濃縮摘要

This experiment started from a Facebook discussion in an espresso group about tamping vs tapping. The thinking was tamping compresses grounds at the top and the bottom more than the middle, and this is why one should use a heavy tamp. So I devised an experiment to better understand tamping.

該實驗從一個意式濃縮咖啡小組的Facebook討論開始，內容涉及夯實與敲擊。 當時的想法是夯實壓實頂部和底部的地面，而不是壓實中間的地面，這就是為什么應該使用沉重的夯實器。 因此，我設計了一個實驗以更好地了解搗固。

Short story: tamping affects the top layers more than the bottom layers with respect to compression. As tamp pressure increases, there is a diminishing returns on puck compression that is non-linear.

簡而言之：就壓縮而言，搗固對頂層的影響大于底層。 隨著夯實壓力的增加，冰球壓縮的收益遞減，這是非線性的。

Previous work has shown that tamping pressures at 5 lbs to 20 lbs doesn’t show a change in extraction. My own experience has been to greatly drop the tamp pressure, but I didn’t have an understanding on how pucks were compressed. I was also not able to find much information online.

先前的工作表明，在5磅至20磅的夯實壓力下，抽提率沒有變化。 我自己的經驗是大大降低夯實壓力，但是我對壓縮球的壓縮方式還不了解。 我也無法在網上找到很多信息。

So, I setup this experiment with a straight, clear tube and a scale to see how the grounds would compress. I used Kompresso for the tube because it has a clear, straight, and long with a plunger to fit. I put it on a scale that could go up to 5 kg, and I recorded a video as I pressed down.

因此，我用一個直的，透明的管子和一個秤來設置此實驗，以查看地面如何壓縮。 我使用Kompresso作為試管，因為它具有一個清晰，筆直且長的柱塞。 我把它放在可以重達5公斤的秤上，按下時錄制了一個視頻。

I did the collection twice because the first round had some trouble in being able to label the markings, but the second round went a lot better.

我做了兩次收集，因為第一輪在標記標記上遇到了一些麻煩，但是第二輪進行得更好。

The two questions to resolve:

要解決的兩個問題：

How does tamping affect the top, middle, and bottom of the puck?

夯實如何影響冰球的頂部，中間和底部？

When does a harder tamp provide diminishing returns?

什么時候進行更嚴格的篡改會減少收益？

數據采集 (Data Collection)

I put a small piece of paper after every 3g of coffee in the tube, but I aimed to keep the paper small. I didn’t want the piece of paper to affect how the coffee compressed. Putting the initial grinds in the tube did not cause compression as can be seen above.

在每3克咖啡中，我會在試管中放一小塊紙，但我的目的是使紙變小。 我不想讓那張紙影響咖啡的壓縮方式。 如上所示，將初始研磨物放入管中不會引起壓縮。

I took sample images at desired pressures, and then I lined them up with the starting image. I then used red lines for the starting positions and green lines for the ending positions.

我在所需的壓力下拍攝了樣本圖像，然后將它們與起始圖像對齊。 然后，我將紅線用于起始位置，將綠線用于終止位置。

I wrote a simple script in Matlab to find the location of red and green lines in the images.

我在Matlab中編寫了一個簡單的腳本，以查找圖像中紅線和綠線的位置。

校準和標簽 (Calibration and Labeling)

I also wanted to remove camera bias so I used a ruler to make a calibration image. I then marked it up with red lines and used the same script to find the locations of the red lines. I then fit a line to these markings and converted the line locations for each image to a physical distance.

我還想消除相機偏差，所以我用尺子制作了校準圖像。 然后，我用紅線對其進行了標記，并使用相同的腳本來查找紅線的位置。 然后，我將一條線插入這些標記，并將每個圖像的線位置轉換為物理距離。

For each image, I was able to clearly get four lines for the slices of the Top, Middle, and Bottom. There was coffee above the Top and below the Bottom, but I can’t see the top, and I’m suspicious about using the bottom. I ended up using the three slices and the four lines (used to derive the slices) in analysis.

對于每張圖像，我都能清楚地獲得四行用于頂部，中間和底部的切片。 頂部上方和底部下方都有咖啡，但我看不到頂部，我對使用底部感到懷疑。 我最終在分析中使用了三個切片和四行(用于得出切片)。

The plunger is also smaller than a 58mm (58.5mm to be exact) filter basket. To accommodate, I scaled the pounds per square inch from the 0.93 square inches of the Kompresso tube to the 4.16 square inches of a 58 mm basket.

柱塞也小于58毫米(準確地說是58.5毫米)濾籃。 為了適應，我將磅/平方英寸的磅數從Kompresso管的0.93平方英寸縮放到58毫米籃子的4.16平方英寸。

夯實壓力分析 (Tamp Pressure Analysis)

I plot here the slice height and then the height of the markers. I plotted the height of the markers in log to show they trend logarithmically. This means that to gain the same change in height change or compression, the force required grows exponentially.

我在這里繪制切片高度，然后繪制標記的高度。 我在對數圖中繪制了標記的高度，以顯示它們呈對數趨勢。 這意味著，要獲得相同的高度變化或壓縮變化，所需的力將呈指數增長。

There is some noise in the data, but the trend is pretty clear. When looking at a line plot, we can see the trend is that the Bottom doesn’t compress like the Top and Middle. We can look at the percentage of compression with respect to the maximum compression achieved at 59 lbs.

數據中有些雜音，但趨勢非常明顯。 查看折線圖時，我們可以看到趨勢是底部不像頂部和中部那樣壓縮。 我們可以看一下相對于在59磅時達到的最大壓縮率的壓縮率百分比。

The Top compresses mostly in the first 6 lbs, and the middle is the slowest to compress. This makes sense because when you compress the grounds, there will be an equal and opposite force from the counter on the bottom grounds. In absolute values, the bottom is compressed less. This could be due to the paper marker moving when the grounds were put in. This experiment would work better if one set of grounds was colored and one wasn’t. My aim here was to get a quick experiment to see what it could tell me about tamping.

頂部的壓縮主要在前6磅中，而中間的壓縮速度最慢。 這是有道理的，因為壓縮地面時，計數器會在底部地面上施加相等且相反的力。 以絕對值計，底部壓縮較少。 這可能是由于插入地面時紙張標記器移動了。如果對一組地面進行了著色而沒有對地面進行著色，則該實驗會更好。 我的目的是進行快速實驗，以了解夯實的知識。

比較切片 (Comparing Slices)

We can use the slice compression percentage and compare different slices. I did this by making a ratio of compression as seen below. The Top/Bottom ratio is the highest initially, which seems a bit obvious.

我們可以使用切片壓縮百分比并比較不同的切片。 我通過如下所示的壓縮率來做到這一點。 頂部/底部比率最初是最高的，這似乎有點明顯。

Looking closer, the Top/Mid and Top/Bottom seem to even out while the Mid/Bottom stays below 1 which means that the Bottom compressed more than the middle.

仔細觀察，“頂部/中部”和“頂部/底部”似乎平整，而“中部/底部”保持在1以下，這意味著底部的壓縮程度大于中部。

專注于線標記 (Focusing on the Line Markers)

If we look at how much the line markers move as a percentage of their total movement or compression, we can see a little more on the middle. The Mid-Top and Mid-Bottom trend the same way. When comparing one layer to the next, they have close to a 1:1 ratio. However, when looking at the different lines vs the Bottom line, all the layers compress faster than the bottom up until 15 lbs. Then they are all fairly close (within 20%) to their maximum compression positions.

如果我們看一下線標記移動量占其總移動或壓縮百分比的話，我們會在中間看到更多。 中上和中下的趨勢相同。 將一層與另一層進行比較時，它們的比例接近1：1。 但是，當查看與底線不同的線時，所有圖層的壓縮速度都比底線快，直到15磅為止。 然后它們都非常接近其最大壓縮位置(在20％之內)。

收益遞減 (Diminishing Returns)

If we look at the overall height of the puck, the idea of diminishing returns is very clear. 80% of compression happened at 3 lbs of pressure. To get to 90% compression took 20 lbs, and then to get to 100% compressed took more than 50 lbs. 50% of all compression occurs in the first 1 lbs of pressure.

如果我們看冰球的整體高度，那么減少回報的想法非常明確。 80％的壓縮發生在3磅的壓力下。 要達到90％的壓縮需要20磅，然后達到100％的壓縮需要超過50磅。 所有壓縮的50％發生在最初的1磅壓力中。

I couldn’t get it to compress more than this point, and I wasn’t able to measure pressure past 13 lbs with this scale or the equivalent of more than a 60 lbs tamp for a 58mm basket. However, I doubt doing a 60 lbs tamp makes much of a difference. Previous experiments on tamp pressure showed there was no difference in extraction when comparing 10 lbs of tamp pressure t0 40 lbs. They didn’t go lower than 10 lbs though, so it is unclear.

我無法壓縮到這一點以上，并且我無法使用此比例尺測量超過13磅的壓力，或者無法測量58毫米籃子的超過60磅的夯實壓力。 但是，我懷疑進行60磅的夯實會帶來很大的不同。 先前的夯實壓力實驗表明，比較10磅夯實壓力t0 40磅時，提取量沒有差異。 它們的重量并沒有低于10磅，因此目前尚不清楚。

In my own experiments, I’ve been reducing my tamp pressure to 1 lbs or less.

在我自己的實驗中，我一直將夯實壓力降低到1磅或更小。

A better experiment can be designed as a result of this one:

結果，可以設計出更好的實驗：

Use two different colors of coffee grounds

使用兩種不同顏色的咖啡渣

Layer at 2g increments

層以2g增量

Look at the compression.

看壓縮。

I am satisfied in now having a better understanding of our two questions:

我很滿意現在對我們的兩個問題有了更好的理解：

1. How does tamping affect the top, middle, and bottom of the puck?

1.夯實如何影響冰球的頂部，中間和底部？

Not evenly even at very high pressures.

即使在很高的壓力下也不均勻。

2. When does a harder tamp provide diminishing returns?

2.什么時候進行更嚴格的篡改會減少收益？

Between 2 lbs and 3 lbs of pressure, there was a 20% increase in compression compared to the 10% between 3lbs and 20lbs or the 10% between 20lbs and 59 lbs. This means that most tamps heavier than 3 lbs should be similar, and that a massively heavy tamp may not be worth whatever effect it is having on the shot.

在2磅和3磅之間的壓力下，與3磅和20磅之間的10％或20磅和59磅之間的10％相比，壓縮率增加了20％。 這意味著大多數重于3磅的夯實圖應該是相似的，而且沉重的夯實圖不值得在鏡頭上產生任何效果。

If you like, follow me on Twitter and YouTube where I post videos of espresso shots on different machines and espresso related stuff. You can also find me on LinkedIn.

如果您愿意，請在Twitter和YouTube上關注我，在這里我會在不同的機器上發布濃咖啡拍攝的視頻以及與濃咖啡相關的內容。 您也可以在LinkedIn上找到我。

我的進一步閱讀： (Further readings of mine:)

Deconstructed Coffee: Split Roasting, Grinding, and Layering for Better Espresso

解構后的咖啡：焙炒，研磨和分層，以獲得更濃的意式濃縮咖啡

Pre-infusion for Espresso: Visual Cues for Better Espresso

特濃咖啡的預輸注：視覺提示可提供更好的特濃咖啡

The Shape of Coffee

咖啡的形狀

To Stir or To Swirl: Better Espresso Experience

攪拌或旋流：更好的意式濃縮咖啡體驗

Spicy Espresso: Grind Hot, Tamp Cold for Better Coffee

香濃意式特濃咖啡：磨碎熱，搗碎冷可制得更好的咖啡

Staccato Espresso: Leveling Up Espresso

Staccato意式濃縮咖啡：升級意式濃縮咖啡

Improving Espresso with Paper Filters

使用濾紙器改善意式濃縮咖啡

Coffee Solubility in Espresso: An Initial Study

濃咖啡中的咖啡溶解度：初步研究

Staccato Tamping: Improving Espresso without a Sifter

Staccato搗固：無需篩分器即可提高濃咖啡

Espresso Simulation: First Steps in Computer Models

濃咖啡模擬：計算機模型的第一步

Pressure Pulsing for Better Espresso

壓力脈沖使咖啡更濃

Coffee Data Sheet

咖啡數據表

Artisan coffee is overprice

工匠咖啡價格過高

The Tale of the Stolen Espresso Machine

被盜咖啡機的故事

Espresso filter analysis

濃縮咖啡過濾器分析

Portable Espresso: A Guide

便攜式意式濃縮咖啡：指南

Kruve Sifter: An Analysis

Kruve Sifter：分析

翻譯自: https://towardsdatascience.com/the-diminishing-returns-of-tamping-for-espresso-cac289685059

濃縮摘要

總結

以上是生活随笔為你收集整理的浓缩摘要_浓缩咖啡的收益递减的全部內容，希望文章能夠幫你解決所遇到的問題。

如果覺得生活随笔網站內容還不錯，歡迎將生活随笔推薦給好友。