Post #151 made 14 years ago
Pat wrote:Will read the above properly soon Stu but will be uploading another version soon.

If renaming fields is laborious, I will do it.
Okay, if you decide to rename a named value you basically re-add the same value with a new name. Then you have to go through every other named value and check that they don't reference the old name. Then you have to go through every cell formula and check that they don't reference the old name, and then you also need to check the macros too.

You can use Find & Replace to do the Cell Formula checking
I have already just added about 20 names just to get the Recipe Template working so this is important!
Yes, it makes the logic manageable :)
A major priority with the Calc is to get new brewers looking/studying their brew day so measuring mash volume is something to be encouraged. (It is not about getting people to capture data for me - it is about learning/improving/educating). It is not a big deal and erring on side of 'learning' should always be the priority.

All existing software is poor on presentation and consideration of new brewers and/or first-time users. That won't be us though will it :thumbs: :champ:

(BTW, I hope that me being able to use multiple columns is goint ot be okay in the Recipe template, otherwise I have just wasted the last several hours :argh:)
It shoudl be okay, just select all your cells and try copy/pasting them into a blank message and see how it comes out ;)
(Second note: We are going to assume brewers are not going to change their equipment. If they do, then they have to re-start their brew history or take an educated guess. No software can solve that scenario.)
The brewing history as of the previous version did, at least more than any other software
Last edited by stux on 09 Jul 2011, 22:09, edited 6 times in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #152 made 14 years ago
sigurdur wrote:One thing I noticed that is missing, but vital (if you want to use this for recipe formulation). The wort colour is not calculated (either by EBC or SRM).
The calculator has always (so far) been about recipe scaling to your equipment and batch size, not actual formulation

My vision for 2.0 is that this limitaiton remains.

I think 3.0 will have more formulation features, but for the moment if you want to do recipe formulation I would recommend using BIAB Beer Designer or Beer Smith 2

(Its what I do ;))

The calculator doesn't calculate colours because it doesn't do anything different for any different grain other than have x entries of grain each with a different ratio
Last edited by stux on 09 Jul 2011, 22:13, edited 5 times in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #153 made 14 years ago
Pat wrote:Recipe Template work so far....

Named Sheet1/Cell B10 "RecipeName"
Named Sheet1/Cell B15 "RecipeSource"
Named Sheet1/Cell I15 "RecipeLink"
Named Sheet1/Cell A59 "RecipeNotes"
Named Sheet1/Cell C14 "PotType"
Named Sheet1/Cell D14 "PotVolume"
Named Sheet1/Cell I14 "MashTime"
Named Sheet2/Cell M17 "TotalIBU"

Changed Sheet3/Cells M10:17 to 1 decimal point

Deleted Pot Height from Sheet 1 and moved Mash to left. (Step mash not considered)

Named Sheet2/Cell A6 "Grain1"
Same logic through to A12
Named Sheet2/Cell F6 "GrainWeight1"
Same logic through to F12

Just noticed I am going to have to add another column on the left of the Recipe template and un-merge and re-merge nearly every single thing I have done. (Lesson learned - start on the hops first!)

Can you computer guys tell me if what I have done will even work? :P
Pat, can you please try to use the naming system that I started using when adding named cells.

I use the first two letters to signifiy which sheet the cell is on or belongs to. For example "GB_" is Grain Bill and all the Grain Bill names begin with "GB_", this means all the grain bill values are listed together

This is important because there are many values which have similar names on different sheets and its necessary to know which is which

It also helps find all the values which have been defined for a given sheet, because they are all clumped together

I know "Vs_", which was short for "Volumes Etc" is no longer short for "BIAB Calculator" but there are a lot of cells already named with that scheme and I would appreciate it if you stuck with it

Or if you want to rename all the names to "BC_" then that would work too, but then ALL the "Vs_" names have to be renamed... including in the macros

Thankyou
Last edited by stux on 09 Jul 2011, 22:21, edited 5 times in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #154 made 14 years ago
Co-ordination

I can't see any solution to people working on the same spreadsheet simultaneously I must say. Isn't this the problem here?

For example, stux and I in similiar time zones might get the 'urge' to do some major work on the sheet. (I have been doing this most of the day while not knowing if anyone else has been working as well let alone if it is on something easy to copy or not). But what if we have the same urges at the same time?

Isn't the real key giving feedback on what has been done so far and communicating to each other clearly that "I am on a roll" or something?

I think we are actually doing amazingly well here so far.


(Stux: Sorry mate on the naming but this is really difficult for me. I don't understand most of the field names. If you could provide a table/list of what names you have used so far and what they mean, that would help me and probably others identify the logic. As mentioned, I am happy to spend the laborious hours cleaning up stuff but not until I am told whether what I have done is actually good or bad. Cleaning stuff up is easy time for me :). Mind you, I don't have many 'easy time' hours available as there are only 24 every day!)

One thing I find very good in situations like this is Skype. Instead of writing thousands of words here, two people can quickly solve unanswered questions and then post up their conclusions for consideration. A single person putting over a view and waiting for a response while "having the urge" is pretty limiting but it seems to be sufficing here - only just though!

I'm always amazed at what you computer guys can do however the result always needs to be considered from a first-time users point of view. This is the greyest area of all!!!
Last edited by Pat on 09 Jul 2011, 22:33, edited 5 times in total.
Are you a "Goodwill Brewer?" Pay forward and Buy Some BIPs ;)

Post #155 made 14 years ago
178 posts in this thread. 52 of these have been made in the last 24 hours.

Time to re-group and work out priorities! Seriously, a lot of important stuff is slipping by or being ignored.

I, have spent all day on this and still see very important issues raised that I have not acknowledged, responded to or had time to think on with quality.

I've mentioned several times what I think is important but what do you think?

:interesting:
Pat
Are you a "Goodwill Brewer?" Pay forward and Buy Some BIPs ;)

Post #156 made 14 years ago
I know there were a massive number of posts in the last 24 hours, but unfortunately, this is a busy weekend for me (packing for Scout Camp today, getting my son to Scout Camp tomorrow), so I'll have to catch up as I can. I have added a few things to "Unanswered Posts". #5 I mentioned a few posts ago. #6-8 are new.



[center]Where We Are At[/center]
[center]Copy and paste this post anytime you want to add or subtract anything.[/center]

I've noticed that it is easy to miss a lot of stuff in this thread. For example sig and smyrna made a few suggestions or asked questions yesterday that we haven't addressed yet. If something slips past, add it here.

Things Needing to Be Completed

1. Style Guide Incorporation
2. Recipe Report Incorporation
3. Layout (highest priority for now is finding four decent colours).

Things Now Broken

1. Comments: Many are no longer visible or the box has changed in size. Any ideas?

Unanswered Posts

1. Programming suggestions made by Sig here. (Pat unable to answer.)
2. Scaling versus Weight question by Sig made here (Might need more detail Sig as I am having trouble seeing what you mean.)
3. Calculated Cell Protection: stux has given feedback on this. Still wondering if Sig can find a way around this 'Advanced Button' proposal that would hide some tabs and protect calculated fields.
4. Colour suggestions need to be made. (I have checked out colour links made and will explore them more shortly.)
5. Add brew date and name of beer to Brew History, suggestion made by smyrnaquince here
6. I have seen recipes (Belgian Dubbels) that call for two yeasts. I assume that the brewer could enter two yeasts in the appropriate cell, but I just wanted to bring this up in case people feel that there needs to be an extra cell for the second yeast.
7. Do we want to allow for a mash-out step? If so, we need a place to record temperature and time. (Future Version issue? If so, move this entry there.)
8. We do not allow for (i.e., have cells to record) any kind of step mash at different temperatures. (Future Version issue? If so, move this entry there.)

Things to Consider for Future Versions

1. Make Ingredient Tables Unrestricted.
2. Make Brew History Unrestricted - like ianh has.
3. Consider adding Ingredient List - Still retain the 'generic grain' option though.
Last edited by smyrnaquince on 10 Jul 2011, 00:35, edited 5 times in total.

Post #157 made 14 years ago
Thank you Smyrna (again) and thank you Sig (again)! (Excuse me not addressing your posts directly... You'll see why below.)

You, like a few others here, are making a real difference. (I hope the below addresses what I think must be obvious concerns.)

[center]The History of The Calculator (first three sheets)[/center]
The Calculator (the one you see on the board at time of writing) was originally developed by BIABrewer.info and it took masses of hours and collection of figures to do this. Although we see it now as pitiful, the thought that went into it should still be respected and appreciated by all. It still provides the backbone of anything we have done here.

Since then, with BIABrewer's continual encouragement and input, the bitterness formulas have been improved immensely by stux (along with all your help) and now they are right (I hope, though I haven't checked in a while. Has anyone?). The converting to three systems (metric, US and Imperial) is outstanding!

Stux has also amazed me with what he has done in his Maxi-BIAB section though I had to have an hour and a half phone call with him for him to explain it to me :lol:.

And this is the problem. Stux has done brilliant work on the Maxi-BIAB side (and the bitterness formula of the pure side) and we are all giving him as much credit as we possibly can for this. But, nearly all visual and usability improvements have been done by others and they are not being given appropriate respect or consideration.

Stux does not 'own' this project and nor do I. (I assume he would agree with this as I know he likes 'OpenSource.')

The way I am seeing it, BIABrewer and stux have been magnificent contributors here to date but that is now holding us back and preventing some of you from 'jumping in' whereas this is exactly what you should be feeling free to do. (Thanks to you who have!)

[center]Possibilities for You[/center]
Stu started this thread with enthusiasm (good on him!) but without a 'heads up' to BIABrewer. BIABrewer had a totally different view on starting this thread :). It has all worked out well to date but I think, stux and BIABrewer have too much 'power' now, if you like, in this thread. BIABrewer does not agree with this.

I still agree with Stu's name being at the top of the 'Maxi-BIAB Calculator' but I don't see why all your names (those actively contributing here) shouldn't appear with equal prominence on any 'calculator' we release (i.e. variations on the first three tabs) because you guys have been making as many differences as anyone else on the first tabs.

I also think we are now at the stage where it might be a good idea for two separate projects to be created. One being, a "Maxi-BIAB" project and one being a "BIAB" project. Stux loves the "Maxi-BIAB" challenge and I love the "Layout/Presentation Challenge." So perhaps Stu could run one project and I the other? Maybe Stu would even like to continue working on his own, with bugger-all help, as he has done for ages? (Don't know how he does it!)

Down the track, of course, we could collaborate but for now, I think two separate projects would be sensible and more efficient.

If any of you think this is a good idea then PM me or, if brave enough, comment here.

If I project manage the main calculator, I would need a team to operate in a hidden forum where all participants offer feedback and/or expertise and consistently give feedback to any suggestions - exactly as some of you are doing here. It's a big ask. Updates would be posted on the main forum regularly and anyone who offers consistent feedback there should then be invited to the hidden forum where we try to get most things right before letting things run wild.

If stux wanted the same as above, then that is easy and if anyone wants to be a member of both groups (apart from stux and myself), then they should definitely do so.

Stux's group (or himself, if he chooses) would be free to 'publish' their calculator any time they think appropriate as long as they accept responsibility for answering any questions their publication may require. My group would be focussed highly on detail, layout and quality for all users bar "Maxi-BIABers".

There are many holes in the latest draft. I think that having a group focussed on the first few sheets will be the fastest way to fix them.

Cheers,
Pat

Edit: Just worked out... That's actualy about 17 out of the last 24 hours (minus a few breaks) I have spent on this single topic just today. And, I worked and did some other stuff for about 4 hours! No way that anyone can keep up with the current pace I reckon. I used to enjoy my weekends :lol:.
Last edited by Pat on 10 Jul 2011, 03:05, edited 5 times in total.
Are you a "Goodwill Brewer?" Pay forward and Buy Some BIPs ;)

Post #158 made 14 years ago
I've been looking at the current calculator's numbers compared to BeerSmith 2 and I've noticed a discrepancy has crept back.

Our calculator is applying the evaporation loss to the cooled end/start of boil volumes, whereas BeerSmith 2 is applying them to the hot volumes.

As an example

BS2 takes the Into Fermenter volume of 23L, then adds the Loss to Trub (2.56) then adds the cooling loss 1.06 to get an end of boil volume of 26.58L

Then it adds the evaporation of 8.07L to get 34.65 pre-boil vol

our calculator is ending up with the same end-of-boil 100C volume of 26.59, then subtracting the cooling loss, then adding the evaporation to get a cooled SOB volume of 33.52, then re-apply a cooling loss correction to get a SOB 100C volume of 35.02L

this half litre difference is because we're subtracting the evaporation from the cooled volumes rather than the hot volumes.

In the interests of maintaing congruency with BeerSmith 2 I think the evaporation should be subtracted from the Hot Volumes.

More so, a cooled Start of Boil Volume is impossible to measure as the SOB Volume is always going to be somewhere between the Mash Out temperature and the boiling temperature.

The BeerSmith 2 (and Maxi-BIAB) End of Boil and Start of Boil volumes are at 100C
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #159 made 14 years ago
More so,

I know that one of the reasons that the calculator shows SOB/EOB volumes at Ambient temperatures is so that things add up simply.

Perhaps we could solve this issue by showing the cooling loss, just like BeerSmith 2 does

Start of Boil Volume 100C = Packaged Volume + Fermenter Loss + Kettle Loss + Cooling Loss + Evaporation

Start of Boil Volume 20C = Start of Boil Volume / 100C Factor

Water Required = Start of Boil Volume 20C + Grain Absorption

Mash Volume = Water Required + Wet Grain Displacement



I would like to change BIABCalc 2.0 so that it matches this logic...

Is that okay?
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #160 made 14 years ago
PS: I like the dark grey/light hilites that Pat used in his original Jul 09 update, before that was replaced with the dotty cells
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #161 made 14 years ago
Another difference is that we use a 20C->100C factor of 4.451%, BS2 uses 4%

I don't know which is more correct...
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #162 made 14 years ago
I've made the change I talked about in the previous posts to a sheet, and I have screenshots of the relevant BS2 and BC2 areas to compare/contrast

I use a Kettle Loss %ge of 12% in both BS2 and BC2, so I changed the 17.95% default to that.

I also removed the Dotty Cell shading as I couldn't read the values.

I have based this on pat's V1 changes above.

I needed to do this because I'm actually trying to do a brew/experiment right now... and I need the BS2 and BC2 numbers to match for the experiment to go ahead!

As has been said in other places, a BC2 batch (into packaging) of 21.3L = a BS2 batch of 23L (into fermenter)
BS2 23L Batch.png
BC2 21.3L Batch.png
You should note that firstly

Volume Into Fermenter (BC2) = Batch Size (BS2) = 23L
Kettle & Trub Buffer (BC2) = Kettle Loss (BS2 = 2.56L

I have changed BS2's cooling factor to 4.45% to match BC2

Cooling Loss (BC2) = 1.14L
Cooling Loss (BS2) = 1.19L

BUT if you divide BS2's Cooling Loss by the cooling factor you get 1.14L again, which is interesting... I don't know if this is a bug in BS2... or not, as can be seen, the actual results are the same as ours...

End of Boil Volume - Hot (BC2) = Post Boil Vol (BS2) = 26.7L

Evaporation for this Brew (BC2) = Boil Off (BS2) = 8.07L

Start of Boil Volume - Hot (BC2) = Est Pre Boil Vol (BS2) = 34.77



My point is, we match BS2 basically EXACTLY if we apply the evaporation loss to the hot temperatures.

I think it is in our best interests to match BS2, and as such we should apply the Evaporation losses to the hot temperatures. Also, we should consider updating our temperature factors to match BS2 as well.

Along the same lines, perhaps we should consider changing the primary control volume from Packaged Volume to Fermenter Volume.

This would have a few benefits

1) Our "Brew Length" would match BS2's Brew Length
2) The Fermenter Trub estimates would no longer affect the initial water requirements
3) People have fixed size fermenters, thus the critical value to them is how many L they can fit in their fermenters safely.
4) Deriving Kettle Loss from Packaged Volume is crazy as the two are not really connected... But the Fermenter Volume is directly related to the Kettle Loss because End of Boil Volume - Fermenter Volume = Kettle Loss.
Maxi-BIAB Calculator Jul10 - stux.xls
So, in summary

1) Our "Brew Length", ie the value the user changes to change everything else, should be the "Into Fermenter Volume"
2) We should use the same Expansion Factor as BeerSmith 2, even if BS2's value is not perfect
3) We should subtract the evaporation loss from the hot volumes.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by stux on 10 Jul 2011, 11:32, edited 5 times in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #163 made 14 years ago
Morning!

I missed out a key sentence in my last post here. I have just added it... "The converting to three systems (metric, US and Imperial) is outstanding!"

stux, that is great you are re-checking everything. Just what is needed! All you have written above makes sense to me as well.

Any thoughts on sig's post above re focussing on layout and creating a blueprint and my post on trying to allow these guys more input? I can see a lot of skill and experience there waiting to be unleashed and that I think is going to be necessary (and co-ordinated) to get this thing over the several humps ahead.

Can't believe your brewing! No drinking until you chill :lol: (Think I am going to be very lazy today :sleep: .)
Are you a "Goodwill Brewer?" Pay forward and Buy Some BIPs ;)

Post #164 made 14 years ago
Stux,

Thanks for your work! I found a little time (meaning that I am staying up too late considering I'm driving a couple of hours to Scout Camp in the morning. ;) ).

stux wrote: I think it is in our best interests to match BS2
I agree.

stux wrote: Along the same lines, perhaps we should consider changing the primary control volume from Packaged Volume to Fermenter Volume.

This would have a few benefits

1) Our "Brew Length" would match BS2's Brew Length
2) The Fermenter Trub estimates would no longer affect the initial water requirements
3) People have fixed size fermenters, thus the critical value to them is how many L they can fit in their fermenters safely.
4) Deriving Kettle Loss from Packaged Volume is crazy as the two are not really connected... But the Fermenter Volume is directly related to the Kettle Loss because End of Boil Volume - Fermenter Volume = Kettle Loss.
These sound reasonable to me.

stux wrote: So, in summary

1) Our "Brew Length", ie the value the user changes to change everything else, should be the "Into Fermenter Volume"
2) We should use the same Expansion Factor as BeerSmith 2, even if BS2's value is not perfect
3) We should subtract the evaporation loss from the hot volumes.
Again, this all sounds reasonable to me.
Last edited by smyrnaquince on 10 Jul 2011, 11:51, edited 5 times in total.

Post #165 made 14 years ago
Just some thoughts...

First, I don't have a dog in this fight. :) (Do you guys have the same saying?)

I see myself more as a beta-tester than as a coder on this project. (Geez, I last did beta testing over 20 years ago and I was not very popular when I found bugs in the product scheduled for release. Of course, I never found bugs in the parts that *I* wrote.) As I mentioned earlier, I did (for my own use) add metric-US conversions to v1.0. However, what is in v2.x is so much better than what I was doing that I'd rather leave the coding to people better at it than I am. I do enjoy giving suggestions on features that might improve the calculator, though, and helping to ensure that it works for those of us still hampered by a system of measurement the rest of the world has discarded (or does South Africa still use the English system?).

If we can get the first three sheets of The Calculator 2.x done, then the Maxi-BIAB work could proceed using them as a starting point. Separating the BIAB and Maxi-BIAB calulators would be a shame because the first three sheets in them would be bound to differ (in the long run if not in the short run) when they really should be identical.

Could people who enjoy working on layout/presentation (i.e., the user interface) do their work while the people who enjoy formulas/coding/logic flow work on the underlying engine in parallel? If the layout/presentation people base all their work on one version of the engine and do not change the engine (sorry, but this would include variable names), then when that work is done, it could be transferred to a later (ready or nearly ready for release) engine version by editing the latest engine version using Format Painter and by moving rows by copying and pasting (assuming that cell references were done correctly in the formulas).

By the way, because the variable names do not matter to the end user, I am agnostic on the actual choice of variable names.

As far as contributors' names go, there is a difference between copyright and credit. The copyright line is important so someone doesn't download the spreadsheet and turn it into a commercial product. (Yes, they still could do this, but at least the copyright is an impediment.) A copyright also reflects the intellectual property of the creator(s) of a work. At some point, an individual's contributions become significant enough that they are part of a team that created the work and should share in the copyright. I can't make the call as to where that breakpoint is, but I believe that a beta tester falls below the cut line for a copyright. However, an acknowledgements section could be used to give credit to contributors below the cut line. (My name actually appears in published books for this very reason.)

If there is value to what I have been doing, then I am happy to continue giving my comments, observations, and suggestions on appearance and on functionality.

Now I've got to get to bed! :sleep:

Post #166 made 14 years ago
Warning: The "-->" button erases formulas in the Brew History area.

Sig: Only copy the values of the hilited cells, everything else should recalculate
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #167 made 14 years ago
PS: I acheived 93% efficiency on my brew tonight ;)

So I added another 3L to the boil to compensate for it!

The interesting thing is Mashout reading was 98% eff, Pre-boil read as 90% and end of boil read as 85%

Not sure what the hell is up with that, but BS2 called it 93% which sounds like a good compromise :)

I also had an absorbtion rate of 0.456L/KG

Also, Maxi-BIAB calculator was spot on to the mm with Mash Volume, where as BC2 was out. Will look into that.

Ended up hitting Original Gravity exactly
Last edited by stux on 11 Jul 2011, 07:53, edited 1 time in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #168 made 14 years ago
I just tried the latest (Maxi-BIAB Calculator Jul10 - stux.xls) and compared it to an earlier version (Maxi-BIAB Calculator Jul09.xls). With the hot vs. cold correction, it was interesting to see that the volumes did come down, but very slightly, e.g., 5.19 -> 5.15 gal for the Approximate Mash Volume, or down by 0.77%!

I noticed that the default value for the Kettle Trub Percentage went from 17.95% to 12.00% between these two versions. (I made them match when I made the comparison.) Is there a default value we could settle on? In addition to getting the formulas right, I think we need to decide on reasonable default values for the light green fields. New brewers will need some guidance. I realize that these values can vary based on the individual brewer's techniques, but is there an average or typical number that we can us?

Post #169 made 14 years ago
Sorry,

That Jul10 sheet had my system value of 12% so that i could match my beersmith 2 profile
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #170 made 14 years ago
sigurdur wrote:
stux wrote:Warning: The "-->" button erases formulas in the Brew History area.

Sig: Only copy the values of the hilited cells, everything else should recalculate
stux: I know .. the button stops working whenever there is a change in the layout, which is why I pointed out a couple of times (after Pat) that the layout needs to be designed first, then the code.
Attached is a version that corrects this bug.

Hmmmm, I'll take a look at it and see if I can come up with a more robust approach
stux, any specific reason you don't have an opinion on the layout design or the project split?
More like I'm just not in the habit of posting when I'm mostly in agreement

Will formulate some thoughts
Last edited by stux on 11 Jul 2011, 08:57, edited 5 times in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #171 made 14 years ago
What I think I'm going to have to do here is separate the Maxi-BIAB Calculator project from the 'Calculator' project as too many things are getting lost. For example, much of the work I did on Saturday I will now have to re-do so for me it seems to be 4 steps forward, three steps back :lol:.

So, I will rename this thread and leave Stu alone with it. He can rename the spreadsheet here, "Maxi-BIAB Calculator" or whatever he chooses. He can keep the first pages or lose them. In other words, there is no need for him to worry about full-volume BIAB unless he wants to and there is no need to worry about checking with anyone else before making decisions unless he wants to. If he comes up with something great then it can be his (though hopefully he will acknowledge the original Calculator and those who help him along the way.)

I'll manage the 'Calculator' as I know what things will percuss through the entire site and I know I can get important/major help/feedback from many of you who have been contributing so well here. I won't be worrying about Maxi-BIAB in that sheet.

Much has been achieved here in the last few weeks. Brilliant stuff! Impressive stuff! Good on you stux and good on the rest of you!

Let's see what we all come up with :thumbs:
Pat
Are you a "Goodwill Brewer?" Pay forward and Buy Some BIPs ;)

Post #172 made 14 years ago
I think splitting the projects is a mistake

The upload I uploaded yesterday was to demonstrate a suggested change

Most of us seem to have agreed to that change, and I don't mind reimplementing it into what ever you've come up with in the mean time

I haven't touched the maxi tabs in ages, so I don't really see what this has to do with maxi-biab

The fact is, I've been working on the calculator, not the maxi biab calculator and I've been starting my changes on the latest uploaded layout version each time, as long as the layout versions weren't completely broken

I do think it would make sense to split the layout design and mechanics into two different developments, but the idea would be the mechanics version would be updated to resemble the layout version, if not periodically then eventually

But it does not make sense to simply cast off my efforts at updating THE calculator and call it "Stux's Maxi-BIAB Calculator"

Its not, the maxi biab calculator doesn't need the full volume calculator, but I thought it would make it more accessible if it was an extension to the full volume calculator

Now, things have run away,

It's a bit hard to suggest, but it would work better if people let me be responsible for updating most formulas/macros on the spreadsheet, perhaps put suggestions, if agreed I can implement them

Pat and others, I want you guys to come up with what ever layout changes you think works well, but I do also have some thoughts on that, and it's mainly to do with legibility

I'm not tying to steal credit for the BIAB Calculator, frankly i don't care that much about the credit, but if my work gets used by lots of people, then I'm happy to do it, if it doesn't, then I won't bother, the Maxi-BIAB part of the calculator does what i need it to do
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #173 made 14 years ago
PS: I forgot to mention, I tested BrickBrewHaus' strike water temp equation, and I hit my mash temp within 0.1C!!! Considering I was 0.1C off my StrikeWater Temp that's pretty damn amazing!
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #174 made 14 years ago
Modified sigs macro which copies the cells right

It now references a named range to define the cells, which means excel will keep it up to date, which makes it more robust

I actually re-wrote it fully to use a recursive routine so that it won't copy blank columns.

Then added Copy Estimates, Copy Actuals and the Clear History buttons

Works quite well

I also fiddled with the colours a bit and changed a few labels in Column A... not sure if it works. You'll notice some "Target/Actual" and "Estimate/Actual" stuff. The problem is that sometimes the value in the Actuals column is not an estimate, but rather than actual... for example, Estimate column Mash Temp is "target" where as Actual column is achieved

Also, I got rid of the Vs_StrikeTemp2 logic as the first formula seems to work well.
Maxi-BIAB Calculator Jul11 - stux2.xls
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by stux on 11 Jul 2011, 13:36, edited 5 times in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Post #175 made 14 years ago
Added some code which ask you if you want to reset to defaults, hopefully when you launch the sheet the first time.

LMK if it works for you
Maxi-BIAB Calculator Jul11 - stux3.xls
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.
Last edited by stux on 11 Jul 2011, 14:12, edited 5 times in total.
Fermenting: -
Cubed: -
Stirplate: -
On Tap: NS Summer Ale III (WY1272), Landlord III (WY1469), Fighter's 70/- II (WY1272), Roast Porter (WY1028), Cider, Soda
Next: Munich Helles III

5/7/12

Return to “Measurement, Mathematics and Records”

Brewers Online

Brewers browsing this forum: No members and 13 guests

cron