Note, I've copied and pasted the following from this thread. We have the okay to use a BIABacus beta version in this thread only. I'll give some more details when I post the conversion in the next post here.]

Opus X wrote:Thanks. I appreciate the help. Here goes:

Style: American Pale Ale
Name: Sierra
Yeast: Wyeast American 1056
Fermentation Temperature: 62-65 (F)
Original Gravity: 1.057
Total IBU's: 49.32
Color (EBC): 4.8
Efficiency at End of Boil: 72% (Just a guess)
Mash Length (mins): 90
Boil Length (mins): 90
Your Vessel Type (Pot/Keggle/Urn): Pot
Source/Credits: This is a kit purchased from Austin Home Brew Supply

Volumes etc.

Your Vessel Volume (L or gal): 10.5g
Your Vessel Diameter (cm or in): 15 5/8”
Water Required (L or gal): 9.75g
Mash Temperature (C or F): 152 (F)
Volume at End of Boil (L or gal):
Volume into Fermenter (L or gal): 5.25g
Brew Length (L or gal):
Total Grain Bill (g or oz): 11.4lb/ 182.4oz

Grains - Colors - Percentages and/or Weight (g or oz)

Grain 1: 9 lb of American Pale 2 Row/ 1.8L
Grain 2: .8 lb of American Carapils (Dextrine)/ 1.8L
Grain 3: .8 lb of American Caramel Crystal 10L/ 10L
Grain 4: .8 lb American Vienna/ 4L

Hops - AA% - IBUs - Weight (g or oz) at Minutes

Hop 1: 1 oz Perle at 60 min./ 8.2 AA/ 32.51 IBU
Hop 2: 1 oz Cascade at 20 min/ 7 AA/ 16.81 IBU
Hop 3: 1 oz Cascade at 0 min/ 7 AA/ 0 IBU
Hop 4: 2 oz Cascade Dry Hop


Adjuncts/Minerals/Finings etc.

None

Notes:

This will be a BIAB using a 42qt pot (15 5/8” X 13.5”) and propane burner.

[Note: Maybe read this post once I have posted the BIABacus file.]

Before I post the BIABacus here OpusX, let's look at the original recipe.

You have provided excellent info in your post - it's really very good detail.

The only essential thing that was missing was, "Volume at End of Boil (L or gal):" This is the most critical volume number in all-grain brewing recipes but you can hardly ever find any recipes that state it. (Definitley not your fault!)

When no end of boil volume is provided, we have to make some guesses. The process of making the right guess is very hard to explain and I won't go into it in this post. Suffice to say that the BIABacus has some features which make it easy for lunatics like me who like converting recipes to make the best guess possible.

In making my guess, I have checked three 'indicators' to try and gauge the integrity of the original recipe. Your guess of 72% End of Boil Efficiency (EOBE) works out very nicely if the original brewer had no kettle trub losses. (The colour estimates match.)

This straight away tells me that the integrity of the original recipe is compromised to some degree. I'm guessing that well over 95%, probably a lot more, recipes on the internet or from recipe reports are inaccurate so this recipe is certainly not abnormal.

For example, we can't use the IBU estimate as an indicator as we don't know if the formula used was Tinseth, Rager, or Garetz. (If it was Tinseth, then the formula used is wrong. This is not uncommon at all.)

...

I'm sorry to write so much above that complicates things for you. If you let me know where you got this recipe from, I'll be able to explain why I am questioning some of the numbers from the original recipe. In the meantime though, I am going to make a judgement call and assume that the original brewer did have some kettle trub. I am going to assume they had 2 L (0.53 G) of it.

In other words, in the next post, in the BIABacus, you will see that I have assumed an EOBV-A in Section C of 21.87 L (5.78 G).

Are you totally bored yet?

[center]Request from BIABrewer.info re BIABacus...[/center]

- Please do not post the BIABacus for now in any other threads or on any other forums yet as it is incomplete.

- Please read here

...

Back on topic - OpusX's Sierra Conversion

In the BIABacus file below, I have done my best at interpreting the original recipe. There are two key issues...

1. A first glance at The BIABacus might seem daunting as there is a lot of info there on one page. Just take your time and ask any questions you like.

2. If you can provide me with more details on the source recipe, we can quickly improve my interpretation.


PP

I probably won't be brewing for acouple of weeks until the weather breaks a bit.So.PP,are there any great changes here from the one I have been using for last month?
It has been spot on and I really don't have time to check out the new one closely.
After all, I believe you are leading the second half of that Cheezy thing BB is doing,and I have to study!!
Lylo

I am going to win Cheese!!!!!!!!!

I don't think there would be any critical changes from the version you have as I haven't been able to have a good run at it over the last two months. Hopefully I'll get a few days in the next few weeks to tidy up a few things. These are more layout issues than logic ones.


PP

Cool Pat,I have used it for the last 5 brews and I haven't noticed a single misstep!

Just used the BIABacus for my first brew and it is GREAT. Thanks.
Notes:
1. While I'm brewing I update the BIABacus on my laptop while I brew. I like to see as much as possible on the screen. I resize the BIABacus to 70% and it works a treat.
2. Love the hops Form and Method fields. Helps a lot when using pellets & leaf.
3. At the end of section O (Your Estimated Values) it says "Advanced trub management methods have been used" in red. I did not change any of the standard figures. Is this message normal? [ADMIN NOTE: This will not appear in the latest version. See next post for full details.]

Thanks again.
lambert

Lylo and Opus...

BIABrewer has been busy writing posts in this thread fixing my errors .

In that thread, the first post now contains an improved version of my conversion above. It's not major stuff but you can read the changes in the third post of the above thread.


PP

Good on you Opus,

The whirfloc is always a good idea - it can only help. Using a sock for the hops makes a big difference as will your screen. In section L of the BIABacus, if you put a "Y" beside 'Hopsock', it will reduce your kettle trub estimates. So definitely do that. With your set-up you may well gt very little trub. If this is the case, you can over-ride the 'Kettle to Fermentor Loss (KFL)' default in the "BIABacus Default Adjustments" section.

The mash-out will increase your efficiency so do it if it's not too hard with your set-up. If not, just delete that step from the BIABacus and the auto-efficiency will lower a little. We're not sure yet if the mash-out increases efficiency into kettle because of the extra time the grain is in contact with the water or because of the higher temperature. It's probably a bit of both.

To do the mash-out, if you have a way of suspending the bag in the wort but well away from the bottom of the kettle then do that otherwise you'll have to continually stir the mash while the heat is being applied. Do this a few times anyway even if you can suspend the bag. As soon as you reach 172 F give the mash a good mix to ensure the heat has gone through the grain and then you can pull the bag.

If you get confused on anything in the BIABacus just let us know.

Have fun !
PP

Welcome to the forum Dauthi ,

The post above is great and has all the info needed. I have to shoot off now but can do the recipe for you tomorrow (in about 10 hours).

Your variations to the recipe will be fine. Not too sure on the demineralized water. This usually needs building back up in some way. Is your tap water no good?

Catch you tomorrow,
PP

Dauthi,

cold water dilution should help it to cool down quite quickly!

When I started out brewing I carried the hot wort to the bathtub with cold water in it. I added a few ice cubes to the bath water and got the wort down to pitching temps. I kept it covered most of the time to keep splashes out of the pot.

After a while I built a immersion chiller out of copper tubing to quicken the cooling process. It work for a year or so. After I had three batches get infected (in a row)!! I found that a leak in my immersion chiller was letting well water drip in the pot to infect my beer! I learned about No-chill cooling here on this site and I now only no chill my beer! search this site!

Good luck

Hello again Dauthi ,

Your water plan sounds fine and your chilling in the sink is good as well.

Your kettle is pretty small so we are stretching things a bit here. Because your kettle is so wide, I'd consider floating a stainless steel bowl on the wort during the boil to reduce the evaporation rate. Maybe do a trial run with water and the bowl so as we can re-calulate the evap rate.

I've used the original NRB recipe here rather than the mini-BIAB one although this is neither here nor there. I've also use the pre-release BIABacus as that is the spreadsheet that will be getting used from here on. At a first look, it will seem a bit daunting. Like any software, it will take a bit of study to familiarise yourself with it and you will have questions. Just relax and take your time. Some help has been written here. Save a second copy of the spreadsheet so you can play around with it and, ask as many questions you like here.

I've found a problem with copying and pasting the Recipe Report. Let me know if you need t do this and I'll give you a work-around.

Anyway, rather than me explaining what I've done, have a bit of a study and then we can work through any bits that don't make sense or need further explanation.


PP [center]BIABacus 1.0 RECIPE REPORT[/center]
[center]BIAB Recipe Designer, Calculator and Scaler.[/center]
[center](Please visit http://www.biabrewer.info" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; for the latest version.)[/center]
[center]NRB's All Amarillo APA[/center]

Recipe Overview

Brewer: Dauthi
Style: American Pale Ale
Source Recipe Link: viewtopic.php?f=7&t=14

Original Gravity (OG): 1.058
IBU's (Tinseth): 33.9
Bitterness to Gravity Ratio: 0.59
Colour: 8.3 SRM = 16.3 EBC
ABV%: 5.24

Efficiency into Kettle (EIK): 78.1 %
Efficiency into Fermentor (EIF): 70.4 %

Note: This is a Pure BIAB (Full Volume Mash)

Times and Temperatures

Mash: 90 mins at 66 C = 150.8 F
Boil: 90 min
Ferment: 10 days at 18 C = 64.4 F

Volumes & Gravities

Total Water Needed (TWN): 16.89 L = 4.46 G
Volume into Kettle (VIK): 12.15 L = 3.21 G @ 1.054
End of Boil Volume - Ambient (EOBV-A): 10.82 L = 2.86 G @ 1.058
Volume into Fermentor (VIF): 9.75 L = 2.58 G @ 1.058
Volume into Packaging (VIP): 9.03 L = 2.39 G @ 1.017 assuming apparent attenuation of 70 %

The Fermentables Bill

Note: If extracts or sugars are not followed by an exclamation mark, go to http://www.biabrewer.info" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

76.8% Brewferm Pale Ale (3.5 SRM = 6.9 EBC) 2085 grams = 4.6 pounds
15.4% Brewferm Munich 1 (7.5 SRM = 14.8 EBC) 417 grams = 0.92 pounds
7.8% Amber (25 SRM = 39.4 EBC) 211 grams = 0.47 pounds

The Hop Bill

Based on pellet hops and Tinseth IBUs.

16.5 IBU Cascade Pellets (7.3%AA) 10.3 grams = 0.365 ounces at 60 mins
12.7 IBU Cascade Pellets (7.3%AA) 13.2 grams = 0.465 ounces at 20 mins
4.7 IBU Cascade Pellets (7.3%AA) 14.9 grams = 0.526 ounces at 5 mins

Mash Steps

Mash Type: Maxi-BIAB (Part Volume Mash) for 90 mins at 66 C = 150.8 F
Water Held Back from Mash: 7 L = 1.85 G
Water Used in a Sparge: 3.5 L = 0.92 G
Mashout for for 1 mins at 78 C = 172.4 F
Water Added During Boil: 3.5 L = 0.92 G

Miscellaneous Ingredients

1/4 Tab Whirfloc (Boil 5)Mins - Clarity

Chilling & Hop Management Methods

Hopsock Used: Y
Chilling Method: Immersion Chiller (Employed 0 mins after boil end.)

Fermentation& Conditioning

Fermention: Safale US-05 for 10 days at 18 C = 64.4 F
Req. Volumes of CO2: 2.4
Serving Temp: 5 C = 41 F

Maxi-BIAB Adjustments

Water Held Back from Mash: 7 L = 1.85 G
Water Used in a Sparge: 3.5 L = 0.92 G
Water Added During Boil: 3.5 L = 0.92 G

Good stuff!

You'll need to float the bowl to reduce the evaporation as it is more affected by surface area of the wort. Covering with a lid has two problems. Even if you almost completely cover it, the evaporation doesn't reduce that much. If it does, chances are all the stuff you are trying to get rid of by boiling is just dripping back into the pot.

As for chilling, you should definitely chill with your current set-up. That is easiest and with this recipe I suggest you start chilling as soon as the flame is off. Once chilled, whirlpool it, let it settle then transfer and pitch.

You can chill in the fermentor but there is really no reason for you to do this. The size of your kettle makes it easy to chill in the sink/tub and you won't need a ton of water for the chill.

You can put the mash in the oven if you want. Just make sure that you have a few thermometers so as you can check the oven temp and mash accurately. I'd probably just keep it on the stove-top, at least for the first few brews. That will make it easier to check the temp and stir it occasionally during the mash.


PP

PP, is the bitterness/gravity ratio displayed in sections a and s aproduct of the scaled recipe or the original? I expect it is the scaled one,I have never even noticed this cell before and it looks like another good thing that I can fret about.
According to Beersmith this ratio is quite low for an APA. Would we have room in C for the same ratio as calculated for the original?

Great question Lylo ,

I hope I don't do a crappy job at answering this .

In the actuals area, the BIABacus has results and capabilities you won't find in any other program. A lot of thought, hundreds of hours, has gone into the provision of estimated versus actual results. It's a really hard thing to get right. The formulas are very complex but, at the end of the day, they are just, 'black and white,' stuff.

The hardest thing is how and where to display information. From memory, there are well over a thousand 'fields' on the first sheet of the BIABacus. Every label had to be thought through to fit in a small space. Occasionally we had to make a compromise and that's what you are looking at now...

In Section A you will see that there is, 'Expected Original Gravity'. Underneath though you see, 'Bitterness to Gravity Ratio'. If we could have fitted it in we would have written, "Expected Bitterness to Gravity Ratio'.

Everything in Section A is, 'Expected.' This includes IBU, ABV, colour etc. The logic here is, "That's the original recipe/intention."

Section S, while it only has one input field was probably the hardest section to write. It's a section that depending on how many 'actuals' are provided above it, alters the numbers. If you put in nothing, the numbers should match Section or remainblank. If you put in a couple of numbers, things start to happen in Section S but!!!!!!....

... adding actual numbers to Section A would confuse things. This doesn't mean what you are saying or asking for is wrong. In fact, it highlights one of the many ways that the BIABacus can be improved and that we don't have time to do.

For example, more 'reports' are needed to better display some information. Imagine an estimate versus actual report? This would highlight major discrepancies. Unfortunately, reports add a few kb to the BIABacus but these things can be done, without penalty, once we get a few spreadsheet experts on board.

The biggest problem we have in BIABacus PR 1.0 is in the Recipe Report. For a start, there is only one and it prints out actuals rather than originals. Good for the brewer but not for posting on forums. More work! The main problem though for now is that you can't copy it to a forum unless the sheet is unprotected. Only found that out today and still have no 'smart' solution .

Anyway, the basic logic of the BIABacus is that Sections A-M (the first two left-hand columns), should, with very few exceptions be based on what you intend the outcome to be.

One other problem I found today was in Section J. Never even thought of this problem until scaling Dauthi's recipe above. Miscellaneous additions will not scale. In his case, I wrote 1/4 tablet instead of half.

How annoying!!!

Have at it gentlemen! My first try at the BIABacus!

This is the beer I usually brew. Something of a session beer, but it we really like it, and it is drinkable pretty quick. I thought I should try scaling from the original recipe to see if I could grasp the BIABacus( I really struggle with the calculator ) I added my pot dimentions, and then went right down the BIABacus by section.

I guess Im just looking for someone to check my work. The data coming out of the BIABacus is right in line with notes on my last batch.

I could not get BIABacus to allow me to post the recipe report, so I have attached the file. The original recipe and link are below.


http://www.homebrewtalk.com/f66/centenn ... all-42841/

Recipe Type: All Grain
Yeast: Nottingham
Yeast Starter: Nope
Additional Yeast or Yeast Starter: Nope
Batch Size (Gallons): 5.5 & 11
Original Gravity: 1.039
Final Gravity: 1.008
IBU: 21.6
Boiling Time (Minutes): 60-75
Color: 3.9
Primary Fermentation (# of Days & Temp): 4 days at 68 Degrees
Additional Fermentation: Kegged, chilled and Carb'd for one week
Secondary Fermentation (# of Days & Temp): 5 Days at 68 Degrees

****5 Gallon Batch****

Batch Size: 5.50 gal
Boil Size: 6.57 gal
Estimated OG: 1.040 SG
Estimated Color: 3.9 SRM
Estimated IBU: 21.5 IBU
Brewhouse Efficiency: 70.0 %
Boil Time: 60 Minutes

Ingredients:
------------
Amount
7.00 lb Pale Malt (2 Row) US (2.0 SRM)
0.75 lb Cara-Pils/Dextrine (2.0 SRM)
0.50 lb Caramel/Crystal Malt - 10L (10.0 SRM)
0.50 lb Vienna Malt (3.5 SRM)
0.25 oz Centennial [9.50%] (55 min)
0.25 oz Centennial [9.50%] (35 min)
0.25 oz Cascade [7.80%] (20 min)
0.25 oz Cascade [7.80%] (5 min)
1 Pkgs Nottingham (Danstar #-) (Hydrated)


Mash at 150 degrees for 60 minutes.

Lylo

Sorry mate, I forgot to answer your question about BeerSmith. The NRB All Amrill APA recipe is one of the sample recipes in BeerSmith2 but, the recipe there has the reverse hop schedule from memory. (We used to have the same here until a while ago. The problem comes from the original recipe where the aroma hops are listed first and boil ones last). Even if you change the recipes so that they match in both programs, BeerSmith will give a higher IBU estimate as there is an error in the hop formula. So, the B/G ratios between the two programs won't match unless BeerSmith fixes that error.

B/G ratios can be a bit gimmicky if used in the wrong way. In recipe design you are better off looking at gravity and bitterness separately. So, why do we have it?

The main use of the B/G ratio I think is to help the user when they come to make any Pre-Pitching Corrections. If the Pre-Pitching Correction chosen by the brewer causes a large difference between the B/G ratios in Sections A and S, then they might want to re-consider their decision.

Dauthi

That's great you've been able to make some sense of it Dauthi. Good on you .

The Trub Management notice will pop up if you put a 'Y' beside 'Hopsock' or a minute value beside 'Whirlpool' in Section K. It will also be triggered if you put a 'Y" beside 'Secondary Used', 'Crash-Chilled' or 'Filtered' in Section L.

The section K ones automatically lower your 'Kettle to Fermentor Loss (KFL)' whilst the ones in Section L, automatically lower your 'Fermentor to Packaging Loss (FPL)'.

There's a bit more info on this written here. That might explain it in better detail.

2trout

That's perfect . Only discrepancy I can see is that US-05 is typed in for the yeast instead of the original Nottingham. (I suspect you have done this on purpose. I'd use the US-05 too ). In Section L you have a 'Y' beside 'Hopsock' so I assume you'll be using one of those. If not, your kettle trub losses might be a bit higher.

The report printing is a bit of a PITA. I've worked out one way of doing it but it's very clumsy. Hopefully I'll think of something better .

Good stuff Trout!

Thanks for looking PP.

My assumption in sections I, L, are that they would be a bit more subjective than the "Source" sections. By this I mean that in section I and L I could try and follow the source, and enter that data, or I clould enter the data for the process that I use. Does that make sense? While the source used a 3v system and a 60 min mash and 60 min boil, I will be using a 90, and the source used Nottingham yeast but I dont care for Nottingham so Im using us-05, and as such I should entering what Im using in section L (plus there is not a "source vs me" section as there is above for other ingredients.)

By the way, if I haven't thanked you and the other members for all of the work and help provided, let me do so now.
The help you all have provided has been the reason that I have continued to brew.