So I’ve only just updated from RT3 to RT4.6.16, and was checking out the new recipe layout, which separates temp- and time- based steps. Seems an OK layout in the RT software. However, once saved, checking over on the roast.world web interface, it appears all my time-based steps are moved to the end of the list. Assuming this is just a visual thing, and that the steps will play out right when I actually run this recipe (have 8 batches to run this evening, so I’ll find out), but it does make the recipe look weird. Take a look at Roast World - Cup, grade, and analyze your coffee roasts in depth – it uses a 60 second “soak” period where I ramp up from P0 to P9 over the course of the first minute after charge. All those steps are purely time based, no bean temps involved. The rest of the steps are temperature based, and I’ve gotten in the habit in RT3x of just using “placeholder” times for those, so they appear in the right order. At any rate, as you can see in that recipe on roast.world, all those early time-based steps appear at the end of the recipe, instead of where they belong. Now take a look at my template recipe, that I’ve not yet opened and edited in RT4, at Roast World - Cup, grade, and analyze your coffee roasts in depth – this is the recipe I cloned for the Honduras recipe. That one has the steps laid out in the proper order.
Is this something that I can fix on my end, something that needs fixing by the software developers, or something I should just accept as kind of weird but whatever?
(Also, would be really nice if recipes sync’d to roast.world showed the notes section that I usually add via the RT software – i.e. “Drop 30 to 60 seconds after end of 1C, 20-25% development”.)
It is my opinion that this recipe will not work the way that you are hoping it will.
I believe that the temperature is the first condition that must be met.
You recipe will play out exactly as it is displayed.
Also, I don’t understand the need to change the power settings a 5 second intervals. I think that it will take longer than that to see any change in temperature because of the lag of the heating element.
Please don’t think that I am criticizing your effort.
here is a link to one of my recipes that has a one minute lower power soak at the beginning:
I’m about to find out how it’ll play back – preheating now.
Re: power increments in 5 second intervals – I know it’s probably weird looking and, if I’m being honest, a bit more micromanagement than necessary. Nevertheless, I’ve been getting consistent results with a soak like this, just turning up the dial from 0 to my desired starting power level, getting there by 1 minute. Doing this, I consistently hit my turning point at 1:02 on almost everything I roast, as well as 165C (which I’ve decided is “Yellowing”) at between 3:30 and 4:30, depending on the bean and the profile. When I get consistent AND tasty results, I tend to stick to it. I’m sure there’s other ways to do it.
Well, here’s the roast: Roast World - Cup, grade, and analyze your coffee roasts in depth
It ran as intended, so I guess the visual layout of the recipe, after editing with RT4.6.16, is just weird. Milestones were where I expected (Yellowing was maybe 10 seconds quicker than I hoped, but not off by much). Ignore that glitch in the ROR around 196C – I think I have a loose wire to the bean probe, and I get that every now and then.
RW will receive an overhaul shortly, so until then the recipes will be shown in a different way.
They should run as you see them and design them in RT.
As I understand it from explanation I got using RT3…
The Recipe tests all Recipe criteria simultaneously. There’s a limit to the number of steps in that broadside evaluation (20? 25? sorry- don’t recall the limit). Without counting I believe you’re inside the limit. You have Time criteria for your early power-increase regimen. Those steps will execute in that Time ordered sequence: as Time criteria is met, the step then executes the Command portion (the new Power setting). The sequence displayed in the Recipe list is not important for the proper execution. Unfortunately it is an issue for you as you try to confirm the Recipe design you entered vs. the jumbled sequence. It’s hard to picture what you’re trying to execute in the Recipe.
All that said, you already have demonstrated that your planned sequence executes properly. But it is unsettling to lose the visual confirmation of your intended design.