If you only measured 6.5 bar you need to bleed the air
You need to remove all the air between the piston and pressure guage or it will under read
Why? Gases are compressible, liquids are not
I have sufficient experience in what happens when too many product options are offered and i try to learn from my mistakes, but thank you for your input
Reiss Gunson post=7955 wrote: If you only measured 6.5 bar you failed to bleed the air
You need to remove all the air between the piston and pressure guage or it will under read
@ Reiss: this leaves open a few questions:
1) I assume that you measure the same way as JJ does: a portafilter with a pressure gauge. When the lever goes down and the group is filled with water, there will be air above the water. How exactly do you bleed that air?
2) Ok. Let’s assume all air has gone: max pressure measured is the pressure that the spring max can deliver. That is your story, right?
3) But now we are making an espresso: there is a PF with a basket full of coffee, There will be no bleeding of air. :silly:
The pressure the spring will deliver in this situation seems more relevant to me, then the max pressure the spring can deliver with no air pocket.
Am I missing something here?
M.
Ps. Couldn't find the quote, but for what it is worth, I remember that Paul Pratt stated somewhere on HB (Arduino Supervat Restauration??) that traditional spring lever machines deliver around 6,5 bars.
1. In the image above where i am measuring the line pressure at my workshop (again you have to bleed the air to get the correct reading) i have a ball valve threaded in above the pressure gauge. obviously the air wants to sit above the water, but after a few iterations you will get the hang of it as you watch the pressure get steadily higher as you eliminate more air - take the highest reading you can get when making this kind of measurement
2. that number is the static pressure of the spring. that is what you buy the component as being rated to, i.e. an 11 bar spring. the 'proper' way to measure the static pressure of the spring is to remove the spring from the group and measure it under compression in a vice like device (i don't have one of those)
3. correct
4. the double spring will not deliver 4.5 bar more than the single spring. the double spring increases the dynamic pressure toward the end of the extraction so there is less tailing off, flattening the dynamic pressure curve, making it more like the flat pressure profile of a pump extraction. is that what you want?
5. i don't care who has measured the single spring to 6.5 bar; it is not the way it is done. when correctly measured it is a proxy for the rated pressure of the spring without having to dismantle the group and compress the spring in a vice with a measurement device attached
6. what you are talking about is dynamic pressure and it is no where near 9 or 11 bar anyway, whichever spring you use - as soon as the water starts to move through the puck the pressure drops dramatically (below 6 bar). dynamic pressure is fiendishly difficult to measure accurately, which is why no one does
if i thought a twin spring group gave a better taste we would have made all our machines with a twin spring from the very first machine. there is no unit cost difference whether we buy twin spring or single spring groups
where the cost comes in is when you start offering options on everything, particularly if you want to have machines on the shelf, ready to ship, which we do
we have never been ambiguous in what our philosophy is, we are very focused on making basically one design of machine, in three different sizes with a great number of common components between all three (soon to be four) machines. it also allows me to know all of our machines inside out and know the answer to any problem that may arise post sale
the L1 - P will meet the needs of any professional, just as the L2 & L3 do
we are committed to making the best lever espresso machines in the world, bar none
i guess I'm left with no alternative but to do you a video clip showing me measuring the static pressure of a single spring, and then drop the twin spring group in and measure that. boring. tiresome. trivial. non-productive.
when you go to buy a new car do you walk out of the showroom if your request for different gear ratios to be made available is turned down, because that is the equivalent of what you are asking for
as a rule manufacturers will try to make you the best all round product that meets the needs of most of their customers at the price point in question. whilst the enchanted woods of bespoke creations has an allure to us, we exercise discipline to resist its charms. businesses who get dragged into bespoke creations usually fail. volume is the secret sauce
perhaps the point can be illustrated best with a table:
Can you see how reducing the number of variants from 16 to 4 dramatically improves our efficiency (working capital requirements) and ability to have product on the shelf, ready to ship?
We continue to offer the ability to plumb the L1 in and/or out with the introduction of a plumb in kit as an option, but we now only make tank machines - this is a massive difference
Not only that, but if you want to make a change to the product you have a quarter of the amount of stock to clear before the change can be announced
I would love to indulge in everyone's wish list for customisations i genuinely would. But sooner or later we would go bust, I can almost guarantee that
Consider the tremendous sales volume of Apple that runs to hundreds of millions of units in total, yet how few options they offer - look at the recent iPhone 'C' 'option' range - an unmitigated disaster by Apple's standards
We are just a tiny tiny drop in in the ocean in comparison, with a fraction of their volumes, so we need to be very wary of offering too many variants. Im sorry, its just commercial reality
I cannot agree more with you. If you are afraid of getting responses from strangers and dangerous people or if you are not interested in what the other members want to say you can unsuscribe or not participate in the forum.
Who said I'm afraid? I'm not afraid of nothing. Simpy, I don't want to talk with people who disrespect me. I don't need it. I don't see what's weird in this.
Still you insist on telling me what to do or not. Awesome.
spoke with the factory yesterday (wednesday) just after noon and the L1 - P was being assembled with a view to completing yesterday/today
so that's progress. next step will be to see what it weighs in at fully loaded and get the packaging right
then its off to the Gary Smith, the photographer who has taken the images of our other machines - it is a bit more of a challenge now that i am not in London, but it is worth it to ensure a consistent look to all our images
i am awaiting advice on the timeline for the packaging solution and juggling that with securing some time with Gary Smith, photographer who himself has a busy schedule
i would expect a steer today on when the packaging will be available
we are close now to getting it down to Gary in London for a shoot
obviously it will take on the L2/3 look when it is panelled up, but that is easily done
i doubt they are L2s as there shouldnt be any on the line this week - i suspect they are L1s as they are on build, but I'm struggling to say with any certainty from the photo
i have just had it confirmed that we should be able to send it to london friday or monday, worst case
our rolls royce 3 group and 2 group architecture is now available in a 1 group format
Reiss Gunson post=8316 wrote: i doubt they are L2s as there shouldnt be any on the line this week - i suspect they are L1s as they are on build, but I'm struggling to say with any certainty from the photo
It does look like the L2, the open top is larger, if it was 2 L1-P you should have seen the stainless frame wall in the middle. But I could be wrong...
Reiss Gunson post=8316 wrote: our rolls royce 3 group and 2 group architecture is now available in a 1 group format
Yep, it sure looks a more luxurious version of the L1 with all the extras and the look and feel of the professional line.
The LONDINIUM I - P is now available to order, but please refer to my blog post here for details and a discount if you are an existing LONDINIUM customer
It is a matter of taste of course, but to me the dimensions of L1-P look more 'balanced' than the standard L1. I am not so sure about the sightglass, it disturbs a bit the cleanliness of the design, but I could live with that. Now I only need to find that excuse...
Reiss, I need to take strong meds to keep my anxiety at bay :-) The photo sure is a nice sales piece.
I am looking forward to look under the hood since I saw something in the early photos that generate questions. So when the big box arrives on my doorstep (which I hope is soon) I can get off the darn Moka Pots and start enjoying good coffee once again. My wife has hated the wait and scorned the Moka Pot Maddness, she has even threatened me with Starbucks!
I had no idea what my line pressure could be so I asked a friend to make me a panel that could facilitate two espresso machines, a pressure gauge and a needle valve to regulate the pressure.
Line pressure is near 3 bar here so I can tweak it from there down to where I would want it.
Comments
As I have already tried to explain
If you only measured 6.5 bar you need to bleed the air
You need to remove all the air between the piston and pressure guage or it will under read
Why? Gases are compressible, liquids are not
I have sufficient experience in what happens when too many product options are offered and i try to learn from my mistakes, but thank you for your input
@ Reiss: this leaves open a few questions:
1) I assume that you measure the same way as JJ does: a portafilter with a pressure gauge. When the lever goes down and the group is filled with water, there will be air above the water. How exactly do you bleed that air?
2) Ok. Let’s assume all air has gone: max pressure measured is the pressure that the spring max can deliver. That is your story, right?
3) But now we are making an espresso: there is a PF with a basket full of coffee, There will be no bleeding of air. :silly:
The pressure the spring will deliver in this situation seems more relevant to me, then the max pressure the spring can deliver with no air pocket.
Am I missing something here?
M.
Ps. Couldn't find the quote, but for what it is worth, I remember that Paul Pratt stated somewhere on HB (Arduino Supervat Restauration??) that traditional spring lever machines deliver around 6,5 bars.
1. In the image above where i am measuring the line pressure at my workshop (again you have to bleed the air to get the correct reading) i have a ball valve threaded in above the pressure gauge. obviously the air wants to sit above the water, but after a few iterations you will get the hang of it as you watch the pressure get steadily higher as you eliminate more air - take the highest reading you can get when making this kind of measurement
2. that number is the static pressure of the spring. that is what you buy the component as being rated to, i.e. an 11 bar spring. the 'proper' way to measure the static pressure of the spring is to remove the spring from the group and measure it under compression in a vice like device (i don't have one of those)
3. correct
4. the double spring will not deliver 4.5 bar more than the single spring. the double spring increases the dynamic pressure toward the end of the extraction so there is less tailing off, flattening the dynamic pressure curve, making it more like the flat pressure profile of a pump extraction. is that what you want?
5. i don't care who has measured the single spring to 6.5 bar; it is not the way it is done. when correctly measured it is a proxy for the rated pressure of the spring without having to dismantle the group and compress the spring in a vice with a measurement device attached
6. what you are talking about is dynamic pressure and it is no where near 9 or 11 bar anyway, whichever spring you use - as soon as the water starts to move through the puck the pressure drops dramatically (below 6 bar). dynamic pressure is fiendishly difficult to measure accurately, which is why no one does
if i thought a twin spring group gave a better taste we would have made all our machines with a twin spring from the very first machine. there is no unit cost difference whether we buy twin spring or single spring groups
where the cost comes in is when you start offering options on everything, particularly if you want to have machines on the shelf, ready to ship, which we do
we have never been ambiguous in what our philosophy is, we are very focused on making basically one design of machine, in three different sizes with a great number of common components between all three (soon to be four) machines. it also allows me to know all of our machines inside out and know the answer to any problem that may arise post sale
the L1 - P will meet the needs of any professional, just as the L2 & L3 do
we are committed to making the best lever espresso machines in the world, bar none
i guess I'm left with no alternative but to do you a video clip showing me measuring the static pressure of a single spring, and then drop the twin spring group in and measure that. boring. tiresome. trivial. non-productive.
when you go to buy a new car do you walk out of the showroom if your request for different gear ratios to be made available is turned down, because that is the equivalent of what you are asking for
as a rule manufacturers will try to make you the best all round product that meets the needs of most of their customers at the price point in question. whilst the enchanted woods of bespoke creations has an allure to us, we exercise discipline to resist its charms. businesses who get dragged into bespoke creations usually fail. volume is the secret sauce
perhaps the point can be illustrated best with a table:
Can you see how reducing the number of variants from 16 to 4 dramatically improves our efficiency (working capital requirements) and ability to have product on the shelf, ready to ship?
We continue to offer the ability to plumb the L1 in and/or out with the introduction of a plumb in kit as an option, but we now only make tank machines - this is a massive difference
Not only that, but if you want to make a change to the product you have a quarter of the amount of stock to clear before the change can be announced
I would love to indulge in everyone's wish list for customisations i genuinely would. But sooner or later we would go bust, I can almost guarantee that
Consider the tremendous sales volume of Apple that runs to hundreds of millions of units in total, yet how few options they offer - look at the recent iPhone 'C' 'option' range - an unmitigated disaster by Apple's standards
We are just a tiny tiny drop in in the ocean in comparison, with a fraction of their volumes, so we need to be very wary of offering too many variants. Im sorry, its just commercial reality
Water, ready.
Power, ready.
Drain, ready.
Grinders, ready.
Sheetrock dust on the recptacle
If you dont want/dont need responses from members other than Reiss please use the private message option or the trustful email.
Still you insist on telling me what to do or not. Awesome.
Is that a 240v supply in the wall?
Thank you, that is indeed a 240v outlet dedicated for the machine. I added a photo to make it more clear.
so that's progress. next step will be to see what it weighs in at fully loaded and get the packaging right
then its off to the Gary Smith, the photographer who has taken the images of our other machines - it is a bit more of a challenge now that i am not in London, but it is worth it to ensure a consistent look to all our images
so, its built. its done. tested and ready to go
i am awaiting advice on the timeline for the packaging solution and juggling that with securing some time with Gary Smith, photographer who himself has a busy schedule
i would expect a steer today on when the packaging will be available
we are close now to getting it down to Gary in London for a shoot
The picture also shows how it compares in size to the bigger L2 at the back...
Kfir.
obviously it will take on the L2/3 look when it is panelled up, but that is easily done
i doubt they are L2s as there shouldnt be any on the line this week - i suspect they are L1s as they are on build, but I'm struggling to say with any certainty from the photo
i have just had it confirmed that we should be able to send it to london friday or monday, worst case
our rolls royce 3 group and 2 group architecture is now available in a 1 group format
It does look like the L2, the open top is larger, if it was 2 L1-P you should have seen the stainless frame wall in the middle.
But I could be wrong...
Yep, it sure looks a more luxurious version of the L1 with all the extras and the look and feel of the professional line.
Good luck, it looks like a winner product to me.
Kfir.
reiss.
I think L1-P is a milestone for my fauvorite Espresso machine builder, Londinium !
THANKS REISS !!.
These days we supply the machines with one naked portafilter per group
Kind regards
Reiss
this is purely a 'placeholder' image to show you the LONDINIUM I - P with the panels on
the photo shoot took place yesterday
It is a matter of taste of course, but to me the dimensions of L1-P look more 'balanced' than the standard L1. I am not so sure about the sightglass, it disturbs a bit the cleanliness of the design, but I could live with that. Now I only need to find that excuse...
M
I am looking forward to look under the hood since I saw something in the early photos that generate questions. So when the big box arrives on my doorstep (which I hope is soon) I can get off the darn Moka Pots and start enjoying good coffee once again. My wife has hated the wait and scorned the Moka Pot Maddness, she has even threatened me with Starbucks!
I like the beefier look of the drip tray and the sight glass that reminds me its still a classic lever machine.
Kfir.
Line pressure is near 3 bar here so I can tweak it from there down to where I would want it.