Kegconnection Complete Starter Kit and More Giveaway!


Home Brew Forums > Home Brewing Beer > Brewing Software > Another Beersmith WTF moment...

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-05-2012, 12:46 AM   #21
duboman
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Glenview, IL
Posts: 5,997
Liked 452 Times on 421 Posts
Likes Given: 201

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cwi

Besides getting into yet another of BeerSmith's flaws regarding scaling, it is best to do things one step at a time.

It is best to work only with a copy of a recipe. If you then scale it by picking a new equipment profile, making sure to check the 'keep everything the same' box. You should not have experienced this issue, at least not by what BeerSmith shows you. If you actually do the math by hand, you may find some small errors here and there, which is why you don't want to scale to one profile, scale to a second one (or more), then scale back to the original. Strange things can happen.

What were your steps?
Did you use the scaling tool, then pick the equip profile?
Did you check the 'keep everything the same box?
Did the new "in the kettle' batch size increase over the previous 'to the fermenter' batch size?
I simply opened the recipe, selected the new equipment profile and clicked save as and renamed.

I did not notice a "keep everything the same " probably because i did not use the scale tool, would this have been the proper way to have done this.

I can do it differently because I still have the original recipe.
__________________
Nothing Left to do but smile and drink beer.....

The Commune Brewing Company-Perfecting the "art" of beer since 2010
duboman is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-05-2012, 03:07 AM   #22
cwi
Registered User
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 845
Liked 30 Times on 27 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by duboman View Post
I simply opened the recipe, selected the new equipment profile and clicked save as and renamed.
I think I must have repeated about 10 times in this thread to 'use the scale tool', and check the 'keep things the same' box. This is another shortcoming of BeerSmith in that it gives virtually no warnings when you do something wrong. Even worse, if gives you about 100 ways to do things wrong.

Quote:
Originally Posted by duboman View Post
I did not notice a "keep everything the same " probably because i did not use the scale tool, would this have been the proper way to have done this.
There is almost no other way to properly scale a recipe in BeerSmith. Random things happen almost every other way. The only way I have found to even come close to scaling a recipe is to use the 'scale tool', then select a different equip profile with the new batch size (and everything else you need to change), and check the 'match/keep the same' box (At least that is how I remember getting to it).

I am not even sure why they make you select the box "to keep everything the same". Why would you not want to do that when scaling? BeerSmith is full of pitfalls and booby traps, along with some outright errors. I have brought these to the attention of the author, in his own forum, with no response or acknowledgement. He appears to be playing some kind of game so that he can feign ignorance in the future, but I know that he is aware of the issues.

Quote:
Originally Posted by duboman View Post
I can do it differently because I still have the original recipe.
You always want to keep a copy of a recipe that has been brewed. I am not certain what the 'version' field does, and I wouldn't trust it to make a new copy unless you verify it.

You should be able to make a copy, then USE THE SCALE TOOL to switch to a new profile.

BeerSmith has very few 'wizard' type helpers in it, and even fewer pop-ups to give warnings. You cannot go clickity-clicking around BeerSmith, and hope to get a useable results. You have to be very deliberate when working within BeerSmith.
__________________
cwi is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-05-2012, 11:53 AM   #23
duboman
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Glenview, IL
Posts: 5,997
Liked 452 Times on 421 Posts
Likes Given: 201

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cwi View Post
First topic: Batch size
If your current value in the BeerSmith's "trub and chiller losses" field is .5G, and your current batch size (to the fermenter as it is currently configured) is 6.25G, then your new batch size, once you set trub loss to 0, would be 6.75G. Old Batch Size + Trub Loss = New 'In the Kettle' Batch Size. This will get you your same 6.25G to your fermenter.

You don't need to worry about your fermenter losses, unless you have a specific 'package volume' you are shooting for. Most people max their fermenter volume out, mainly because their fermenters are already sized for the 'package volume' + yeast cake/loss, so shooting for a 'package volume' is not very common. Think 5.5G batch in a 6G better bottle, to end up with ~5G into a corny keg. If you have extra ferm capacity, and do want to shoot for a specific 'package volume', you just need to include the 'fermenter-to-package' losses as well as your 'kettle-to-fermenter' losses. You would scale the batch size to be 'package volume' + 'kettle-to-fermenter' losses + 'fermenter-to-package' losses.

In your current case this would still be 6.75G, but if you knew a new recipe would increase your yeast/trub loss in the fermenter, like for dry hopping, you would just add the extra expected losses to your 'in the kettle' batch size ('batch size' in BeerSmith, with the trub loss field set to 0). You would do the same thing if you just wanted to increase your final 'package volume', only for notekeeping purposes, you would increase your 'package volume', and leave your expected losses according to what you normally experience.

If you wanted to, you could increase the various losses by some percentage related to how much you increased your 'batch size'/'package volume', and/or adjust the losses base on the observed results. BeerSmith propaganda teaches following the later, and primarily adjusting numbers reactively based on observed results only. Users who understand how to predict losses, prefer to make adjustments proactively. Being proactive can save a few brewing cycles when dialing in equipment/recipes.

Second topic: efficiency
Your original 'to the fermenter' efficiency was 80%.
If you trub loss field in BeerSmith was not 0 (you said it was .5G), there is no way for your 'est mash eff' to be 80%. The 'est mash eff' is a number BeerSmith generates based off of 'to the fermenter' efficiency (which the user enters), less any trub and lauter losses.

If your current BeerSmith 'to the fermenter' efficiency is 80%, and your actual observed mash eff has been 80%, you were supposed to have adjusted your 'to the fermenter' efficiency higher to iteratively dial your numbers in. There is no calculator or tool within BeerSmith to generate your new 'to the fermenter' efficiency, even though it is a calculation that only BeerSmith uses for something meaningful. You have to do it by hand with a formula, which BeerSmith doesn't provide, or find a 3rd party tool online. All the numbers are available within your BeerSmith profile for it to do all of this automatically, but, alas, the 'Why do the calcs yourself' program makes you do this BeerSmith specific one yourself.

For now, in the 'brewhouse eff'/'total eff' field, just use your observed average 'into the kettle' mash efficiency, even if it is 80% and the same as your current BeerSmith 'into the fermenter'/'brewhouse'/'total' efficiency. If you did your measurements right, your observed efficiency is the proper value for the new 'in the kettle' eff method.





The issue is the pitfall created by BeerSmith's choice to use 'to the fermenter' efficiency. This pitfall entraps many unsuspecting users, and also makes it very difficult to use fields like trub loss as they would logically be utilized, unless you do a bunch of extra calculations.

Many users, seemingly yourself included, don't even realize they are being impacted, or have to do these extra calcs. This is because most users go by the more common 'in the kettle' efficiency, and don't realize that BeerSmith's brewhouse eff also includes kettle-to-fermenter losses in this number.

The result is, if you increase the value in the trub loss field due to equip mod, leaf vs. pellet hop, etc.; but do not decrease your brewhouse/total efficiency number, the next time you brew a recipe using the updated profile, your OG will be off if everything else you do remains the same. All BeerSmith has done in this instance, is increase your mash water by the increased loss volume. The most devious part is that BeerSmith displays, very proudly, that your predicted OG will still be the same.

Buried in the fine print, and something most users usually don't look at until after brewing, is your new 'est mash eff' number, which has now magically increased, sometimes over 100%. I have explained in further detail in the other threads why this happens, and it really isn't important. What is important is that there are no warnings, popups, red numbers- nothing.

The issue of people getting tricked by BeerSmith aside, even those who understand, intimately, what is happening and how to deal with it, are forced to jerry rig BeerSmith to make it useable. As designed, BeerSmith does not allow for predicting/compensating for trub/hop losses on a per recipe basis. It also requires unnecessary calculations when modifying equipment losses. Recipe sharing is also impacted, because extra(neous) information has to be conveyed with the recipe in order to share recipes, either within or external to BeerSmith. Importing recipes from other places is equally problematic.

These issues would all be resolved, and no impact to users would be felt, if BeerSmith changed to using 'in the kettle' efficiency. I believe the developer knows this, but has too much code based on the current methodology, and doesn't want to invest the time to fix it. Or, he just believes his way is right. If it is the latter, his background would explain things.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwi View Post
I think I must have repeated about 10 times in this thread to 'use the scale tool', and check the 'keep things the same' box. This is another shortcoming of BeerSmith in that it gives virtually no warnings when you do something wrong. Even worse, if gives you about 100 ways to do things wrong.


There is almost no other way to properly scale a recipe in BeerSmith. Random things happen almost every other way. The only way I have found to even come close to scaling a recipe is to use the 'scale tool', then select a different equip profile with the new batch size (and everything else you need to change), and check the 'match/keep the same' box (At least that is how I remember getting to it).

I am not even sure why they make you select the box "to keep everything the same". Why would you not want to do that when scaling? BeerSmith is full of pitfalls and booby traps, along with some outright errors. I have brought these to the attention of the author, in his own forum, with no response or acknowledgement. He appears to be playing some kind of game so that he can feign ignorance in the future, but I know that he is aware of the issues.


You always want to keep a copy of a recipe that has been brewed. I am not certain what the 'version' field does, and I wouldn't trust it to make a new copy unless you verify it.

You should be able to make a copy, then USE THE SCALE TOOL to switch to a new profile.

BeerSmith has very few 'wizard' type helpers in it, and even fewer pop-ups to give warnings. You cannot go clickity-clicking around BeerSmith, and hope to get a useable results. You have to be very deliberate when working within BeerSmith.
Sorry, In reading the posts I missed the "Use the Scale Tool" part
I'll go back to my recipes and give that a whirl.........
Saw you tried to pm me but my mailbox was full, I cleaned things up if you wanted to try and re-send
__________________
Nothing Left to do but smile and drink beer.....

The Commune Brewing Company-Perfecting the "art" of beer since 2010
duboman is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-05-2012, 02:50 PM   #24
cwi
Registered User
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Location: Austin
Posts: 845
Liked 30 Times on 27 Posts
Likes Given: 1

Default

Quote:
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwi View Post
You then just increase (use the scaling tool to do this) the batch size to account for any post boil losses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwi View Post
This is done by simply scaling the batch size (using the scale tool, always) by the exact volume of your expected/experienced post-boil kettle losses.
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwi View Post
it is much easier to figure out what batch size to scale to (always checking the 'keep numbers the same' box).

Yes, when you scale the original recipe (using the scale tool and checking the 'keep numbers the same' box)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cwi View Post
Also, don't forget you can proactively adjust for increased/decreased losses based on hoppy/non-hoppy beers, or whatever, by just using the scale tool to increase or decrease batch size.
Quote:
Originally Posted by duboman View Post
Sorry, In reading the posts I missed the "Use the Scale Tool" part
The post you quoted is one of the only posts where I didn't specifically state to 'use the scale tool'. I even left out some posts in the sample above, as well as numerous posts in the other thread you claimed you read.

It appears there is no way to win. This is the story of my life. If I repeat something constantly, someone tells me to quit being pedantic. If I ask them if they understood what I just said, they tell me they are not an idiot. But, if I don't, someone complains that I didn't stress it enough.

There are other ways to scale, but I have heard rumors there are hidden errors with them, especially if there is trub loss. I am not even certain if the 'scale tool' does it completely correctly, but it seems to get it close enough.

Quote:
Originally Posted by duboman View Post
I'll go back to my recipes and give that a whirl.........
Saw you tried to pm me but my mailbox was full, I cleaned things up if you wanted to try and re-send
I just saw you were online, and wanted to see if you figured it out.
Using the scale tool should give you the same numbers, quality and quantity, of your original recipe (as long as your kettle volume remains the same).

You have to keep you brain turned on with BeerSmith- it doesn't have many warnings when things go bad, and hides a lot of its errors.
__________________
cwi is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Old 09-05-2012, 08:51 PM   #25
duboman
Feedback Score: 0 reviews
Recipes 
 
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: Glenview, IL
Posts: 5,997
Liked 452 Times on 421 Posts
Likes Given: 201

Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by cwi View Post
The post you quoted is one of the only posts where I didn't specifically state to 'use the scale tool'. I even left out some posts in the sample above, as well as numerous posts in the other thread you claimed you read.

It appears there is no way to win. This is the story of my life. If I repeat something constantly, someone tells me to quit being pedantic. If I ask them if they understood what I just said, they tell me they are not an idiot. But, if I don't, someone complains that I didn't stress it enough.

There are other ways to scale, but I have heard rumors there are hidden errors with them, especially if there is trub loss. I am not even certain if the 'scale tool' does it completely correctly, but it seems to get it close enough.


I just saw you were online, and wanted to see if you figured it out.
Using the scale tool should give you the same numbers, quality and quantity, of your original recipe (as long as your kettle volume remains the same).

You have to keep you brain turned on with BeerSmith- it doesn't have many warnings when things go bad, and hides a lot of its errors.
Got it, thanks again!
__________________
Nothing Left to do but smile and drink beer.....

The Commune Brewing Company-Perfecting the "art" of beer since 2010
duboman is offline
 
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Reply


Quick Reply
Message:
Options
Thread Tools


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Beersmith help bbrim Brewing Software 2 01-13-2013 05:25 AM
Beersmith zuke395 Brewing Software 10 02-22-2012 07:57 PM
FWH Beersmith Julohan Brewing Software 16 12-14-2011 09:11 PM
If you have something other than Beersmith kedash Brewing Software 13 01-18-2010 01:55 PM
beersmith help sunblock Brewing Software 3 05-22-2009 10:04 PM