If you had been given the recipe in BIABacus form, all most users would need to do is, in Section B, type in kettle height, diameter and desired VIF. Done .

Also notice that anyone being given A BIABacus Recipe Report gets all the critical information clearly laid out. No other recipe report comes close.


PP

w6csmith - re: your Punk IPA Clone recipe.

I have had a quick look through the BIABacus, and have noticed some potential problem areas. I don't know if these are intentional or not, but I thought it prudent to point them out at this stage.

My Buffalo boiler is 38.2cm Diameter, and 35.5cm tall (40.7 L), but maybe yours really is that little bit bigger?
I would recommend a 90 minute boil.
The grain bill looks good (nice and easy)! the last clone I did I used Golden Promise malt which worked well, but this will have no real effect (I guess).

You have set the IBU level to 35 Is this because you wanted to? I would "guess" that the real Punk IPA is more than this (but who really knows)?
Quite a complex hop bill which does look similar to mine (though I couldn't get Ahtanum at the time).

Definitely mash for 90 minutes (not 60).

WLP007 (Whitbread dry) - I can't remember if this is similar to US04/Nottingham yeast, but it may achieve more than 70% attenuation. However, this is out of any real control so just thought I would mention it.

I can see you have been filling in some pre-pitching stuff. It is good to play around with these, but it is easy to forget to remove them as well. I don't touch these until well after packaging, when I have a full set of notes to transfer. Again, just thought I would mention it.

Finally - Whether this will turn out to be a clone of Punk IPA is unknown. I don't think anybody has a high integrity recipe for this (yet). However, I am sure it will be really nice though. I say give it a try and let us know what you think.

PistolPatch wrote:If you had been given the recipe in BIABacus form, all most users would need to do is, in Section B, type in kettle height, diameter and desired VIF. Done .


PP

Yes that's what I did with my first batch using the well regarded NRBs All Amarillo recipe.

Thing is I am fussy and like to try other things. You'll just need to get 30 or so BIABicus files just like NRB's, with different styles ready for all us newbies PP. But I guess we should allow you some sleep now and again. (not too much though there's beer to be brewed)

But seriously I cracked my first bottle of the NRB recipe the other day. Had only been in the bottle a week, so still pretty young. Was great though. Maybe a little sweet for me, but that may change in a week or so. But as I only sampled 1 it might be me, after 5 or 6 pints I think I will get a far better idea how much I like it.

I'm hooked on this BIAB method though, compared to my dark days and extract brewing it just doesn't compare and for very little extra effort you get something so so so much better.

DaveDoran wrote:Hi All,

Looking for feedback on these ingredients. Its for a brewclub meeting for a brew using all Australian made ingredients (Australian grown Cascade). Just wondering if anyone has tried these ingredients together and if they work.
Thanks.

One final Bump

DaveDoran wrote:

DaveDoran wrote:Hi All,

Looking for feedback on these ingredients. Its for a brewclub meeting for a brew using all Australian made ingredients (Australian grown Cascade). Just wondering if anyone has tried these ingredients together and if they work.
Thanks.

One final Bump

I need to read this thread more often.

I have used a similar malt bill, and it's very clean ... which showcases the hop flavors nicely. It basically has to work on the malt front. I couldn't comment on the hops, but if your cascade is anything like the American cascade, it'll play well with just about anything.

My guess is the wheat is just in there for head retention and body.

Hi Rick,

Thanks for the feedback. Yep got it spot on.

Sorry you got 'lost in the post(s)' here Dave .

File is great and the recipe is interesting. I doubt anyone can help you too much on this, you'll just have to be the pioneer. I'd love to taste this one. Could be fantastic!

Please let us know how it goes and...

Hope we are not too late for you w6. Just add all your zero hops at zero. Your error is not a big deal Have fun!

Just noticed your last file didn't have either of the first two lines of Section D filled out but all's good .

Hi All,
Here's my take on lager from BCS (Munich Helles-page 52) recipe.
I tried to adjust it accordingly to suggestions, found earlier in this thread.
And I just wanted to do last reality check, before I'll mill the grains
It supposed to be, most likely sort of (yeast) starter batch for the following bigger brew.

My biggest doubts are narrowed to few sections:
W - (water & grist ratio) - I'd like to do a dunk sparge. I did it already few times before, with quite good effect on efficiency, though
H - Lager brewing process. Isn't too long for the beer sitting on the yeast cake (autolyse)? Should I do secondary (so far did ales - no problem for 1 month but any longer, is it ok?).

Any critics would be more than helpful. Thanks & Cheers!

w6csmith wrote:I think it's time to go to the pub and drink someone else's beers!

Lol and let us know how it turns out w6 - accidents can be great . I can't see why that beer won't be great especially with you being a hophead .

mirogster wrote:My biggest doubts are narrowed to few sections:
W - (water & grist ratio) - I'd like to do a dunk sparge. I did it already few times before, with quite good effect on efficiency, though
H - Lager brewing process. Isn't too long for the beer sitting on the yeast cake (autolyse)? Should I do secondary (so far did ales - no problem for 1 month but any longer, is it ok?).

Lovely job on the file miro .

My only comments are as follows...

1. You really shouldn't see any improvement in sparging. I've done several side by sides on it and there is no difference. Sometimes it's easy to think the was an improvement in kettle efficiency for a variety of wrong reasons (I can give more details on this if you'd like). In other words, it is usually another factor that has been the result of an apparent increase so don't trap yourself into a complication that is unnecessary.

2. You'll see a lot of posts, including this site, that say that leaving the beer on the yeast cake doesn't matter. I'm pretty sensitive to acetaldehyde and on my next brews, I am going to pull them off the yeast cake a few days after active fermentation finishes. I want to see how that goes as I still sometimes get acetaldehyde. I think that some styles can probably handle it and maybe some styles don't.

Anyway, if you do use a secondary for a lager, then you can also use that to condition in for a while assuming it is an air-tight container and can be kept cool after fermentation is finished. I used to use the cubes that I now no-chill in for secondarys. Just make sure you release the pressure every so often.

Also if you pitch below the fermentation temp, there will be no need for the diacetyl rest but I often still do one anyway. Why not!


PP

Aaahh Pistol Patch, you got me! I'm such a sucker for flattery Thank You Sir, Thank You so much
OK seriously now. I'm a huge fan of BIABacus (it's my default software, and as I mentioned before, I did few ales with it). Can't enough recommend it (same as biabrewer.info) in other interwebs, whenever I have an opportunity!
Such a fine masterpiece!

Ad 1. So you suggesting, that I should do full volume, traditional biab mash? Never, ever did it before, haha, that's true (ok maybe looong time ago). But with such small batch. Why not?!
Ad 2. I might even do 2 parallel, similar batches (helles and dunkel), using the same yeast (again, small batches and my starter is already big enough for 2). One will go quicker off the yeast than the other, and I'll see myself

One more thing, and I'm sure that I saw the answer somewhere: efficiency in section X.
My previous batches were around 75-85% Should I fill it in, or leave blank as it is?
Thanks again PP!
Love your mad dedication to this forum!

Hey again miro ,

Glad you are enjoying the BIABacus. We should have a last pre-release or maybe even the first release out with help shortly. After that hopefully time can get spent on making info here easier to find which would be tops! And, good on you for spreading the word.

Yep, go the full volume.

As for the efficiency thing, here's the go. Kettle efficiency is a variable, not a constant. It will be higher for low gravity brews and vice versa, The BIABacus works this out for you. What you might notice though after a few brews is that the BIABacus might be consistently under-estimating your kettle efficiency. Let's say you noticed that your kettle efficiency seemed to be always 5% more than estimated then, what you would do is set up Section X as follows... There is really never any need to use the "or set it to" field except for advanced users investigating poorly published recipes.

This concept of kettle efficiency being a variable is not well known because other software can't handle it. The misconception that efficiency is fixed leads to all sorts of educational problems. It's one of the many reasons why people might think sparging improves efficiency when it doesn't. What happens is they do their first brew and it's a 1.065 beer. They full-volume it and think their efficiency is poor so they hear that sparging improves things. Next beer they sparge but they have only brewed a 1.050 beer. Their efficiency jumps and they think it is because of sparging when the real reason was that they were brewing a lower gravity beer. They then go and post everywhere how much sparging improves their kettle efficiency .

Other reasons people can jump to this conclusion are...

1. Making an assumption from one brew. Numbers for one brew cannot be trusted.
2. On the first full volume brew they may have only mashed for 60 minutes, On the sparged one they end up leaving the grain in contact with water for longer. Same result would have occurred if they just full-volumed mased for longer.
3. First brew may have been a 60 minute boil. They then realise they should boil for 90 mins. This also increase efficiency a little as the grain gets washed in more water.
4. Different water on different brew days. Municipal water can vary greatly sometimes in a single day. This can affect kettle efficiency.
5. Different grain batches.

There's more things but that will give you a good idea I reckon .

Hope that gets you sorted miro ,
PP

Absolutely PP!! Thank you so much for taking your time and answering in such awesome (as usual) way . Your ideas and points made me thinking and they'll certainly influence my brewing process.
It's really great privilege and luck to meet such passionate people here.
That's why I love this forum. You guys, 'down under' are really special kind of brewers

Flattery will get you everywhere . Much appreciated .

Ok, I am not super computer literate and this is my first time posting a file here. I have been using the Biabacus for about a year without making any default changes and using Brewing Classic Styles for recipes. I want to dial it in a bit so I was going to try the NRB's Amarillo Ale recipe on here. I made some changes to the default section but want to know if I'm thinking right.
I changed KFL to 0 because I just dump everything into the fermentor once it is cooled down. Is that right? I notice when I do that it changes my mash volume 3.85 gallons down to 3.53 gallons. That is great if that is true bc I could get more beer out of the same vessel. Am I doing that right?
I changed the evaporation rate to 1.9L/hr which seems to be what I get on this crappy stove (I move every 3-6 months for work so that is constantly changing though). Does that sound right?
I appreciate any help and really sorry if I posted this in the wrong spot or screwed up the attachment.

Monkeyman - I have had a quick check through your file and noticed the following (by the way I think you have won the gold medal for the longest BIABacus filename ).

I think the VAW for BCS recipes is recommended to be set at 22.7L (not a big discrepancy here).
Setting your own IBU level is also a good idea (with BCS recipes) as it has been noted that the original recipes are based on extract brews, and therefore will have a higher hop utilisation than all grain recipes. I see you have already done this.

Not sure if you wanted to do it this way but it is also recommended to do a mash & boil for 90 minutes. Mashing for 90 with a mashout step will help get a few more gravity points. Boiling for 90 minutes covers all beer styles. I see here you have set at 75, so should be OK (who knows)

Setting your KFL to zero is OK (I do it to) but it will increase your FPL somewhat as you will have a little more debris in the fermenter. How much this will be is anyones guess. I would just say there is a chance your VIP will be a little lower.

Other than that I cannot see much else, just thought I would point out the above in case it was/was not a conscious decision.

Thanks for the reply Mally. Looking forward to trying this recipe and some others on here.

DaveDoran wrote:

DaveDoran wrote:Hi All,

Looking for feedback on these ingredients. Its for a brewclub meeting for a brew using all Australian made ingredients (Australian grown Cascade). Just wondering if anyone has tried these ingredients together and if they work.
Thanks.

One final Bump

Brewing this tonight.
The wort tastes great. So far so good. Hopefully it keeps on this path.

Another quick question about the NRB Amarillo Ale recipe that I posted above. I ended up using the amounts that the Biabacus converted for me in the grain bill but at the last minute decided to add .25 oz of Carapils to the recipe. How do I add that to the Biabacus if it isn't part of the original recipe? Thanks for the reply and Happy Easter.

Thanks for the reply, that did the job.