Re: BIABacus Pre-Release - Your First Impressions

Post #401 made 2 weeks ago
Well, I've had a few hiccoughs the last few months so this is my first post in quite some time. Let's hope I remember how to post!!!

Firstly cheers to @ShorePoints. He's on to everything, a true favourite of mine.
Secondly, hi there @tizoc. Good questions.
Thirdly, to me. I just had a big operation and have had to take a lot of drugs so read the following at your own risk...

Okay I've read the above posts quickly... contrary to what I've read above, I can advise that the BIABacus handles a myriad of calculations - the "spreadsheet" handles a diabolical amount of scenarios. The only constant we have been unable to write into it is bullshit. For example, if you typed, one plus one will equal three, the BIABacus will throw a return of, "Bullshit."

Now, back to you again @tizoc . [I wasn't joking about the big operation. It's taken me out of the game for the last three months and I'm not sure if I can stay in it for another three months. I also pay the bills for this site - I think it's over $40 per month so bear with me.] What I think you might be trying to do is figuring out my calculations rather than the logic behind them. The BIABacus defaults are derived from formulas/algorithms. Formulas/algorithms come from data which I have asked for and so many fantastic brewers have given me.

I have freely given those averages to some other software companies and some others have pinched them.

But the averages we have been at true pains to collect here and others copy are simply, averages. They pinch the average but they don't pinch the point....

For example, Volume Loss from Lauter is not a mysterious thing. Imagine you have two towels in front of you. One is a face washer and the other is a king size towel. Now squash each of those "towels" between your hands. In fact, wring them in your hands as hard as you can. Which towel ends up drier?

The BIABacus will give you a very good default on things like this but it goes way beyond that. For example, it will throw you some pretty cool warnings that other software simply cannot do if you throw brewing scenarios at it that won't work.

But, the BIABacus is not an app (and can't be an app atm as the maths are far too complicated) and, if something isn't an app then what use could it be???

We better ask Yuval :scratch:
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
    • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia

Re: BIABacus Pre-Release - Your First Impressions

Post #403 made 2 weeks ago
Thank you @PistolPatch for taking the time to answer. I'm sorry to hear that, I hope you get better!

What I think you might be trying to do is figuring out my calculations rather than the logic behind them.
It is the other way around! I'm not trying to figure out the calculation, I'm trying to understand the logic behind it.

My intuition says that if I have grain that gives me 250g of sugar per kg used (sorry about the made up numbers, just trying to make things easy), and I use 4kg in 10L, with 0 absorption, I end with 10L of wort having 1kg of sugar in it (100g of sugar per L).

If my grain absorbs 1/2L of liquid per kg*, then to produce 10L of wort, I will have to use 12L of water to account for the 2L lost, but if I don't increase the amount of grain, then the wort is more dilute (83.33g of sugar per L), I end with 10L of wort (2L lost to the grain) but there are only 833g of sugar in it (he remaining 166g are in the wort still in the grain). To account for this sugar loss, then I would have to add more grain too with that extra water (which in return would also require a bit more water, getting some Zeno's Paradox vibes now).

(Note: I know it is probably not as simple as that, because the more water the grain touches, the more it is "washed", and the better the extraction is, but I guess this is accounted for by the estimated efficiency)

Does this make sense? My confusion lies here, because BIABacus takes into account the extra amount of water needed, but not the grain, like if what the grain retained was 100% water without sugar in it.

You can try this in BIABacus by changing the Volume Loss from Lauter setting to ridiculous values like 3 L/kg.

I hope I have explained it better this time, thanks for your patience :)

* this could happen because I'm using a bag that doesn't drain as well, because I don't squeeze, because of a different kind of grain, or because like in my situation, I'm using a second boil kettle and draining the worth from the bottom of the mash kettle to leave the trub behind. The end result is always the same, some wort is lost going into the boil.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From Uruguay

Re: BIABacus Pre-Release - Your First Impressions

Post #404 made 2 weeks ago
Thanks @ShorePoints for the welcome back. Re-reading my post above, I think I may need more time to start talking sense :). And I know Scott has been doing his usual excellent work and that the old faithfuls are still posting (e.g. @mally when they haven't been hit by cyclones (e.g. @Mad_Scientist ) etc.

@tizoc , thanks for your best wishes and apologies for my post above which, on a quick re-read, has a fair bit of off-topic stuff in it. Let's see if I can do a bit better now... You were asking something like...
I noticed in the BIABacus that when I changed the Volume Loss from Lauter, it didn't change the amount of grain needed. Is this a bug?
Well, tizoc, it might be :scratch: :think: :scratch:. So, firstly, congratulations to you on asking the question. That's truly impressive :salute: :salute: :salute:

I suspect it could be but I'm not going to jump straight in and say it is because my brain isn't running at full steam yet and, even when it was running at full steam, I second-guessed and quadruple-checked some of the more complex calculations many, many times only to finally remember that they were correct and why they were correct.

Excellent Thinking

I really admire, after a semi-proper read the way you are thinking tizoc. (I'm looking forward to studying Zeno's Paradox - had never heard of that!) For example, one tool I use to check calculations/assumptions is exaggeration. You mentioned above changing 'Volume Loss to Lauter settings to ridiculous values." Perfect thinking! In fact, changing 'Volume Loss from Lauter' (in a later unpublished BIABacus version, this is called 'Sweet Liquor Retained by Grain') to not even just 3/kg but to 200 or zero only changes 'Total Water Needed.'

And, at a quick glance, that seems wrong but it may not be...

Even if it is a Bug, in Reality...

I'm so pleased to read back over your question and see not only the things I've pointed out above but you also wrote phrases like, '"the more water the grain touches, the more it is "washed."' There are very , very few brewers, amateur or professional, that understand the things you have mentioned.

On a quick "thought experiment," I think that even if it is a bug, one side would balance the other out. In fact, after writing all the above, I think the BIABacus is correct and that I probably have thought this through in earlier stages. (There was an incredible amount of stuff to think through; to this day, mainstream software still has incorrect formulas, ambiguous terminology and no idea of the concepts we have talked about above.)

I may be wrong though tizoc.

If I am wrong, then the ranges we are talking about will be insignificant and "correcting" for the small error may not be as worthy an endeavour as say having the BIABacus include the amount of dry hops used when auto-estimating FPL. e.g. a massively dry-hopped beer will incur a massive 'Fermenter to Packaging Loss,' compared to a beer with no dry hops.

To Finish Up...

In an unreleased version of the BIABacus, I do have it auto-estimating FPL etc based on dry-hopping and some other variables. But, it should not be able to do that. It should throw a "circular error." [NOTE: For anyone that has followed the history of the BIABacus, we've worked on many versions. Kostas was by far the most diligent, humble and clever. After a billion Skype hours we realised that programming something like the BIABacus would take both of us 96 hours a day!

So, at the moment, the BIABacus is a spreadsheet but, the latest version I have here seems to be smarter than those who wrote it. It should not be able to auto-estimate some figures it is doing so I won't be releasing it until I understand it. I do personally use the un-released version and love it but am scared to death there is some error in it.

Anyway tizoc, think this through as hard as you can. I'll also think it through several more times over the next few days. There's definitely nothing major to worry about but, being mathematically correct, or establishing where we are in error, can only help every brewer.

Cheers to you,
PP
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
    • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia

Re: BIABacus Pre-Release - Your First Impressions

Post #406 made 2 weeks ago
PistolPatch wrote:I'm so pleased to read back over your question and see not only the things I've pointed out above but you also wrote phrases like, '"the more water the grain touches, the more it is "washed."' There are very , very few brewers, amateur or professional, that understand the things you have mentioned.
It is not surprising if you consider that when I started brewing two years ago, Palmer's book and this forum were my primary sources, and thats from where I built my basic intuitions (for the "washing" thing, credit goes to you and your "dirty jeans" analogy). All I did was read and learn, the credit for the good source material is yours :peace:
PistolPatch wrote:If I am wrong, then the ranges we are talking about will be insignificant and "correcting" for the small error may not be as worthy an endeavour as say having the BIABacus include the amount of dry hops used when auto-estimating FPL. e.g. a massively dry-hopped beer will incur a massive 'Fermenter to Packaging Loss,' compared to a beer with no dry hops.
Yeah, as I mentioned to @ShorePoints in a previous post, when doing BIAB with "proper technique" (that is, lifting the bag and letting it drain, and also maybe squeezing), it is probably not a big deal, because the difference is likely going to be small from brewer to brewer (or even batch to batch, some people may squeeze the bag sometimes and sometimes not).

I only started wondering about this because of the new "unproper technique" I'm using now (which I'm still investigating and improving). Instead of lifting the bag I now (after recirculating the wort) drain the wort from bellow the big-mash-kettle to a small-boil-kettle (either with a SS racking cane or from the spigot with the help of a pump, haven't decided what is better yet), that way I leave a big portion of trub from the grain behind. But along with that trub also stays some wort, in addition to what stays in the grain from not squeezing the bag.
PistolPatch wrote:So, at the moment, the BIABacus is a spreadsheet but, the latest version I have here seems to be smarter than those who wrote it. It should not be able to auto-estimate some figures it is doing so I won't be releasing it until I understand it. I do personally use the un-released version and love it but am scared to death there is some error in it.
While I can think of things that could be improved in a coded BIABacus version (which at some point I considered attempting), there is nothing wrong with spreadsheets. The only two brewing tools I use at the computer are spreadsheets (BIABacus and Bru'n Water). And not because I'm some sort of lover of spreadsheets, it is just what I felt most comfortable with after trying other alternatives. You built something very good.

And as you noted, replicating BIABacus from scratch is quite a bit of work, it would take some time to both build it and test it. On the other hand I think once (if ever) done, it would be easier to build more things on top of.
PistolPatch wrote:Anyway tizoc, think this through as hard as you can. I'll also think it through several more times over the next few days. There's definitely nothing major to worry about but, being mathematically correct, or establishing where we are in error, can only help every brewer.
For "proper technique" BIAB, I think the calculations are fine as is, trying to account for the small Volume Loss from Lauter differences would complicate things.

For situations like I mentioned, I'm not sure yet, if it were wort it, I'm thinking that maybe Volume Loss from Lauter is not the correct place to handle it, because it is not actually volume loss to the grain, but to post-mash trub. I'm not even sure this is a problem yet being that I'm still experimenting with the method :think:

I will let you know what I find out after trying this for a few more batches.
    • SVA Brewer With Over 20 Brews From Uruguay

Re: BIABacus Pre-Release - Your First Impressions

Post #407 made 1 week ago
Thanks a heap @Scott. (I owe you and some others*)

In the meantime, I have to deal with the likes of @tizoc :lol:

What tizoc describes is a definite error

I've written a PM to tizoc re this and some other stuff such as some of the complexities involved in coding the BIABacus. In that PM, I've explained how to unlock the BIABacus and examine the formulas. The error is not one that is practically significant but, personally, I found it very interesting. In my PM I attempted to share some of the reasons why this error was missed. (Tizoc, please feel free to share those reasons.) I am super-pleased that tizoc found the error!!!

I'll think more and write more on the Volume Loss from Lauter error when I can. It's definitely nothing to worry about so that's good. Can't wait to see if it explains the 'corrections' I had to make in my extreme partigyle brew :think:
PP

*I've been working for about 17 hours straight now. A lot of that has been spent writing. Today was the first day I felt I was able to write well enough to say thanks to two organisations that have astounded me with their care. They were number two on my list of people to thank. You, Scott, are one of the number ones!!! [Please excuse this off-topic note. Back on track now I hope...]
If you have found the above or anything else of value on BIABrewer.info, consider supporting us by getting some BIPs!
    • SVA Brewer With Over 100 Brews From Australia

Return to “BIABrewer.info and BIAB for New Members”

Brewers Online

Brewers browsing this forum: No members and 19 guests