BCS user control panel question

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.

bruin_ale

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 7, 2009
Messages
1,401
Reaction score
25
Location
Campbell, CA
So I'm heavily leaning towards using a BCS for my build. I've done alot of research - I like the expandability and the interface. The PID route is nice also, but I'm a computer engineer so using a state machine just makes sense to me. In any case, after drooling over Kal's control panel and then starting to design my own I realized that there's really not much that I need to put on there - no PID display, I don't want to bother with separate power supplies for volt/amp meters, and even auto/manual switches seem unnecessary - if the BCS isn't working I wouldn't be able to PID or PWM the heating element so controlling a boil would be difficult.

So here's my question(s) for those with a BCS based system:
1. What's on your control panel ?
2. If you put switches for manual control - do you use them at all or do you just use the web interface switches. Do you find the switches unnecessary?
3. Anything on your panel that you absolutely wouldn't give up? I think an e-stop is about the only thing I see as an absolute necessity for my panel, otherwise maybe just a light to show which heating element is on would be a nice visual.
4. Did you mount the BCS in your panel or are you using cat-5 or some other method to route control signals? I'm thinking of mounting the BCS on the wall and running cat5, that way I can have a BCS-460 do double duty of fermentation control and brew-control.
5. I'm thinking the size of the enclosure can be significantly smaller than Kal's since there only needs to be a couple distribution bars, an SSR for each element and pump, and an e-stop switch. But I haven't started wiring so maybe I'm wrong - what size enclosure did you use?
 
So I'm heavily leaning towards using a BCS for my build. I've done alot of research - I like the expandability and the interface. The PID route is nice also, but I'm a computer engineer so using a state machine just makes sense to me. In any case, after drooling over Kal's control panel and then starting to design my own I realized that there's really not much that I need to put on there - no PID display, I don't want to bother with separate power supplies for volt/amp meters, and even auto/manual switches seem unnecessary - if the BCS isn't working I wouldn't be able to PID or PWM the heating element so controlling a boil would be difficult.

So here's my question(s) for those with a BCS based system:
1. What's on your control panel ?
Nothing! I use the PC only (but may put some on/off/auto switches later).

2. If you put switches for manual control - do you use them at all or do you just use the web interface switches. Do you find the switches unnecessary?
I'd like the switches for manually cycling the pump off during a process for priming purposes (I usually cycle it on/off/on/off/on for priming purposes).

3. Anything on your panel that you absolutely wouldn't give up? I think an e-stop is about the only thing I see as an absolute necessity for my panel, otherwise maybe just a light to show which heating element is on would be a nice visual.
Nothing

4. Did you mount the BCS in your panel or are you using cat-5 or some other method to route control signals? I'm thinking of mounting the BCS on the wall and running cat5, that way I can have a BCS-460 do double duty of fermentation control and brew-control.
I have my BCS mounted in an alarm enclosure on the wall. 3 SSR's inside the enclosure are used for running my kegerators and fermentation fridge. I have 3 cat 5's that run to data jacks on the wall where my stand plugs into it. One cable for temp probes, one for SSR's to control the 3 pumps and 3 gas solenoid valves and one cable that goes to a relay board controlling 6 ball valve actuators.

5. I'm thinking the size of the enclosure can be significantly smaller than Kal's since there only needs to be a couple distribution bars, an SSR for each element and pump, and an e-stop switch. But I haven't started wiring so maybe I'm wrong - what size enclosure did you use?
I used a 14"x14" alarm panel enclosure.
See answers in BOLD above.
Also see my signature for links to my BCS system.
 
Switches -
Main ON/OFF
RIMS OFF/AUTO
PUMP OFF/ON/AUTO
PUMP OFF/ON/AUTO

Having manual pump switch is very handy when priming or cleaning. I use a larger plastic Home Depot box because it was just easier to fit things in and leave room for expansion. My first generation was a tiny box which was too small.
 
I use a 12 x 12 enclosure and would not go any smaller.
I just use cat 5 for the signal wires, this makes it easy to switch between projects...

For switches:
Main ON/OFF, Boil Kettle/OFF/HLT
I also have switches to allow manual control of my pump/anything else

For the lights, I have two lights per element (energized/firing)

Have fun, the BCS-460 is a pretty cool gizmo!
 
Here's some pics of mine. BCS is in the box with the switches (that I can use manually or auto) One small cable from there to the main box on the stand.
Controlpanelinside.jpg

switchboxinsideBCS.jpg

switchboxinsidecover.jpg

controlpanellabled.jpg

rigdone.jpg
 
You need to abandon the BCS system completely, if you ask me, and go with playoffs and a real championship like the NFL does!

Oh wait, wrong BCS system...

:fro:
 
Really nice guys, this is very helpful. Great picture of the BCS there Layne, I was wondering what it would look like if I put the BCS in a separate box and then have a bunch of RJ45 to hook that all up - sort like a wrapper around the BCS.

So, with that in mind I'll definitely add a switch for the pump to my list.

The one I'm debating on is the switch to decide between HLT and BK for the heating element. Obviously we want to avoid turning on both at the same time, and this is one sort of safety to avoid that. I'm sure there are those who chose not to bother - anybody have any feedback on that particular item?
 
The one I'm debating on is the switch to decide between HLT and BK for the heating element. Obviously we want to avoid turning on both at the same time, and this is one sort of safety to avoid that. I'm sure there are those who chose not to bother - anybody have any feedback on that particular item?

Your programming should take care of that.
 
Your programming should take care of that.

That's what I was thinking.. putting in a switch to manually select which element is firing seems like it would be unnecessary - yet I seem to see it on alot of bcs panels.
 
Hey Bruin- I built Layne's controls. His remote box connects to the main panel with a DB25 data cable. It runs power to and from the box, the sensor connections, and all the logic lines (control SSRs in the main panel). Layne's system runs on 50Amps so he can run both elements simultaneously, but we originally had a selector switch on a 30amp design. I would suggest it, but it isn't necessary. Just remember to think about what you are doing.

I was very impressed with the BCS interface.
 
Thanks, I never thought about using a larger cable like that to carry all the signals. Was initially thinking of just bundling a few cat5 together (made my own speaker wire that way one time - turned out pretty nice). Gotta think about that part a little more, it'd be cool to use all 4 temp sensors while brewing - then just disconnect the cable and plug my fermentor and serving fridge back in to monitor those. The temp won't change much anyways - plus I still have Rancos on those for backup.
 
That's what I was thinking.. putting in a switch to manually select which element is firing seems like it would be unnecessary - yet I seem to see it on alot of bcs panels.

I set both my elements and my pumps with 3 way auto-off-on switches. Most of the time the BCS is controlling everything, but it sure is nice to manually heat up some water or control the pumps without having to use the computer interface, or accidentally interrupting the running process. I mostly use manual control for clean up, running boiling wort through the chiller to sanitize it, and sometimes preheating the mash tun.

Brent
 
Really nice guys, this is very helpful. Great picture of the BCS there Layne, I was wondering what it would look like if I put the BCS in a separate box and then have a bunch of RJ45 to hook that all up - sort like a wrapper around the BCS.

So, with that in mind I'll definitely add a switch for the pump to my list.

The one I'm debating on is the switch to decide between HLT and BK for the heating element. Obviously we want to avoid turning on both at the same time, and this is one sort of safety to avoid that. I'm sure there are those who chose not to bother - anybody have any feedback on that particular item?

Your programming should take care of that.

That's what I was thinking.. putting in a switch to manually select which element is firing seems like it would be unnecessary - yet I seem to see it on alot of bcs panels.

If the combined load of your elements and pumps exceed the supply you have available, I would recommend a selector switch to reduce the chance of tripping a breaker.

Even if you don't use manual selector switches for your elements, you can still exceed the capacity of your circuit with the BCS. If you are very careful, you might be able to program the BCS steps and processes to avoid firing more than one element simultaneously, but there is no interlock safe guard built into the BCS to enforce that as a rule. There are no interlocks between output devices of the BCS. And if you run the BCS in manual mode, all bets are off.

If your panel is designed properly, a fuse or breaker should protect against catastrophic failure but I chose not to count on it.

I have two pumps, two 5500 watt elements, and one 1500 watt element on a 50 amp breaker. Without a selector to prevent me from firing both 5500 watt elements, I'm sure I would have tripped a breaker by now.

Good luck.


Ed
 
Thanks Ed, I tend to agree but don't want a manual step between firing burners. I'm not as familiar with this type of electric work as I am with digital logic. I'd like to do something like this:
A = select HLT element
B = select BK element

C= BK XOR HLT

C AND A => SSR HLT
C AND B => SSR BK

Any such switch or configuration that I could use or would I need to just build the circuit myself?
 
Okay, thought about this some more..

What about this? I'd have 3 40A SSRs
1 HLT SSR - controls HOT1 to HLT
2 BK SSR - controls HOT1 to BK
3 HLT/BK SSR - controls HOT2 to both HLT and BK

SSR 1 & 2 are just standard BCS output on one side of the coil and BCS Ground on the other.
SSR 3 would have the BCS HLT and BK outputs on the coil. Essentially, the relay is only open if current flows across the coil - so if HLT and BK are both 1 or both 0, SSR #3 is open. Elements only get power if HLT!=BK.

Would that work? Anybody see a problem with that?
 
Okay, thought about this some more..

What about this? I'd have 3 40A SSRs
1 HLT SSR - controls HOT1 to HLT
2 BK SSR - controls HOT1 to BK
3 HLT/BK SSR - controls HOT2 to both HLT and BK

SSR 1 & 2 are just standard BCS output on one side of the coil and BCS Ground on the other.
SSR 3 would have the BCS HLT and BK outputs on the coil. Essentially, the relay is only open if current flows across the coil - so if HLT and BK are both 1 or both 0, SSR #3 is open. Elements only get power if HLT!=BK.

Would that work? Anybody see a problem with that?

You said you don't want a manual step between switching from HLT to BK heating. So are you talking about trying to control this via the BCS?

I don't know how you can build an interlock / lockout without a physical selector switch.

In my panel, all the selector switches are on the low voltage "control" side of the SSR's.

Ed
 
You said you don't want a manual step between switching from HLT to BK heating. So are you talking about trying to control this via the BCS?

I don't know how you can build an interlock / lockout without a physical selector switch.

In my panel, all the selector switches are on the low voltage "control" side of the SSR's.

Ed

Yeah, this would be BCS controlled...
HLT and BK select would be the signals from the BCS outputs.
I thought I described it ok, but here's a picture. I'm still not sure if it would work, but it seems like there should be a way to make sure both are kept off in the case that the BCS is trying to power them both.

XOR_SSR.jpg
 
You could build your interlocks using relays on the BCS control side. That way even if the BCS is trying to command more then one SSR on, it won't be able to.

Also something to consider on the BCS processes - the higher level processes can override settings in the lower level processes. This could be handy in your situation.

Example:
Process 0 commands Out1 ON & Out2 OFF
Process 1 commands Out1 OFF & Out2 ON
If you were to have both Process 0 and Process 1 running at the same time, Process 1 will take precedence since it is the higher level process.

Manual mode however would allow you to turn both Out1 & Out2 on at the same time, so having relays to perform the interlock should be used.
 
Thanks Jon,
Any suggestions on the interlock circuit? Since the ON/OFF coming from the BCS would be in PID mode it's going to switch too fast/often to use a mechanical relay, so I was thinking it'd have to be an SSR - other than the idea I posted earlier - I'm not sure how this would be done.
 
Thanks Jon,
Any suggestions on the interlock circuit? Since the ON/OFF coming from the BCS would be in PID mode it's going to switch too fast/often to use a mechanical relay, so I was thinking it'd have to be an SSR - other than the idea I posted earlier - I'm not sure how this would be done.

Since it's just the BK & HLT you need to switch between, it should be fairly easy. You can run the BCS BK & HLT SSR outputs through a DPDT relay to keep only one firing at a time. This method uses an additional output, but even in manual mode, it will keep you from firing both elements at the same time.

Assumptions:
Drive the HLT SSR on Out0
Drive the BK SSR on Out1
Element select relay on Out8

Wire trigger (+) of 5v DPDT relay to Out8.

Relay pole #1 NC contact to Out0
Relay pole #1 NO contact is unused
Relay pole #1 COMMON contact to HLT SSR

Relay pole #2 NC contact is unused
Relay pole #2 NO contact to Out1
Relay pole #2 COMMON contact to BK SSR

When Out8 is not energized, the circuit to the HLT SSR is capable of being energized, but not the circuit to the BK SSR. Energize Out8 and it is the opposite.

Does this work?
 
Thanks Jon, that seems like it should work. I only get 6 outputs on the 460 though :(
Let's see, 2 elements, 1 pump, 1 element select. Only left with 2 - course there's always the expansion card, but I'm confused about how that works - you can only use those ports in a single process or something?
 
You could build your interlocks using relays on the BCS control side. That way even if the BCS is trying to command more then one SSR on, it won't be able to.

Also something to consider on the BCS processes - the higher level processes can override settings in the lower level processes. This could be handy in your situation.

Example:
Process 0 commands Out1 ON & Out2 OFF
Process 1 commands Out1 OFF & Out2 ON
If you were to have both Process 0 and Process 1 running at the same time, Process 1 will take precedence since it is the higher level process.

Manual mode however would allow you to turn both Out1 & Out2 on at the same time, so having relays to perform the interlock should be used.

Jon,

I did not realize there is a "precedence" between Processes on the BCS. I have a BCS460 and don't have the latest firmware, and on mine I think the processes are completely independent. Is the precedence based on the Process Number, or is there a "level" setting somewhere? I can't find any info about this, is the Process level precedence documented on the ECC Wiki?

The idea of using another output and a DPDT relay is very intriguing. If you could find a digital DPDT with NO & NC contacts, I wonder if you could have a constant toggle (50/50 or maybe 70/30 or 60/40) and basically use both elements at the same time? It would likely confuse the heck out of the PID, but you could "split" the time between 2 elements without any over current issue.

I'm out of outputs on my 460, so maybe it's time for a 462 with new firmware... hmmm.

Ed
 
Interesting idea Ed, since I'm still in the design phase I'm going to think about that some more. It'd be really nice to maintain my sparge water temp while getting a head start on the boil at the same time.
Before the BCS firmware added actual PWM, they were doing it by setting a timer and using 2 states (State 0 = On wait 3 seconds, State 1 = Off, wait 1 second). Could definitely do something similar, but yeah - no idea what would happen with the PID. I'd think it would be able to manage since it's capable of switching many times per second - as long as it's got a long enough duty cycle to maintain the temp you're asking it to.
 
Ed,


I've not seen any documentation on the precedence "feature" and I don't really know if it is in all versions of the firmware. My guess is that it is a core piece of the logic though and has probably been there since the beginning. There is no setting for it anywhere and I actually stumbled upon it's use by accident.

My first 3 processes are:
Process 0 = MLT Heat/Hold
Process 1 = HLT Heat/Hold
Process 2 = Fly Sparge

I run both process 0 and 1 simultaneously during my mash and when I am ready for sparging, I start process #2. Even though process 0 & 1 are still running, their outputs and temp settings get overridden by the settings of process 2. I then go back and turn off process 0 & 1 later.

Hopefully we'll see a future update that lets you chain processes together and start/stop processes from other processes. This would then allow full automation logic from beginning to end.
 
Ed,


I've not seen any documentation on the precedence "feature" and I don't really know if it is in all versions of the firmware. My guess is that it is a core piece of the logic though and has probably been there since the beginning. There is no setting for it anywhere and I actually stumbled upon it's use by accident.

My first 3 processes are:
Process 0 = MLT Heat/Hold
Process 1 = HLT Heat/Hold
Process 2 = Fly Sparge

I run both process 0 and 1 simultaneously during my mash and when I am ready for sparging, I start process #2. Even though process 0 & 1 are still running, their outputs and temp settings get overridden by the settings of process 2. I then go back and turn off process 0 & 1 later.

Hopefully we'll see a future update that lets you chain processes together and start/stop processes from other processes. This would then allow full automation logic from beginning to end.

Jon,

Have you tried starting Process 2, then starting Process 0?

I thought it was as simply as the last process to access an output (on or off) got control of it. In other words, I thought if you have 2 running processes that referenced the same output, they would BOTH change it.

I agree, I'd like to see more interaction between processes.


Ed
 
Jon,

Have you tried starting Process 2, then starting Process 0?

I thought it was as simply as the last process to access an output (on or off) got control of it. In other words, I thought if you have 2 running processes that referenced the same output, they would BOTH change it.

I agree, I'd like to see more interaction between processes.


Ed

No, it is definitely the higher level process that takes precedence. I just tested it to be sure. I turned on Process2, then Process1, then Process0. All valves stayed in the Process2 configuration. I then turned off Process2 while 0 & 1 were still on and the configuration reverted to what those two processes were requesting.

Ed, I would be interested in hearing if yours works the same. There has only been one firmware update since I've had my BCS and it has worked the same on both versions.
 
No, it is definitely the higher level process that takes precedence. I just tested it to be sure. I turned on Process2, then Process1, then Process0. All valves stayed in the Process2 configuration. I then turned off Process2 while 0 & 1 were still on and the configuration reverted to what those two processes were requesting.

Ed, I would be interested in hearing if yours works the same. There has only been one firmware update since I've had my BCS and it has worked the same on both versions.

Jon,

It'll take me a bit to test it. I'll have to save my config & setup new processes. I kind of went to extremes making sure there was no conflicts between processes so I didn't have to worry about one interfering with the other's outputs.

Ed
 
I can't seem to find a 5vdc coil DPDT relay that I can put in my control panel. Anybody have an idea where I'd get one? Everything I find is either PC mount of Surface mount.
 
Yes, higher processes take priority. However its not recommended to have two processes drive the same output.

Here's a relay that is compatible with the BCS. They also make 12v cards, however that would require a separate power supply.
http://cgi.ebay.com/Two-Relay-Modul...ultDomain_0&hash=item3cab7c89b9#ht_6636wt_970

Thanks, I just got my BCS in the mail today BTW. Super fast shipping!
I was concerned with using that relay because it says the coil current is 70mA and the BCS outputs are only rated to 25mA right?
 
Those relay boards have built in transistor drivers to handle that 70ma relay coils. They only require about 50uA (micro amps) of current from the BCS, so well within budget. Since the +5VDC pin of the BCS can source up to 300ma, you can use that to power the relay board.
 
Took me some effort to dig this thread up, but just thought I'd follow-up on this so you guys know how it turned out.

I bought a relay like the one above and wired it into my control panel, finally got everything wired up and did a dry test last night (no 220V, just BCS 5V and 0VDC).
The DPDT relay works great as an interlock, with the BCS I turned both elements to on and am not able to energize both element SSR at the same time.

On a side note, it was really cool to do that test and watch the leds on the SSRs and the DPDT relay light up as the coil is energized. Everything worked as intended, so I'll be doing a 220V test, then a wet test this week - brewing thursday or friday for the first time in a long time. :ban:

Also, the BCS is really cool. I used the probes from brewershardware and plugged in his coefficients. When I tested them against a digital probe from my kitchen they're 5 degrees lower on the hot side (hot water from my water cooler) and 5 degrees higher on the low side (ice water). Need to grab all my thermometers and see if my kitchen thermometer is off or the BCS probes are off.
 
Back
Top