Control Panel VS Computer

Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum

Help Support Homebrew Talk - Beer, Wine, Mead, & Cider Brewing Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Bru

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2009
Messages
839
Reaction score
4
Location
Johannesburg, South Africa
Ive recently completed my control panel. It controls the gas solenoid on my HLT, RIMS tube, pump (autosparge + on/off), swamp cooler fan/heater etc. But Im starting to think BCS (or 'troller) would have been a better option and probably cheaper.
I can think of a few reasons why "computer" based brewing is better :
Automation using solenoid/motorized ball valves
Remote control / monitoring
Temp logging

Can anyone think of reasons why a control panel maybe better ?
Has anyone used both ?
 
Right off the bat "PRICE" comes to my mind. An analog system should be cheaper to build and have a few less things to "go wrong".

Manual toggles may be good if you want total control and fear losing that control. I agree that, in the end, a BCS would be the thing to build. You can always have a manual override.

I have neither because my budget is not there yet.
 
Im not sure a control panel is cheaper. Two temp controllers plus all the switches gets expensive. On my system most switches are illuminated. That means switch, switch body, bulb holder and bulb. It all adds up quickly.
 
It is easy enough to put in a BCS after the system is up and running. Then you can sell your current controllers and recoup some of the cash. Even with a computer control system you will probably want switches for manual control. Although they would be three way (Manual/Off/Auto) so the switches may work depends on what you have now.

You can upgrade as money allows and still be brewing.
 
I was asked by Bru to post my comments here as I've build what would be considered an 'analog' control panel.

To quote my FAQ:

Why didn't you build a completely automated brewing setup using BCS-460 or similar?

At the end of the day, we don't see any added benefit.

Complete automation is actually something we never wanted for our Electric Brewery. Some people have asked if it's because we didn't know how to do it or because we didn't want to spend the extra money, but neither is the case. We wanted to keep things 'simple' with what can best be described as manual dials and controls. We still want to feel like we're doing something on brew day. It's a hobby and we want to be part of it. If it was completely automated such that you press a button and wort comes out, to us it just wouldn't be the same.

We do use automation however: The PIDs we use are, in a way, completely automated in that the brewer dials in the temperature and is it automatically maintained. That sort of automation makes sense to us. We let some parts maintain certain control aspects of system, but for actually controlling the process steps, we want to be pressing the buttons ourselves.

We also feel that the time required to program the automated steps at the start of the brew day could or would likely take just as long as 'manually' changing certain settings when needed. With today's highly modified malts, most times home brewers (including ourselves) are only brewing with single infusion mashes (a single mash temperature is used) so no special process steps are needed. On our setup we simply set the mash temp and then an hour or two later when mash is done we press the "up temp" button a few times to go up to mash-out temperature. An automated system could automatically do this after the one or two hour period but what exactly is that saving?

Every other operation in a brewery requires disconnecting/re-connecting hoses so we have to go into our brewery for a few minutes regardless. Even this could be automated with valves and all sorts of fancy logic controllers but in our opinion that's hundreds of hours of design/implementation/testing (plus added costs) to save a total of 5-10 minutes of work on brew day. It just doesn't make any sense to us and results in a very complex setup which means it's just more things that may cause problems or break.

Of course, to each their own. Everyone has to build what makes sense to them. My requirements will not be the same as someone elses so there's no "right" or "wrong" answer here.

So before Bru can answer "would it be better?" he needs to decide what his requirements are. Again, no right or wrong answer here.

For what it's worth, here are my requirements:

What was your main criteria in designing The Electric Brewery?

Our all-grain brewery had to meet the following criteria:

- 100% electric for indoor brewing
- Safe, easy, and enjoyable to use
- Not limit the brewer in any way
- Provide for extremely repeatable and consistent results
- Use industrial quality parts that last (all stainless steel, limit the use of plastics)

Note that price is not listed. When we weighed price vs. performance vs. safety, price was considered as the least important factor. That is the complete opposite of what most home brewers do when they put together a brewing setup. For most, price is always the overriding priority and sacrifices have to be made. That's completely acceptable of course as everyone has different needs.

While cost savings was not the primary criteria in designing our Electric Brewery, we didn't (in our opinion) spend money for no reason. Every expenditure was a conscious decision of price vs. quality/performance. The Blichmann kettles are a great example of this as many consider them overpriced. We don't agree. Even if you could buy bare kettles and add on all the options to get to the same quality product, it would likely cost you the same amount in the end. Problem is you can't even do that. For example, I've yet to see any sight glasses as well designed and protected and easy to clean as the ones Blichmann uses. Had I used different kettles with unprotected sight glass added on later, I would have broken then ten times over by now banging around the kettles as I clean them. Kettles are heavy, brewers are clumsy.

There's an old saying "Only the rich can afford to buy cheap things" (because you end up buying them over and over again). In designing our brewery we did not want to continually replace components because we were not happy with the performance or because the parts were cheap and breaking. Buy once, use it a lifetime.

It's been nearly 2 years since we designed and built the Electric Brewery. We're happy to report that there's absolutely nothing we'd change if we had to do this all over again. Having brewed with it over two dozen times (as of this writing in Fall 2010), there's nothing we look at and think "We should have done that differently". We waited this long before publishing our build information as we wanted to make sure we were 100% happy with the setup, thus ensuring that others would be as well.

Our setup may not be for everyone, but for those that do follow our instructions to build their own Electric Brewery, I think they will be suitably impressed with the outcome.

Note that I do not have anything like "make the brewing process as automated as possible".

If that's a requirement for you Bru, then by all means consider more automation.

Kal
 
It's really up to you. I was going to go the way that Kal went, and for the most part will still be taking a lot of his ideas. But I do like the ability to monitor and track my stuff remotely.

I'll be adding two stage temperature (heat/cool) control to my kegerator and will be doing the same with a fermentation chamber. Right there I would have spent between 140-180 on ranco/johnson controllers. Add to that the costs for a PID setup on an all-grain electric system, it adds up pretty quick.

I was able to justify the BCS because the probes tend to be less expensive than a lot of the analog thermometers that people use, the thermocouples are cheaper than RTD probes (depending on where you buy of course) making it a lot easier for me to add more digital measurement points (up to 8 with the BCS-462) without having to add another PID.
 
I've been torn between a PID control panel and going with a BCS system... Right now I'm strongly leaning going the Auber PID route. I like the idea of a PID based control panel... having the ability to go turn it on, set my temp and go.

I love the ability of remote monitoring and that is my main draw to the BCS-460. I can brew in the garage and keep an eye on the process from the house. Ability to expand into a full automation later on is another bonus. However I am a little intimidated by the actual operation and setup of the BCS. Maybe I'm over thinking the BCS, but I don't want to have to worry about writing PID algorithms or writing State programs or crap like that just to brew. Can the BCS be used in a semi manual mode? Reading through the BCS forums on the ECC site makes it seem like actually setting up the brew day in the BCS will be more work than the brewing itself...Maybe a BCS user can ease my concerns or set me straight here...
 
I can only comment from my own experience FWIW. While the BCS-460 is a very nice remote control tool the one thing I did not like is that you are tied to an external computer. To some this is not a big deal but it was to me. The other thing I didn't like was the lack of volume measurements. I went with the brewtroller. The brewtroller already has a local display via an an alphanumeric LCD and will have web control very, very soon via BTnic. I like having many ways to control the brewery. I can control via switches, the local display and soon the web. The brewtroller principals will be working on something called Opentroller soon which will use a Mini2440 ARM9 SBC with will use a 3.5" or 7" graphical display. Go to the website and check it out.
 
I was "analog" but wanted the remote monitoring, plus since everyone has a computer (or I do it from my iPhone), it can be more cost effective to go BCS. 3 PIDs from Auber and you're over $150 with shipping.

I went with the BCS over the Brewtroller because I'm tired of being in project mode and want to actually brew someday soon. Between work, business planning on the side, and training for some mountaineering, I don't have the DIY time to devote to the Brewtroller.
 
I went with the BCS-460 because I can do remote monitoring with my iPad and iPhone. I like brewing with the iPad because it also contains my recipes and notes, and I can also save profiles for each beer to make my life easier. I'm still a very hands on brewer, and I keep the automation to a minimum.

I iPad also controls all the tunes in the brewery, so it's nice to have everything handy in one convenient and concise control panel.

Using the BCS-460 eliminates a ton of extra work when wiring the control panel, and it's nice to have all the alarms and timers at hand to help keep the brew day organized.

The manual control panels sure do look sexy, though. On the other hand, the iPad brings a certain amount of bling to the project as well. To each their own.

Note: If you lack experience with networking, you may be frustrated when working with IP Addresses and logging into the system. It's not hard, but having some experience in these matters makes things a whole lot easier. The forums at ECC are also very helpful.
 
I have a BCS and programming it is actually rather simple once you decide what you want it to do. I still have not figured out what I want it to do. Total automation was never my goal, for that I'd just go buy a keg of already brewed beer and hook it up to the keezer.

At this point I am also building a small single vessel set up and will use Auber PID, etc. I intend to brew with both until I can figure out which one has to go.
 
Ya, I've spent the last couple hours over on the BCS Wiki and Forums... It looks like there will be a little bit of a learning curve, but like anything else, once you get the hang of it things should be easy. Hmm... decisions, decisions...
 
Something else that is noteworthy is that current BCS users can and do post their configuration files which can easily be saved and then uploaded to your BCS for your use. There are several basic config. files in the forums and the Wiki to get you started until you become more familiar with its operation.
 
I have a Brewtroller controlled panel which I also have full manual override capabilities setup on. As part of that, I working through using a computer for logging data during the brew session via the Brewtroller monitored temp probes. My fermentation chamber and keg cooler are all controlled by an Arduino that logs data to a database.

I work in IT so for me, it adds a second layer to the hobby which I enjoy. It does, unfortunately, cut into your brewing days and sometimes you wish you were just back to doing extract in the stovetop.
 
IMHO there's no right or wrong answer. Really depends on your needs and wants.
BobbyM was asking sort of the same questions in this thread.

My thoughts:

I considered BCS myself instead of discrete PIDs so I'll give some ideas from the thought process I went throug a few years ago.

My goals may be different from everyone else so it's important to weigh your own goals against both methods and decide for yourself. There's really no right or wrong answer here.

Industrialized: One of my design goals was to try and build a setup that was as industrial as possible (ie: you should be able to use it on a plant floor in wash down conditions. At least NEMA 12 if not NEMA 4). I didn't want to have to be careful with it. I didn't want to have to treat it like a "normal" PC and keep it in the opposite corner and wipe down my hands before using it. If I couldn't use it with wet hands, gloved hands, hands covered in sticky grist I didn't want it. (That said, I rarely get dirty when brewing but my hands are often wet). This is possible with both BCS and PIDs. Going BCS would have meant using an industrial ruggedized PC touchscreen or similar (I've designed around these in some of the plant floor systems I built years ago and see the abuse they get). So certainly possible with BCS. The only issue is cost. A proper ruggedized touch screen PC (or screen with the PC in a rugged enclosure) isn't cheap. On the flip side PIDs/switches/lights are easy to get in industrial/water resistant form for cheap.

Interface: I loved the open ended customization available with BCS. You can do anything you want. However the more I designed my brew process (make sure you do this first and have that down pat before deciding *how* to implement the process), the more I realized that the controls and custom user interface I'd be creating would be starting to mimic "old fashioned" dials/displays/controls. BCS is infinitely more flexible but I didn't find that in my case I really needed more than what I could get with PIDs/controls/lights.

Ergonomics: Using a physical switch or button with tactile feedback is always easier for an operator than a touchscreen where the only feedback is visual. So when I design user interfaces, if I can do it with something physical I do that first if possible. If there's too much variety between screens or functions then you have to go touchscreen (I do this with my home theater remote for example). You can mix the two as well sometimes: Use the screen for display only (not a touchscreen) and still use discrete buttons. I've done that in the past with systems where an operator needs to poke at a button every minute. You don't want them doing that to a touchscreen. Give them a physical button. This was an option I considered with BCS. Just use it for display.

Flexibility: BCS wins hands down. If you're not sure of your brewing process or think you may want to experiment and/or change it in the future, BCS lets you add or remove controls easily if you keep it all on the screen. If you design correctly from the start then I really don't think it matters. I've been using my PID based setup for almost 3 years now and if I had to built it over again I'd do it the same way. Brewing's been around for thousands of years. I doubt that in 10 years we'll be doing anything radically different in our process that would make me want to redesign my control panel.

Long term serviceability: I wanted my setup to last me for the rest of my life. (I'm more interested in the craft/art of brewing than tinkering with equipment). I figured I'd spend a year or so designing something that could pretty much brew anything and then just use it forever. So part of my requirement was to make sure that if in 1-2 years (or even 10-20 years) I needed to replace something that it be easy to do. Things like relays, PIDs, switches, etc. are all extremely common parts. They've existed for dozens of years and they will continue to exist because of the tens of thousands of installations around the world running today that rely on them. I'm not married to one particular part or manufacturer. If (for example) a PID dies in 20 years I can pretty much buy a PID from any manufacturer and drop it in as the functionality will be the same. The hole sizes are all standard understood manufacturing sizes (1/16 DIN for PIDs, 23mm for switches/lights, etc). BCS is a custom controller that (AFAIK) is not open source and is owned/run by one person. Support is fantastic, Adam is a great guy, but at the end of the day anything could happen. That gave me pause. If the hardware and software was 100% open source then that may be different, but even open source stuff comes and goes in terms of popularity. Where is BCS going to be in 20 years?

Data logging: The anal retentive in me loves the idea of logging temp graphs and all those things that BCS lets you do easily and basically for "free". (No easy way to do this with PIDs). You can track all sorts of things over time. But then I started thinking: What exactly would I "do" with this data? I know how fast a PID based setup ramps. Just use the timer once to time how long it takes to ramp up. Why do I need to know exactly how that curve looks? Does seeing the curve of temp over time really give me any more information that I can use instead of just knowing the start/end points and time? Whenever people talk about all the logging they can do I always ask "So how are you using that data to make your next brew day better?". I couldn't think of one example of how I'd use this extra data so I decided data logging doesn't help me. Your needs may be different however.

Level of automation: This one's a no brainer. If you want or think one day you want to go for semi or complete automation, BCS is the way to go. PID won't give you this. BCS can replace more than just PIDs and can do all the other things you'd want for full automation like pumps/valves/float switches/etc. I didn't want semi or full automation myself so going PID was still in the running. The level of automation is one thing that I didn't actually think about very long at all. I knew right from the start that I didn't want semi or complete automation. I wanted to keep things 'simple' with what can best be described as manual dials and controls for 2 reasons: (1) So that I feel like I'm doing something on brew day (it's a hobby and we want to be part of the process steps instead of having a computer manage them). (2) I felt that the time required to program the automated steps at the start of the brew day could or would likely take just as long as 'manually' changing certain settings when needed. For example, with today's highly modified malts, I mostly do single infusion mashes (not step mashes). The only step I have is to mashout. To do that I hit the "up" button a few times. That's it. BCS could easily automate this but what exactly is that saving?

Remote monitoring/internet support: One feature that BCS is known for is that you can view your BCS controls/screen from anywhere using a web browser. Maybe it's just me, but to this day I still don't understand why I'd want to do that on a properly designed and implemented system. I know how my system behaves so I have no need to monitor it. I have timers with alarms to let me know when something needs to be done. If there's a fear that the system isn't going to run right or needs to be constantly monitored from anywhere then it probably isn't designed right to begin with. Implementing BCS controls as a web server over port 80 like this makes perfect sense of course (you get this feature for 'free'). I just think this is one of those "cool" features that is neat the first time you see it but adds little value at the end of the day.

'Bling' factor: This can most certainly be a design goal. Nothing wrong with that. If someone wants to go for the 'wow' factor then I think both a BCS based setup and manual dial/switch/PID setup can be made to look pretty impressive. A BCS setup can likely be made to look more modern with on screen dials, controls, and process pictures (even animated). A PID based setup can be made to look more industrial/ruggedized with rows and rows of physical dials/lights/switches. Almost 'retro' in a sense. Depends what style you like.

Complexity to implement: Because of the flexibility, BCS has a greater learning curve and you probably need to know a bit more about low voltage electronics if you want to fully harness the power of what it can do. Neither of these was a factor for me (I'm comfortable in this stuff). The same may not be true for others.

Long story short: at the end of day I didn't see how BCS would add any value for *my* design goals and it actually impeded some of *my* goals. I'd end up with something that behaved similarly, would have cost a bit more, and may not have been as serviceable in the long run. The key word here of course is *my*. Set your own goals and decide.

Kal
 
Back
Top