I’ve been using the Bullet since last July, and I love it to death. That being said, there are definitely some things I’d love to see improved. In particular:
Please release an official 3D print schematic for a bean chute. There are a lot of fan workarounds already but it would be great to see something directly from Aillio.
Please also release an official 3D print schematic for the ventilation adapter with a 4" hole rather than 3". I’m not sure if this is a regional difference but hardware stores don’t even sell 3" tubing here; the standard is 4". I had to purchase a 3" to 4" adapter to connect a tube to the vent hole. Speaking of which…
This is more of a hardware thing, but if possible with future iterations of the Bullet it would be great if there was a way for the vent adapter to lock into place rather than just sitting on Bullet. Unless I manage to get the tube to sit perfectly in place (which is rare), smoke will leak out from the bottom of the vent adapter since there’s a tiny gap. I’d love something more than gravity to hold it there.
The way the software works is very weird and confusing regarding the infrared probe vs the standard probe. From what I understand, the machine is reading out the infrared probe temps but the ROR curve in the software is being derived based on the standard probe and not the infrared probe. Please update the software to either allow the program’s ROR curve to use the infrared probe (which would be better since it’s more accurate anyway) or at least allow me to have the Bullet itself display the standard probe temps so I can work consistently with my ROR information.
In future versions of the Bullet, or maybe even as a replacement part for current Bullets, I’d love to see some sort of door or removable part in the chaff collection piece that allows us to clean the inside of it better. It’s tough to get a brush in there and get all the chaff out.
Please don’t have the software close your in-progress bean profile if the roaster is charged. It’s a minor gripe but sometimes I’m filling in details during preheat time during a back-to-back session and my data is lost because of it.
Please allow me to create a new bean on the fly without having to go through the whole wizard. Sometimes I just want to be able to type a bean name in the field after a roast and have it saved as a bean, I don’t need to go to the website and fill in a bunch of details every time. I should be able to select “new bean” from the dropdown window, type a new name, and proceed. It’s fine if the entry is just a blank shell, I can fill it in later.
During a roast, please have the software chart display the DTR phases during the roast rather than only showing them after. It’s not uncommon for roasters to make decisions based on where they are in a roast in terms of DTR (for example, Scott Rao advocates incremental drops in energy beginning at 12% DTR after first crack), so having that information in real time would be useful.
I think that’s all I’ve got for right now. If anyone wants to chime in, I’d love to hear your thoughts!
1, 2, and 3 already exist. Bean chute and exhaust adapter may not be “official”, but why reinvent the wheel.
Everything I have printed has bee 4”.
For 3, there is a slot that a post goes in, you can tighten the post over the slot to hold the exhaust adapter in place.
DTR is displayed live in RT during the roast.
I don’t think fan-created schematics spread via Facebook DMs are an adequate replacement for the manufacturer hosting schematics themselves. At the very least, Aillio should approach the creators of those schematics and get permission to host them on the official site.
What does it matter who created it, if it fits, it fits. If it works, it works…lol.
What makes them less suitable or inadequate?
For just about everything manufactured now, there are aftermarket replacement parts and accessories. Are they always inferior because the original manufacturer didn’t design it or sell it…sometimes, but often, the aftermarket non-OEM is better.(
Thanks for your suggestion!
1,2 We already host these files here: https://aillio.com/?page_id=26652
3 Yes the current files has an adapter that locks a flexible tube onto the Bullet
4 you can press the A Button to toggle between bean probe or IBTS temperature readings.
We are not able at the moment to get a sensible ROR curve from the IBTS but I am actually thinking about releasing what we have even though it would be difficult to actually use.
5 You can loosen the studs and pull out the metal plate. You don’t have to tighten them that much when you put it back together just make sure you align the metal into the plastic groove when you re-assemble.
6 Ok, I will tell this to Matthew
7 This will be part of the coming RT3 release.
8 This is already displayed I think…in the top left corner you can see the percentage in real time.
Awesome, thanks for the response! I printed my exhaust adapter back in August 2019 so I should probably print the new file now.
I’m curious - why are there issues with getting a sensible ROR curve from the IBTS?
Sensitivity and noise apparently. You can search the forums for the topic, there are several threads. Some use Artisan instead of RT. You can use ibts data in Artisan to plot the ROR and, evidently, it fluctuates wildly.
While we’re on the update topic, how about an easy to see display of FC & SC temps in RT and SC temp in the profile? If I’m in RT, I can’t see the temp of either displayed unless I hover over the events. SC isn’t in the profile that opens in Roastworld, you have to open the full profile and hover over the SC event to get the temp. Most of my roasts don’t involve SC, but for the dark roasts I do, SC data access is awkward.
If IBTS noise is the concern in calculating ROR, a fast exponentially weighted moving average could substantially calm it down.
I don’t want to sound harsh, but isn’t the IBTS completely useless if we can’t derive an accurate ROR curve from it? Ultimately the main thing we need to tend to is control of the ROR curve, if the IBTS isn’t accurately reflecting that curve then what good is it?
That is essentially what Scott Rao said to me in a comment about the BULLET in his FaceTime User Group for the On-line Beginner Roasting Course he just gave. Scott said he would ignore the IBTS if It is not used for the RoR curve.
I think the consensus nowadays is that Scott’s declining ROR is not the only way to roast coffee. A perfect Rao curve is in no way a guarantee of a good roast.
@jmacrae523 In no way useless. It gives you much more realistic real time data that is not delayed a minute like the bean probe is. It is also much less sensitive to charge weight.
@djbrandes we already use different filters and algorithms to filter out noise but the IBTS is so precise that it is measuring the movement of the bean mass which is giving fluctuations. There is almost not way to get rid of this without delaying the ROR which we do not want to do. Next step is using machine learning, and this is in development.
I was roasting this evening and was trying to figure out the likely FC time looking at the ROR since I know the FC temp for the particular bean I was roasting. I just thought it would be cool to have an option to input the FC temp (+/- a few degrees) for the bean being roasted and being shown a dynamic estimated FC time based on that and the current ROR.
The FC temp could even be a field in the bean database. Since I believe the ability to choose the bean before the roast starts is being added in a future update, an extra FC field would serve the same purpose without having to input that before each roast.
It’s a little clumsy compared to recording data in My Beans as you suggest, but you can see 1C temps for a specific bean using the Roast Analyzer. Those 1C temps generally cluster together clearly making an outlier very evident. What roast analyzer also displays is the time distribution of 1C caused (I think!) by Preheat temp, Bean Temp when charged, and by ambient temp of the room.
The variations in Bean Temp at charge are very evident in the data displayed and have caused me to delay charging the roast till it gets within range (@quartzglen pointed out the need to heat-soak several months ago).
What I meant was, and, as you have pointed out, a few roasts into a particular bean, you do get to know the average FC temp for it. So, if that could be used as the basis for calculating approximate FC time, wouldn’t it give us more leeway in adjusting parameters like F, P and D to speed up or delay the FC? I have seen many advise newbies about playing with those inputs to anticipate FC and time it accordingly. Seeing a dynamic expected FC time would help know whether a roast is moving ahead too fast or slower than planned. Having an approximate FC time based on current ROR displayed would, I feel, be very informative for newbies like me.
I do try doing some calculations mentally, but find it quite tedious while the roast is on.
@bab - something like what you have mentioned about Artisan - Average RoR in RT - #15 by bab
Honestly that would be my number one feature request and why I’m sticking with Artisan for now, that mental math of calculating expected DE and FC can be exhausting in my less than young brain
Trust me on this… it gets worse. Much worse!!
Another thing I noticed - could RT3 implement a way to un-mark a roast phase if one is marked by mistake? Sometimes I’ve caught myself marking FC a bit prematurely by accident, but there’s no way to undo that so I just have to suck it up for the rest of the roast. I’d love to be able to undo the mark and mark it again at the appropriate time.
You can change the marked values on the Edit page, but maybe you’re looking for a way to do this from the Roast page so that the TSFC and dev % values are re-computed with the new FC value?
You nailed it the second time - I’d like to be able to do this mid-roast.