Software that handles reheated kettle mashing?

It looks like brewing software has improved since the last time I looked. Used to be that infusion and decoction were the only methods they supported. Is there anything around that supports a "reheat kettle mash" (my made-up term). This is a kettle mash that is periodically reheated, if needed, to return to a specific temperature. I'm intimately familiar with that problems of that method, but it's the method I use, and I'm a contrary sort. I will freely admit that infusion, decoction, and praying to Saint Gambrinus for proper temperature while dancing with my fiancee's pet cockatoo could be better alternatives.

That being said, is there any software out there that supports my lunacy?

Thanks.

Yeah, Beertoolspro allows for direct heat additions to the mash profile.

Thank you. I started this hobby when SUDS was the big thing. It has let me limp along, but it's nice to know I can get something that I can use "as is".

Beer Smith calls it a "Temperature Mash". But it's for direct fired MLT's.

Does either of these allow separate batches "under" a recipe? That's a feature I really like. I'm going through BeerSmith trial version, right now and will then give a go on the trial version of BeerToolsPro.

There's no practical reason to keep a hierarchy of recipe ->batch 1 batch 2.

After you actually brew a recipe, you can rename it the recipe name_brewed_2010_6_3. If you brew it again, rename it to the new date. The benefit is that your actual results and tasting notes will be kept with each along with any tweaks you make.

Bobby_M said:

There's no practical reason to keep a hierarchy of recipe ->batch 1 batch 2.

After you actually brew a recipe, you can rename it the recipe name_brewed_2010_6_3. If you brew it again, rename it to the new date. The benefit is that your actual results and tasting notes will be kept with each along with any tweaks you make.

Click to expand...

"It's not a bug, it's a feature!"

That's the classic coder's cop-out, I'm afraid. There is a very practical reason to keep a hierarchy of batches under recipes--that's how I think. It's a habit derived from decades of laboratory work, where the protocol stands alone, and then individual results of running the protocol are recorded with reference to the protocol, instead of wasting the time and space to keep re-copying the protocol.

I don't know if you're assuming beer tools is my product but just to be clear, I'm just a user. The question I have is when does a recipe stop being one and start being another? How much tweaking can you do before it's a new one? Let's say you make one up and brew it and find that it needs a little more bitterness and finishing hops. The next time you brew it, you change the hop schedule. On the 3rd session you wanted to swap out the aromatic for some carapils or whatever. Do you honestly think they should be under the same "mother" recipe?

Even if you were trying to follow the recipe perfectly, each batch is ultimately unique due to circumstance, last minute changes, goofs, and substitutions.

Wasting time and space to copy the protocol? "save as" takes 10 seconds and the file size is 30k.

Bobby_M said:

I don't know if you're assuming beer tools is my product but just to be clear, I'm just a user. The question I have is when does a recipe stop being one and start being another? How much tweaking can you do before it's a new one? Let's say you make one up and brew it and find that it needs a little more bitterness and finishing hops. The next time you brew it, you change the hop schedule. On the 3rd session you wanted to swap out the aromatic for some carapils or whatever. Do you honestly think they should be under the same "mother" recipe?

Click to expand...

Please forgive me for not thinking as you think and not brewing as you brew.

I asked a straight forward set of questions to figure out what you're thinking and you're just blowing me off. It really doesn't help further the discussion much does it? Oh well.