Brewtroller vs BCS

[unclebobby]

Finally after months of watching this thread, we are getting down to business. Keep it coming! I have a decision to make in the near future. Should the difference in temperature sensors be a factor?

 

[crazyirishman34]

Sounds like the BCS Fanboys can shout the loudest. If you look at what the 2 systems can do the Brewtroller is far more capable. It can do volume sensing, PWM fly sparging, Smart Herms, it is stand alone hardware, pretty much can run your brew day with a push of a button if you are so inclined.

 

[crazyirishman34]

The Brewtroller uses one wire temp sensors. That means you can just daisy chain them all together and have one connector on your panel.

 

[jdub44]

I have a fully automated direct fired HLT and Kettle RIMS system controlled by the BT. Anyone who has invested in either of these systems will obviously be passionate about the system they chose. I honestly don't know too much about the BCS as I made the decision to go with the BT very early in the design and didn't look back. I will share some of the reasons why I chose the BT over the BCS.

1. Volume sensing - This was very important to me. I have volume sensing set up in my HLT and Kettle. I love being able to upload my recipe directly into the BT and based on the settings I have already programed into the BT (boil off rate, vessel capacity, volume loss, grain absorbtion, etc), it automatically calculates how much volume is required for the brew session and fills the HLT to this volume and then heats to strike temp. I have my system set up so that once I start the brew session, no action is required until grain in. Volume sensing also allows to auto fly sparge where it monitors the volume added to the brew kettle from the mash and matches by transfering the same volume from the HLT to the Mash.

2. Being able to control processes locally. I love having a control panel that I can control everything from locally. The encoder can be cumbersome at times, but is nice to be able to control all processes locally. I also have switches for all my valves, pumps, and heat sources on my control panel so I can use those as well. This is extremely helpful when doing a cleaning or sanitation cycle.

3. Remote monitoring - The web interface of the BCS is very nice and was the big reason why I was considering it at first, but the BT can also support remote monitoring through live.brewtroller.com. I use this feature during every brew session so I don't have to stay in the garage the whole time. There are already user developed android apps and hopefully will be an iOS app soon too. The live.brewtroller.com is still in its infancy and will be upgraded significantly (I'm told) once BT Firmware 3.0 is released.

Some other comments I've read is that BT is not DIY friendly, which in my opinion is not true. I built my entire system myself with very little experience with electrical systems and no software programming knowledge. There are a ton of resources online particularly the BT website (www.oscsys.com), BT forums, and the blackheart brewery build threads and website. The customer service at BT has also been extremely helpful.

 

[MaxOut]

Sounds like the BCS Fanboys can shout the loudest. If you look at what the 2 systems can do the Brewtroller is far more capable. It can do volume sensing, PWM fly sparging, Smart Herms, it is stand alone hardware, pretty much can run your brew day with a push of a button if you are so inclined.

I'm not knocking the Brewtroller. I'm just pointing out features the matter to me and how they are applied to my brewing style. I use gas so PWM has no benefit to me, volume sensing can be achieved with the BCS but I have no need for it, and I prefer a computer interface with a logical and customizable GUI. I have my system stationary and have manual switches to override all automation. Even with the Brewtroller if it malfunctions you still need manual override. Both options depend on computer logic so the fact that you need a computer to control a BCS isn't a comparable drawback. I consider it an advantage because I have multiple interfaces including remote wireless options all with intuitive customizable GUI's verses a cheesy dial and a LCD. Just saying.

 

[crazyirishman34]

Cool brewtroller setup. Were did you get the front panel?

 

[jdub44]

The front panel was made by Ponoko.com. I modified Blackheart Brewery's original design using adobe illustrator.

 

[unclebobby]

The front panel was made by Ponoko.com. I modified Blackheart Brewery's original design using adobe illustrator.

That an overwhelmingly awesome control panel. I have my Brutus 10 almost completed. I'm thinking a direct fired mash tun with intermittent pilot by Honeywell. I am just a little concerned with how the igniter will affect both of these control units. I've mostly researched the brewtroller.

 

[MaxOut]

That an overwhelmingly awesome control panel. I have my Brutus 10 almost completed. I'm thinking a direct fired mash tun with intermittent pilot by Honeywell. I am just a little concerned with how the igniter will affect both of these control units. I've mostly researched the brewtroller.

I use the Honeywell SmartValves with the intermittent hot surface ignition that do not need an external pilot control and have no problems using the BCS. I don't think you would have any problems with either controller. I've read of people having issues with the direct spark ignition due to the stray high voltage but none with the IHSI.

 

[JonW]

I use the Honeywell SmartValves with the intermittent hot surface ignition that do not need an external pilot control and have no problems using the BCS. I don't think you would have any problems with either controller. I've read of people having issues with the direct spark ignition due to the stray high voltage but none with the IHSI.

I just changed out my spark igniters for HSI's. I'm using the inexpensive Valves4Projects solenoid valves to control gas flow and the Honeywell Glowfly HSI's. The BCS has a feature to drive igniters where it will pre-fire the igniter for a specified time prior to valve opening and then hold it for a specified time after valve opening. They're working flawlessly, but because I'm not using the Honeywell valves with flame detection and all the safety interlocks, I would not suggest these for unattended brewing.

 

[JonW]

Finally after months of watching this thread, we are getting down to business. Keep it coming! I have a decision to make in the near future. Should the difference in temperature sensors be a factor?

The comment about the BCS having only 4 temps is the BCS-460 model. The BCS-462 has 8 temp probes.

You need to research your options and not rely on threads like this to dictate your decision.

 

[JonW]

For you guys saying that the BCS requires a computer to run.... technically it doesn't. The computer (or iPad, iphone, etc) are just display devices - there is no logic executing on the computer. The BCS can run stand-alone and all processes can be start/stopped via switches. Most people don't use it this way because they want a full screen display to see everything happening at once.

The BCS does PWM, Hysteresis and PID temp control. It does temperature averaging across multiple sensors. Your processes run independently so like I pointed out before, I can have my kegerator, fermenter, smoker and brew rig all running at the same time. I often do double brew days and the BCS is handling different settings for batch 2 in the MLT while still finishing batch 1 in the BK. The process flexibility lets the system easily multitask whatever processes you want to do.

Many BCS users build full control panels that look similar to many of those shown for the BT systems so that they can do automatic and manual control. Myself, I just use the GUI (on a touch screen brewery interface) and yes, I pretty much run my brew day with the push of a button.

This pissing match about the two systems is stupid. Calling one system vastly superior to another is flat out wrong. Both systems are very capable and each has it's strengths and weaknesses.

 

[jdub44]

I use the spark ignition pilot modules and did have some issues initially with noise affecting the BT. This was resolved by containing all of the Honeywell controller components in a separate enclosure from the BT and other components, using shielded cable for the 24v supply from the BT to the control modules with ferrite cores, routing the cables away from the rest of the cables, and upgrading my temperature sensors to the one-wire sensors with filtering circuit sold by OSCSYS.

 

[unclebobby]

The comment about the BCS having only 4 temps is the BCS-460 model. The BCS-462 has 8 temp probes.

You need to research your options and not rely on threads like this to dictate your decision.

I completely agree, but it is nice to hear real world experiences before I invest in a product. I will always do more homework than necessary.

 

[unclebobby]

I use the spark ignition pilot modules and did have some issues initially with noise affecting the BT. This was resolved by containing all of the Honeywell controller components in a separate enclosure from the BT and other components, using shielded cable for the 24v supply from the BT to the control modules with ferrite cores, routing the cables away from the rest of the cables, and upgrading my temperature sensors to the one-wire sensors with filtering circuit sold by OSCSYS.

Thank you, it is good to hear a success story. I already have my gas valves for the HLT and the MLT.

 

[JonW]

Thank you, it is good to hear a success story. I already have my gas valves for the HLT and the MLT.

If your valves will support HSI's, I highly suggest you look at those instead of the spark igniters. It's a pain to isolate the spark igniters so that you don't have issues with them. I've used spark igniters for the last year, but every once in a while I'd have an issue with them zapping my controller. HSI's have no interference issues at all.

 

[crazyirishman34]

HSI is nice since you are not lighting a standing pilot. Will the BCS allow you to reset the lock out for failed ignition? Most of the Honeywell smart valve can utilize HSI if the ignition box has the ablity to send the right voltage to it.

 

[JonW]

Will the BCS allow you to reset the lock out for failed ignition?

I don't know. What's required to reset the lock out? If the smart valve (or controller module) puts out a signal to say it went to locked out status, then I don't see why the BCS couldn't react to that and trigger the module back to reset the lockout. I thought those smart valves had that built in to reset & retry when a failed ignition attempt occured... no?

 

[crazyirishman34]

Most times they try to light the 3 times then go into the lockout mode.

 

[MaxOut]

HSI is nice since you are not lighting a standing pilot. Will the BCS allow you to reset the lock out for failed ignition? Most of the Honeywell smart valve can utilize HSI if the ignition box has the ablity to send the right voltage to it.

Honeywell SmatValves do not have an "ignition box" (ignition module) the ignition sequence is controlled by the valve with no additional control hence the name SmartValve. All the valve needs to operate is 24vac and the ignition sequence is initiated.

SmartValves are designed for many applications and have various ignition sequences and pilot assemblies. The SmartValve I use has an ignition sequence that will continue to repeat until it senses flame so lockout is impossible. Some other SmartValves have a sequence that only attempts to ignite a certain number of times before lockout. Lockout is just another form of safety and can be reset simply by removing 24vac from the valve and re applying it with a switch or relay.

The SmartValve I selected uses the IHSI pilot burner that is made up of the hot surface igniter, flame sensor and pilot.
The sequence is as follows - 24vac applied to valve, HSI is activated, pilot valve open, pilot ignites, flame sensor senses pilot and main burner valve opens. At any point the flame sensor quits sensing flame the pilot and main burner valve will close and restart the ignition sequence. I selected this valve for the simplicity, reliability and redundancy.

 

[Stevorino]

So this is what I'm gathering from this thread so far:

Both systems are great.

Both have the capability to run more processes than you will ever need.

BCS is faster & easier to get from unboxing to brewing. This advantage scales largely depending on your coding knowledge.

BT has volume sensing, which could be a decision maker for some.

BCS has full mobile support, BT currently has android support and is anticipating iOS support soon.

 

[hypergolic]

Is there some information on the Android interface for BT? I tried googling and they only thing I found was a short youtube video that didn't show much.

 

[HumanGarbage]

So this is what I'm gathering from this thread so far:

Both systems are great.

Both have the capability to run more processes than you will ever need.

BCS is faster & easier to get from unboxing to brewing. This advantage scales largely depending on your coding knowledge.

BT has volume sensing, which could be a decision maker for some.

BCS has full mobile support, BT currently has android support and is anticipating iOS support soon.

Yup that is pretty much it in a nutshell. However BT does now have iOS support (iPad + iPhone at least).

I went BT. The volume sensing is what did it for me. The open source nature appealed as well. That said, you can't go wrong with either.

 

[Mpez]

Here are some thoughts from me on my blog. I have owned and used both systems now.

 

[chadillac7819]

Here are some thoughts from me on my blog. I have owned and used both systems now.

Mpez, great insight on the two systems on your blog. I was debating for some time and was searching for this kind of real-world review. I finally settled on the BCS 462 since it could do ferm AND brew duty on one machine AND had remote access, not just monitoring. Those features seemed much more usable than volume measurement and reading about your experiences has helped to remove any buyer’s remorse.

BTW - Have you considered reprogramming your DX1 as a permanent fermentation controller? I think that their Fermtroller firmware will load onto it so it won’t be a waste of money. Just a thought.

 

[psbuckland]

I know this thread was a flame war for a while...but I am glad to see it back on track. We seem to have an emotional tie to each of our systems and I can appreciate that.

It is interesting in the varied experiences between users of the DX1. I had the exact opposite experience. My setup was not challenging, a few small issues were resolved quickly, and I got what I wanted.

My main goal was to shorten my brew day, have manual/auto control to move liquor/wort, and have temperature control. I viewed the DX1 as more of a brew day manager...stepping though each phase either manually or automatically. My goals were met as I can set the DX1 to delay start before I even get out of bed. It fills the HLT to the calculated level, heats it to strike temp and fills the MLT(from the bottom), auto refills the HLT, and starts mashing using the HERMS coil. Thats when I show up and stir and have a cup of coffee while mashing. I am almost halfway done with brewing and just showed up.
I wasn't able to find a BCS system successfully operating this way, although it may exist. Good luck to all on their venture!

 

[MaxOut]

I know this thread was a flame war for a while...but I am glad to see it back on track. We seem to have an emotional tie to each of our systems and I can appreciate that.

It is interesting in the varied experiences between users of the DX1. I had the exact opposite experience. My setup was not challenging, a few small issues were resolved quickly, and I got what I wanted.

My main goal was to shorten my brew day, have manual/auto control to move liquor/wort, and have temperature control. I viewed the DX1 as more of a brew day manager...stepping though each phase either manually or automatically. My goals were met as I can set the DX1 to delay start before I even get out of bed. It fills the HLT to the calculated level, heats it to strike temp and fills the MLT(from the bottom), auto refills the HLT, and starts mashing using the HERMS coil. Thats when I show up and stir and have a cup of coffee while mashing. I am almost halfway done with brewing and just showed up.
I wasn't able to find a BCS system successfully operating this way, although it may exist. Good luck to all on their venture!

Agreed the BCS and the BT both have their strengths. Both systems require a certain amount of effort and electrical knowledge to get desired results. I have two BCS's and getting a BT to play with. I'm not interested in volume sensing but more interested in learning something new like when I started brewing. Ultimately one of the the things that keeps me interested in brewing is the DIY aspect of building my brewery.

I can only comment on what I've read about the BT but have real world experience with the BCS. The BCS is capable of achieving what you have with the BT but instead of setting your volume requirement in the programming you would set it mechanically by moving a sensor to the desired level on your sight glass. If I had a need for volume sensing I like this method because no sensors touch the wort. Another more intrusive option is an adjustable float. I use a tankless hot water heater and have no need to pre- heat water for mash or HERMS as it is available on demand. One thing I decide when automating was to keep "ME" in the process. I think of the automation as a assistant that keeps temps and watches timers letting me know with different buzzers to intervene and switch a hose, add hops or stir the mash. Sure I could hard pipe the plumbing, add a bunch of actuated ball valves, put in a motorized grain mill with grain shoot, etc. but I like being involved.

In the end the BCS has allot to offer and I have not even scratched the surface, and I'm sure the BT does as well. I made the decision on the BCS based mainly on the simple operation, basic set up and intuitive web interface. I all ready use a computer for my brew day with Beer smith and the web interface seemed like a good fit with my brewery design.