hey guys,
so i haven't actually used BIABacus so far for several reasons. the first one being that it seems like overkill to me. too much information that i don't really need for my brew day. that is off course my personal opinion only.

Another reason is is that my brewpot is square and i didn't want to mess up the excel file trying to configure calculations for a square pot. could someone do if for me? or direct me to the right cells i should change?

i would like to try and keep better records of my brews and this seems to be a step in that direction.

Thanks
Noam

Happy new year Noam ,

I'm going to jump straight into it. You mention overkill above. Can you give some more information on this?

We all know that at first glance the BIABacus is a bit daunting because there is so much info on one page. (We also intend, in the future, for the user to be able to hide bits they do not need which would make it really easy.) But, even so, if you take the time to have a beer and work through each section, most questions should be answered?

The BIABacus makes things very transparent which is something you won't find in other software. There are so many screens and so many ambiguities in other software it takes months/years to find the errors. We have done this and done a lot more.

No other software does the following...

1. Auto-estimates kettle and fermentor efficiency.
2. Auto-estimates evaporation for stock posts and kegs.
3. Gives volume height and depth measurements for stock pots and kegs.
4. Auto-estimates kettle and fermentor losses.
5. Allows for immediate correction for AA% of hops.
6. Allows for all calculations to consider planned dilutions.
7. Allows for calculations to easily consider unplanned dilutions.
8. Warnings that tell you when you are asking too much from your kettle.
9. etc.

...

You know I spend ages answering both ordinary and tricky questions here. What you mightn't realise is the wide variety of circumstances these questions come from. The BIABacus is only a spreadsheet and in spreadsheet form, it does have a few limitations but it was developed to be able to serve the widest variety of brewers really well especially into new paradigms of thinking such as auto-efficiency.

For example, no other software handles any type of kettle dimensions, let alone a square pot. The BIABacus will even handle your situation though if you understand the principles. And that is what it has all been about.

All you need to do for a square kettle is work out what diameter circle would equal the surface area of your square kettle because the principle of the BIABacus works on the more the surface area, the more the evaporation.

As for height, I'd have to do some googling but I don't think you'd have to adjust that at all. The height along with your 'adjusted' diameter above will give you your capacity and that's it!

...

Getting back to overkill, I think you will find, in other programs, a heap of overkill and a lot of underkill. They get away with it because they distribute a bit of info over lots of screens or use poor terminology over lesser screens.

I know which program you used to use and I assume still do. It works on the assumption, like all brewing software besides the BIABacus, that you will get identical kettle and/or fermentor efficiency from every single brew regardless of it being a high or low gravity brew. That is a falsehood.

What this means is that every number this software generates is based on that falsehood.

If the brews you do are usually of around the same gravity then this is fine. When you do a higher or lower gravity brew you'll just put your readings down to an aberration or, worse still, claim that something else lead to a wonderful lowering or raising or your kettle/fermentor efficiency .

Cheers to our Israeli BIAB ambassador ,
PP

Pat,
I appreciate the detailed response. i am sometimes impatient in reading long threads (this due to ever growing ADHD), but i will take the time to delve into the BIABacus . i need to get back to the brewing basics and try to do it by the book for my next few brews. For that last few I have been "winging it" .

I'm lost. where do i download the latest version?

Could you not just add the lengths of all 4 sides then divide by Pi? (presuming your sides are vertical).

help me out here,
my square kettle has a water surface area of 1280 cm^2 (32cm X 40cm).

ADHD

Okay shib, for your diameter use 40.4 (1280/3.14159=407.444 Square root of that is 20.185. Multiply that by two and you get 40.37. All this comes from pi x radius squared).

As for height, just use the height of your kettle. So put those two numbers in B and it should show our true kettle capacity.

As for latest BIABacus, I posted PR1.3K in this post. Problem is I keep getting caught up on forum questions so I keep losing my place on the BIABacus . However, I think that is the best current version though.


PP
PP

BTW, has anyone tried running BIABacus on Google drive ?

It doesn't work mate.

Btw, let us know if those numbers work for you. You never know, there might even be another person in the world with a square kettle - lol.

so, did i do this right?
can i adjust the Kettle into Fermenter Loss figure?

Most things look pretty good to me Noam ,

Kettle to Fermentor Loss(KFL) can be adjusted/set in Section X.

Don't understand your Section I for 4 litres but if it is clear to you then cool!

In Section D, no need to type 5.0% on the right as it is the same as the left.

The VAW of 4.0 L in the first line of Section D is a bit suspicious. What recipe are yo copying that has a VAW that small?

Also, in Section W, delete the 5.00 L. In Section X, delete the 5.0%. These are numbers from the kolsch recipe where your file originated.

Finally, in Section E, get rid of the word 'Beta'.


PP

Got it. although i like the idea of holding back 5 liters and adding them to the boil.

Okay guys, I'm going to sneak a pre-release in here for you advanced BIABacus'ers to have a look at. Please don't publish this version in any other thread. If someone wants an extract recipe scaled in the next week or so, direct them to this thread and ask them to have it scaled here.

Version 1.3Q (for this thread only) does the following...

1. Allows for sugars and extracts added during the boil. (Section C) [Can't believe my brain didn't blow up ]
2. Allows for grains to be marked as steeped. (Section C)
3. Allows Miscellaneous ingredients in Section F to be scaled.
4. Allows various volumes to be determined by weight and specific gravity (last section of Unit Conversion sheet).
5. Corrected TWN to match original figures collected from brewers.

Before PR1.4...

1. Reports need to reflect above changes.
2. Warnings have to be layered better.
3. Consequences (warnings and numbers) of typing Y beside "Natural Carbonation" on first line of Section C needs to be completed.

Before Final Release

Link in appropriately with a new forum structure.
Suss out if hyperlinks in spreadsheet are going to be problematic.

...

Please let me know of any questions you have. I won't give you any instructions on how to do the extract stuff. Let's just see if you can work it out on your own first.

Thanks ,
PP

P.S. I set the desired VIF to 24.46 L so as the left and right side of Section B would equal. This makes for an easy starting point to investigate the extract changes.

MODNOTE: Thanks for the below mally. Original post edited accordingly.Nice work Pat!

PistolPatch wrote:1. Allows for sugars and extracts added during the boil. (Section B) [Can't believe my brain didn't blow up ]
2. Allows for grains to be marked as steeped. (Section B)

For these I thought they referred to section C? Just hope it is a typo or I am missing something

Excellent work

I like the 'unit conversion' sheet, it's so sweet! I see what the 'B' does but not the 'S'.

Cheers Pat for the correction. I knew I had missed something there.

MS, I hope you knew that the Unit Conversion Sheet has always been there and that you are just referring to the new bit at the bottom ?

As for the B and the S, the S does nothing except tell you that the specialty grain was steeped, not mashed. You'll know how hashie started this thread and Gordon Strong comments on the differences between mashing and steeping specialty grains. So, that box can basically be used to not only deal with extracts and sugars added in the boil, but also to give additional info on how specialty grains were treated.

The only way of doing this before would have been to add a note in Section I.

....

There's possibly a 4% discrepancy in the above. It will take several hours at least to find so if you notice anything odd, email or PM me please. Don't post it here as most 4% stuff I am aware of and have already discounted.


PP

This is Bill's (wstehling) file from this thread; viewtopic.php?f=43&t=2635#p37559

He has some table sugar in it. Is this the correct way to report table sugar? I set section y to 100%/0% for table sugar and entered a "B" for boiled only in section c.

Spot on mate . Good on you .

SimonT has sent me some stuff as well . Doing the above was pretty tricky and I really won't get a chance to check things fully until the weekend.

What I'll be checking is whether the volume x gravity adds up correctly pre and post boil given the absence of the extract. In a normal, all-grain BIAB, we know that we can multiply the volume x the gravity 'points' and we will get the same number pre and post-boil if we adjust the volumes to ambient. In this 'extract' version though, if we put in a 'sugar/extract' after the boil start we need to adjust for that to see if our numbers balance.

On my first check, I found a 4% discrepancy but I was pretty rushed. If anyone has time to run these "volume x gravity point" checks, please do.


PP

PistolPatch wrote: What I'll be checking is whether the volume x gravity adds up correctly pre and post boil given the absence of the extract. In a normal, all-grain BIAB, we know that we can multiply the volume x the gravity 'points' and we will get the same number pre and post-boil if we adjust the volumes to ambient.

PP

Using my attached file above (Bills Belgian Dubbel), with the 'absence' of the 'B - boil' flag in section C AND section Y table sugar set at 100%/0%, the two sets of numbers matched.

33.49 x 46.2 = 1547
24.97 x 62.0 = 1548

PistolPatch wrote: In this 'extract' version though, if we put in a 'sugar/extract' after the boil start we need to adjust for that to see if our numbers balance.

On my first check, I found a 4% discrepancy but I was pretty rushed. If anyone has time to run these "volume x gravity point" checks, please do.


PP

In my screen shot above, I come up with these numbers (this time using gallons to find the ppg).

table sugar is 0.87 pounds x 46.2 ppg (from section Y) = 40

8.85 gal x 42.5 = 376 (before sugar) + 40 (table sugar) = 416

6.60 gal x 62.0 = 409

In the 'extract' version, the 'liquor to grain ratio' is not working, am I correct? The SWN, Mash Volume and VIB are incorrect, or am I wrong? Attached is a screen shot with all the information.

Version Q

Using the example I posted above, it uses 1 pound of DME. You make 43 ppg by mixing it with 1 gallon. I entered 3.75 L / 0.99 gallons in section W 'Water Used in a Sparge'. This did not adjust the grain bill, but did adjust the 'liquor to grain ratio and the SWN, Mash Volume and VIB. This starting out SWN now seems more correct to me. If this is true, couldn't you use that logic in section W to indicate the amount of water to be added at flame-out along with this DME extract?

EDIT 4-7-2014 : I entered 3.75 L in section W "as a tool" to re-calculate a new "liquor to grain ratio" and to find a new starting SWN volume. I wanted to withhold 1 gallon to mix with the DME later.