.35% strength/TDS, respectively).
If you grind a BIT more coarse than typical for a pourover and stir throughout to keep the grounds moving and agitated you don't have to be anywhere near a master pourer. The Hario V60 may work for you if you try that method. Although you still have to pour somewhat slowly, if you do that, pour dead center, scrape the side walls after each pour to keep all the coffee in the water and moving, pouring slightly higher each time (say 3 pours at about 100g per) and adjust the grind so you get a pretty flat spent bed you should get a great extraction.
Try Netphilosopher's recipe when you decide on a dripper (adjusting the grind for your tastes) and then try this too-
for 11oz cup - use 21.7g ground coffee and 361.4g water - shoot for about a 2:30-3min total brew time and a flat spent bed (all grind related)
if you get a 2:1 water loss ratio (1g coffee absorbing 2g water) you'll have 11oz. If you get a 19.5% extraction (a flat spent bed will indicate that you're right around it) you'll have a strength of 1.33%TDS
for a 1.25%TDS cup at 19.5%ext. use 20.4g ground coffee to 358.8g water to the same parameters listed above for the 1.33% cup.
Then get back to us on what your tastebuds tell you to what to do as well as what dripper you got!!!
Posted Tue Jun 19, 2012, 5:57am Subject: Re: Options for Brewing a single Mug that are forgiving of pour technique?
theCoffeeScientist Said:
Netphilosopher has an interesting idea there but I question one specific piece where he states-
280/14 = 20g of coffee, so you'll need 320g of hot brew water. You'll get about 280g of coffee but with this method your strength will taste best if you get around 1.23% or so.
with a 1.23% TDS you would have an extraction of 17.22%, outside of the ideal window of extraction which is 18-22%. I'm not saying that's bad, if you like the taste it is good but there are a lot more quality flavors and sugars left in the bean at that extraction. This is probably a moot point for you, jaybar, as I suspect you do not have a refractometer. But if you get that ratio between 19-20% extraction (which is a more ideal window for sweetness and flavors) the strength/TDS will be between 1.36-1.43%, respectively. That strength is on the outside of what Americans tend to be used to, but still falls within Euro/Norwegian standards (these "standards" were established in the '50s mind you, but still what most American companies brew their coffee within. The American standard is 1.15-1.35% strength/TDS, respectively).
If you grind a BIT more coarse than typical for a pourover and stir throughout to keep the grounds moving and agitated you don't have to be anywhere near a master pourer. The Hario V60 may work for you if you try that method. Although you still have to pour somewhat slowly, if you do that, pour dead center, scrape the side walls after each pour to keep all the coffee in the water and moving, pouring slightly higher each time (say 3 pours at about 100g per) and adjust the grind so you get a pretty flat spent bed you should get a great extraction.
Try Netphilosopher's recipe when you decide on a dripper (adjusting the grind for your tastes) and then try this too-
for 11oz cup - use 21.7g ground coffee and 361.4g water - shoot for about a 2:30-3min total brew time and a flat spent bed (all grind related)
if you get a 2:1 water loss ratio (1g coffee absorbing 2g water) you'll have 11oz. If you get a 19.5% extraction (a flat spent bed will indicate that you're right around it) you'll have a strength of 1.33%TDS
for a 1.25%TDS cup at 19.5%ext. use 20.4g ground coffee to 358.8g water to the same parameters listed above for the 1.33% cup.
Then get back to us on what your tastebuds tell you to what to do as well as what dripper you got!!!
You should try the recipe out. You're using a yield-based extraction calculation for a method that is full-contact.
I got to that strength level by trial and error. Same strength on a pourover or drip vs. French Press or other full-contact method, with same brew ratio, have DRASTICALLY different tastes.
Brew "normally" with a drip brewer and appropriate grind (so the delivery rate gets ~5 minute brew, grounds are nicely domed and not crawling up the sides) at this brew ratio and you'll get decent but strong-tasting coffee at around 1.40-1.45% strength.
Same brew ratio, same 5 minute contact time but in full-contact (immersion, steeping, infusion, whatever you want to call it), and then paper filter, and you'll get a strength more closer to 1.25-1.30%.
Other than resulting strength, these two will taste pretty much the same. If the drip is diluted to same strength, neither my wife or I can tell the difference.
For me, running a "normal" recipe (because let's face it, that's what these brew parameters really are) on a percolation method I need to run a 5.75% brew ratio to achieve a good tasting cup of coffee between 1.19 and 1.30%.
Same brew ratio on a full-contact method using "normal" (meaning reasonable sub 8minute contact times and drip-like NOT espresso grind), I need to either bump the brew ratio to 6.25% OR I end up with strength ranging on average about 0.15% lower.
I just did this with my CCD. It makes a difference if you're using it like a pourover vs using it as a steep-and-release brewer, same grind, same amount of water, same coffee, and same contact times.
Bottom line, jaybar - go with what "tastes", figure out the geek numbers later. Just be precise with the recipe, look for a forgiving method. JMHO, but full-contact methods are a bit more forgiving. It takes a few tries, but then you find the recipe that works for your method, your grinder (and every grinder has its quirks), your water, and your preferred coffee.
And, be VERY careful asking a forum of coffeegeeks for help making coffee! ROFLOL
(it's all in good fun and in pursuit of good coffee)
------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------- Le café doit être noir comme le diable, chaud comme l'enfer, pur comme un ange, et doux comme l'amour.
"There is no right answer with coffee. There is only the elixir in your cup at the moment you partake."
"...I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind;..." - Lord Kelvin RECIPES thread => http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/machines/585708
This formula doesn't make sense to me. It's reminiscent of the way ExtractMoJo/MoJoToGo do it, but seems to mix up units. The stuff on the left hand side is water+coffee solids, but the stuff on the right hand side would appear to be just water. So, it doesn't seem to be a statement about mass conservation. Now, it doesn't really matter if you're just trying to fill up a certain size cup, of course, but it does when you start talking about tds and extraction yield.
Posted Thu Jun 21, 2012, 6:54am Subject: Re: Options for Brewing a single Mug that are forgiving of pour technique?
GlennV Said:
This formula doesn't make sense to me. It's reminiscent of the way ExtractMoJo/MoJoToGo do it, but seems to mix up units. The stuff on the left hand side is water+coffee solids, but the stuff on the right hand side would appear to be just water. So, it doesn't seem to be a statement about mass conservation. Now, it doesn't really matter if you're just trying to fill up a certain size cup, of course, but it does when you start talking about tds and extraction yield.
It's using ratios (dimensionless) to provide quick scalability. Note that neither strength nor TDS are in this - it's JUST the prediction of produced total coffee mass.
Quick overview:
Given for any brew: C (Dry ground Coffee, g) Wb (Brew water, g) Cp (Coffee Produced) A (Absorption ratio, the mass reserved as a ratio of C)
Cp = Wb - (A * C)
Example: Wb = 320g. C = 20g and A=2,
Cp = 320 * (2 * 20) = 280g.
Define R = Wb / C, substitute Wb = R * C:
Cp = (R * C) - (A * C) = C * (R - A) or: Coffee you want to produce = Dry Coffee * (Brew Water Ratio - Absorption )
Make sense?
So if you start out and define R, know what A is, and you want to PRODUCE a certain amount of Cp, then you're just using the inverted form to calculate the dry coffee you need.
------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------- Le café doit être noir comme le diable, chaud comme l'enfer, pur comme un ange, et doux comme l'amour.
"There is no right answer with coffee. There is only the elixir in your cup at the moment you partake."
"...I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind;..." - Lord Kelvin RECIPES thread => http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/machines/585708
jpender Senior Member Joined: 11 Jul 2011 Posts: 406 Location: California Expertise: I like coffee
Grinder: Kyocera CM-50 Vac Pot: S/S Moka Pot Drip: Aeropress
Posted Thu Jun 21, 2012, 9:03am Subject: Re: Options for Brewing a single Mug that are forgiving of pour technique?
GlennV Said:
This formula doesn't make sense to me. It's reminiscent of the way ExtractMoJo/MoJoToGo do it, but seems to mix up units. The stuff on the left hand side is water+coffee solids, but the stuff on the right hand side would appear to be just water. So, it doesn't seem to be a statement about mass conservation. Now, it doesn't really matter if you're just trying to fill up a certain size cup, of course, but it does when you start talking about tds and extraction yield.
He's leaving out the solids in the cup because at normal coffee strength it's a decent approximation.
coffee produced = brew water - absorbed water + extracted solids ~ brew water - absorbed water
For a water/coffee ratio of 16, absorption factor of 2, and yield of 20% the error is -1.4%. Of course the error grows as the coffee/water brew ratio increases. It wouldn't be an acceptable approximation at espresso strengths.
Posted Thu Jun 21, 2012, 11:57am Subject: Re: Options for Brewing a single Mug that are forgiving of pour technique?
jpender Said:
He's leaving out the solids in the cup because at normal coffee strength it's a decent approximation.
coffee produced = brew water - absorbed water + extracted solids ~ brew water - absorbed water
For a water/coffee ratio of 16, absorption factor of 2, and yield of 20% the error is -1.4%. Of course the error grows as the coffee/water brew ratio increases. It wouldn't be an acceptable approximation at espresso strengths.
I'm definitely not leaving solids in the cup out, just defining it with the simplified model without specifying strength. I don't recall specifying extraction or TDS, just predicting the coffee produced based on three other variables. If you see extraction or TDS in the equation, I did something wrong.
That simple model is not just a decent approximation, if you know the mass of the spent wet grounds and coffee produced, it's exact. It is best to start at prediction of total coffee produced, and we know that the amount of water and the amount of coffee is DIRECTLY related to the mass of coffee produced. Strength, TDS and Extraction are not directly related to mass of coffee produced. You cannot brew coffee, measure Cp, Wb, and C and the wet spent grounds and determine extraction - even if you have a perfect scale.
So, we know that the mass of produced coffee is related to how much of the total mass is kept in the wet spent grounds. This amount of retained mass is proportionally related to C.
Note, again, no mention of TDS or extraction. If we try and introduce absorption as a function of TDS or extraction, or try and define just the "water" in the grounds and then define absorption on that as a ratio of C - it becomes a solution where you cannot do anything without knowing TDS.
In your form, you took Cp = Wb - (absorbed water?) + (Extracted solids?)
Exactly how, from C, Wb and Cp only, do you get the absorbed water or extracted solids? Absorbed water in your expression is now mathematically confounded (if there is such a thing - how do you know what the concentration is of the liquid in the grounds? It could be 0%, or maybe it's coffee, similar in strength to the Cp, or maybe it's somewhere in between or near enough to zero that we can call it zero). Extracted solids - how do you know what they are in Cp? You can't measure it with a scale, you can only determine the strength of the beverage. Extracted solids is a combination of dissolved solids and undissolved fines (which fortunately are very small and have fairly low impact to taste).
In the initial, simplified brewing model, there is only produced coffee (which contains water, dissolved solids and teeny amounts of undissolved fines), brew water (which technically may hold a few hundred ppm of tds by itself), dry initial coffee (which is really only 98% dry, technically). Absorption is a convenient term to describe the produced total mass as a relationship to the initial mass of the components. By itself, it's actually already one step refined:
If you define G as the mass of the wet spent grounds, then the total brewing mass looks like:
G + Cp = Wb + C
Cp = Wb + C - G
It is most convenient to introduce absorption as a proportional term based on C. It has practical application (in predicting Cp once you know A, for any given combination of C and Wb). It is independent of extraction (which also by experimentation we know is fairly true) so we don't need to know extraction, TDS, etc.
We just need to know what A is needed to do. If we define G = A * C, then
Cp = Wb + C - (A * C) = Wb + C (1 - A)
But now I have to carry this spare "1" every time I want to do any other manipulation. Since this really started as a prediction of coffee produced, and that's what I cared about when I made the model in the first place, I can pull an algebra trick and define A = G/C - 1, it simplifies the original equation as a sort of mass retention ratio based on C.
Cp + G = Wb + C, but since we said that G = C(A + 1) = (A * C) + 1 (redefined above)
Cp + [(A * C) + C] = Wb + C,
Cp = Wb - (A * C)
------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------- Le café doit être noir comme le diable, chaud comme l'enfer, pur comme un ange, et doux comme l'amour.
"There is no right answer with coffee. There is only the elixir in your cup at the moment you partake."
"...I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind;..." - Lord Kelvin RECIPES thread => http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/machines/585708
jpender Senior Member Joined: 11 Jul 2011 Posts: 406 Location: California Expertise: I like coffee
Grinder: Kyocera CM-50 Vac Pot: S/S Moka Pot Drip: Aeropress
Posted Thu Jun 21, 2012, 5:55pm Subject: Re: Options for Brewing a single Mug that are forgiving of pour technique?
Netphilosopher Said:
I'm definitely not leaving solids in the cup out, just defining it with the simplified model without specifying strength. I don't recall specifying extraction or TDS, just predicting the coffee produced based on three other variables. If you see extraction or TDS in the equation, I did something wrong.
I understand now. You've defined "absorption" to include the solids extracted from the grounds. The extraction yield IS there, it's just not explicit:
Let's call g = solids in the grounds and Wg = water "absorbed" or "retained" by the grounds. Then,
A = G/C - 1 = (Wg + g)/C - 1 = Wg/C - (C-g)/C
But those two terms are the "water loss ratio" (Wg/C) and the "extraction yield" ((C-g)/C).
The water loss ratio (water in grounds / dry coffee) is what I was thinking of as absorption. I believe it's what VST/mojo uses and I think it's what theCoffeeScientist meant.
So you're right, your formula is exact. It's just a different definition of "absorption", one that is a weak function of extraction.
It's related because full immersion or full contact methods are more forgiving with grind (depending on the method) and overall method - BUT they produce lower strength coffee at same brew ratio same or similar grind and same/similar contact time.
Any single-cup method whether percolation or immersion, however, is fairly sensitive to seemingly small errors in brew water mass and coffee mass.
So my suggestion for doing a "manual, nonplastic Clever Coffee Dripper" is basically employing an immersion method - but you should adjust the brew ratio to use a little bit (about 9%) more coffee for the same water to get the same strength.
Percolation methods are sensitive to rate of Wb delivery, slurry percolation rate, grind level, temperature. When the delivery rate is fixed (as in an auto drip machine) all you need to do is find the grind level and filtering system (if there are options) to get the slurry perc rate matched, and adjust the contact time by the amount of brew water you put in. And you can tell whether your slurry perc rate is correct by how the grinds look when you're done.
But done manually, it isn't that forgiving. It's really hard to manually deliver brew water at a particular rate. It's hard to manually deliver brew water in a fairly standardized agitation (like an auto system with a showerhead) without pouring "down the walls". You have to keep the delivery rate somewhat constant to keep the slurry saturated without channeling (or "pouring through"). Variations in this have noticeable effects in how quickly the coffee is extracting. Furthermore, if you pour too quickly, then you run out of your set amount of brew water (if you want to continue extracting) and then you begin changing the brew ratio - or you risk underextraction. If you pour too slowly, then you might overextract, ending with bitterness.
Compare this to immersion: you use an amount of coffee, ground to some level. You use an amount of brew water. You combine the two in a container. You make sure all the coffee is soaked and not floating. Then you wait.
When the timer dings, you separate the coffee from the grounds.
If the coffee is underextracted, steep longer or use finer grind or both. If the coffee is overextracted, steep shorter and/or use coarser grind.
(of course this lead to a discussion of why the end strengths for same brew ratio but different methods are different, but it IS related)
------------------------------------------ ----------------------------------------- Le café doit être noir comme le diable, chaud comme l'enfer, pur comme un ange, et doux comme l'amour.
"There is no right answer with coffee. There is only the elixir in your cup at the moment you partake."
"...I often say that when you can measure what you are speaking about, and express it in numbers, you know something about it; but when you cannot measure it, when you cannot express it in numbers, your knowledge is of a meagre and unsatisfactory kind;..." - Lord Kelvin RECIPES thread => http://www.coffeegeek.com/forums/coffee/machines/585708
Symbols: = New Posts since your last visit = No New Posts since last visit = Newest post
Forum Rules: No profanity, illegal acts or personal attacks will be tolerated in these discussion boards. No commercial posting of any nature will be tolerated; only private sales by private individuals, in the "Buy and Sell" forum. No cross posting allowed - do not post your topic to more than one forum, nor repost a topic to the same forum. Who Can Read The Forum? Anyone can read posts in these discussion boards. Who Can Post New Topics? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post new topics. Who Can Post Replies? Any registered CoffeeGeek member can post replies. Can Photos be posted? Anyone can post photos in their new topics or replies. Who can change or delete posts? Any CoffeeGeek member can edit their own posts. Only moderators can delete posts. Probationary Period: If you are a new signup for CoffeeGeek, you cannot promote, endorse, criticise or otherwise post an unsolicited endorsement for any company, product or service in your first five postings.
= No New Posts since last visit 