BeerTools Pro Bug Reports Archive A

[Romulan_Ale]

When I open BTP, the screen that opens has embedded untitled sessions within the screen. None of the embedded sessions is active, they do however interfere with the viewing the graphs under the styles tab and the color indicator. Latest Version ....19 and Windows XP.

[Romulan_Ale]

I updated my graphics driver and the problem was solved

[just-cj]

When I open an ingredient browser, the standard Mac keyboard command for closing the window doesn't work. Command + w should be the same as clicking on the Close button or the Red X on the top of the window, but it doesn't work.

Mac OS 10.4.8, BTP v20.

[billvelek]

In playing with the water chemistry table I have noticed something odd that must be due to a bug or maybe its due to how I've set my template, but that would seem like a bug, too.

When I start BTP, it begins with my template which is a basic recipe I used back when I was experimenting around, and I just left it as the template because I usually use a couple of the ingredients any how. Well, I noticed that even after I delete ALL of the ingredients, and even set my water volumes to zero, which I presume would put me back to the same posture as though I first opened BTP anew, then if I go to the water chemistry table, it already has a "Mash pH" value of 5.8. How could that possibly be right? Then when I add water to the chemistry table -- still with no grains or other ingredients -- it begins to change; e.g., using the first water on the list -- from Abilene -- as soon as I arrow up to .1 gallons, the 'Mash pH' jumps up to 5.9, which I suppose it should rise since the profile for Abilene water has a pH of 7.8 ... HOWEVER, if I increase the water volume even as high as 10,000 gallons -- still with no ingredients -- the 'Mash pH' still remains at 5.9. That can't be right, can it?

Cheers.

Bill Velek

[jeff]

When I start BTP, it begins with my template which is a basic recipe I used back when I was experimenting around, and I just left it as the template because I usually use a couple of the ingredients any how. Well, I noticed that even after I delete ALL of the ingredients, and even set my water volumes to zero, which I presume would put me back to the same posture as though I first opened BTP anew, then if I go to the water chemistry table, it already has a "Mash pH" value of 5.8. How could that possibly be right? Then when I add water to the chemistry table -- still with no grains or other ingredients -- it begins to change; e.g., using the first water on the list -- from Abilene -- as soon as I arrow up to .1 gallons, the 'Mash pH' jumps up to 5.9, which I suppose it should rise since the profile for Abilene water has a pH of 7.8 ... HOWEVER, if I increase the water volume even as high as 10,000 gallons -- still with no ingredients -- the 'Mash pH' still remains at 5.9. That can't be right, can it?

I agree with you, but understanding how the mash pH value is calculated will clear some things up. Chapter 15 of John Palmer's book How to Brew discusses residual alkalinity and mash pH and what these really mean. You can click over to what he says here. Essentially, these values are simply theoretical indicators, and not comprehensive chemical equilibrium predictions. However, the chemical equilibrium stuff is currently in development. For now, RA and mash pH are there to get us close.

[billvelek]

I agree with you, but understanding how the mash pH value is calculated will clear some things up. Chapter 15 of John Palmer's book How to Brew discusses residual alkalinity and mash pH and what these really mean. You can click over to what he says here. Essentially, these values are simply theoretical indicators, and not comprehensive chemical equilibrium predictions. However, the chemical equilibrium stuff is currently in development. For now, RA and mash pH are there to get us close.

Regarding "the chemical equilibrium stuff is currently in development", do you mean in development by BTP or by brewing/chemistry science? In other words, is that something that you are working on, or planning to work on, as an improvement or new feature for BTP?

Also, thanks for the link; I've read it, am trying to digest it, and have even played with the nomograph that John Palmer has available at that link. In that respect, let me point out some slight deviation -- if I have used it correctly -- and also some difficulty that I've had in understanding how to apply your water chemistry data to his nomograph.

First, because Palmer uses Dublin water as an example, that's what I loaded in BTP. The Ca and Mg scales were marked according to BTP data for Dublin water -- 115 and 4, respectively. Drawing a line between them per Palmer's instructions crosses his "Effective Hardness" scale at about 85, so my first question is whether Palmer's "Effective Hardness" is supposed to be the same thing as "Hardness" in the BTP 'Water Profile' for Dublin? If it is, one of you is definitely wrong because the figures are miles apart -- Palmer's 85 versus BTP's 304. However, I presume that they are not the same, since Palmer's nomograph includes a note under his "Effective Hardness" label -- "This is not the same as Total Hardness as CaCO3", which I assume is what BTP is indicating. If that is correct, would it be useful for BTP to also include a field for "EFFECTIVE Hardness" in addition to "TOTAL Hardness"? Also, this question might not crop up again if you were to relabel your profile screen to specify "TOTAL H." rather than simply "H...".

Continuing on with the nomograph, and assuming that 'Effective Hardness' of 85 is correct, I then marked the 'HCO3' scale at 150 (BTP does not have a data value for 'CaCO3'). Then drawing a line from Hardness 85 through HCO3 150, the line crosses the top scale at about pH 5.76 or 5.77 (note that Palmer's pH scale have 5 increments between each tenth of a point) whereas BTP indicates a pH of 5.9 -- both with and without 10 pounds of base malt in 5 gallons of Dublin water. The base malt does not seem to make any difference to pH, although I got the impression from Palmer's page that it does. Perhaps I need to redigest that. Anyway, one way or the other, the difference in pH between these two tools seems significant enough to mention in case you want to recheck anything. By the way, bottom side of Palmer's top scale for "Residual Alkalinity as CaCO3" indicates a value of about 40 which is very close to BTP's indicated value of 38.6, so you seem to be about right on there.

Finally, Palmer's page also has links to Excel spreadsheets to do calculations on his page -- presumably (since I don't have Excel) for 'Calcium Additions to Lower the Mash pH' and for 'Bicarbonate Additions to Raise the Mash pH'. I assume that experimenting with salt additions in BTP accomplishes the same thing, but I want to ask: what is "bicarbonate"? I don't see it listed on the 'mineral salts' browser, and I don't know if it is the same thing as something else that is listed. If it does happen to be the same as something like 'Baking Soda' or 'Calcite', it would be very handy if the 'alias' were added to the name in your database, such as "Baking Soda (Bicarbonate)". Also, and I think I might have mentioned this before, I understand that some brewers add acids to their mash to change pH; if that is an acceptable brewing practice, should those be added to your water additions database and available for the water chemistry page?

I know this has been long ... as usual ... but I hope you can appreciate that it takes me longer to write this stuff than it takes for you to read it, and I'm just trying to learn and be helpful.

Thanks.

Bill Velek

[slothrob]

I suggest you use BTP's Residual Alkalinity value. The Residual Alkalinity (RA) value I've received from BTP, in the limited testing I've done, has corresponded closely to the RA I've determined from Palmer's spreadsheet (this should work with any spreadsheet program, not just Excel, I use Apple's, but I imagine the free OpenOffice and Googles Doc's and Speadsheets would work as well). This has been true for my tap water and for water I've corrected with salt additions. These numbers have been close to those I got from the nomograph with a couple tries, but I find that to be a bit awkward to use.

I've ignored the pH numbers, since this is sort of an imaginary number in this case. It's not the pH of the water, nor the pH you will hit in your mash, it's a theoretical pH from a mash using only low SRM base malt, if I understand correctly. I'm surprised that BTP changes the pH at all when you increase the grain amount, since Palmer's value is independent of grain amount.

Bicarbonate additions can be made with Sodium Bicarbonate ("Baking Soda") and Calcium Carbonate ("Calcite"). You can use the former, it's reasonably soluble, when you don't want to add more Calcium, but you need to watch how much Sodium you add. The latter will allow you to add both Calcium and Carbonate, but has a more complex effect on RA, since you're adding both halves of the equation. It's also virtually insoluble in water and needs to be added directly to the mash.

Much like you suggest, Bill, my simplified method is to use Palmer's nonograph only to find the range of RA's that are correct for my target SRM. Add Calcium to 50+ ppm, to the mash water, with whatever form of Calcium pushes the RA in the right direction (considering the use of CaSO4 when appropriate to highlight hop flavor). Then finish by adding any additional salts in BTP that get me to the approximate middle of the RA range as calculated by BTP.

[billvelek]

I have never done any salt additions and never even bothered to get a water analysis, but I suppose I ought to do at least that to have an idea of what I'm working with. Anyway, this has been pretty much an academic exercise for me, but certainly not a waste of time. The main reason I posted about all of this is I'm just trying to be helpful in tracking down any possible bugs or potential problems for other users. But who knows? I might advance to the point of trying to replicate recipes using water mimicking exotic places.

Thanks again. You are always most helpful and very knowledgable.

Cheers.

Bill Velek

[slothrob]

Anyway, this has been pretty much an academic exercise for me, but certainly not a waste of time. The main reason I posted about all of this is I'm just trying to be helpful in tracking down any possible bugs or potential problems for other users.

This occurred to me as I was typing my response and realized this was in the bug reporting section. But I figured I'd finish, in case you were trying to mess with your water for real, and try to point you to where BTP gives you the numbers that you need.

[JPinAZ]

Forgive me if this has been reported, but when using v1.0.20, after I click on "add" in the ingredient browser, the recipe window pops up but Windows still thinks the ingredient browser window is still active. The only way I can get back to the ingredient browser it to either Alt-Tab or click on the task bar.

[billvelek]

You should be able to click on the browse key again if you want to add another ingredient. There was a brief discussion some time ago about whether the ingredient list should remain on top to select another one, etc. I suggested that the ingredient list remain on top for the addition of multiple ingredients, and that the user then click on the 'Close' key to return to the session window.

Cheers.

Bill Velek

[Beer Snob]

Hey Jeff! Remember when I posted in HomeBrewTalk a while ago and the font was like well 10 times larger then it was supposed to be? You corrected it for me.... what did you do.... it's doing it again although this time I caught it before posting.

This is what I coped and posted over there but it comes out normal over here

DogFish 60 Minute Clone
14-B American IPA



Size: 5.4 gal
Efficiency: 75.0%
Attenuation: 75.0%
Calories: 238.06 per 12.0 fl oz

Original Gravity: 1.071 (1.056 - 1.075)
|====================#===========|
Terminal Gravity: 1.018 (1.010 - 1.018)
|=======================#========|
Color: 11.0 (6.0 - 15.0)
|================#===============|
Alcohol: 7.04% (5.5% - 7.5%)
|====================#===========|
Bitterness: 149.38 (40.0 - 60.0)
|================================|

Ingredients:
8.5 lbs Dry Extra Light
0.5 lbs Crystal Malt 60

[jeff]

Hey Jeff! Remember when I posted in HomeBrewTalk a while ago and the font was like well 10 times larger then it was supposed to be? You corrected it for me.... what did you do.... it's doing it again although this time I caught it before posting.

Try using BBCode (alternate) to see if that works. Let me know if it helps, thanks!

[Beer Snob]

Yeah I knew you said to use that one and when the 'standard' came up I did not think to try the others or see if there was another one:) Thanks Jeff! Came out well. Hoping you work on the profile section some more as I still think that is an incredible difference in this program.

HEY, YOU ARE IN BYO THIS MONTH! I believe this is the first month I saw it:) Congrats!!

[jeff]

HEY, YOU ARE IN BYO THIS MONTH! I believe this is the first month I saw it:) Congrats!!

Thanks