| |
Main
Date: 30 Nov 2006 09:58:30
From: OrganicVeggie
Subject: IBU Calculations
|
Howdy all,
John Bleichert posted a handy-dandy Perl script for calculating IBUs
at:
http://home.earthlink.net/~syborg/sc/sc.html
Using the logic, I tried to integrate the Tinseth, Rager and Daniels
methods into the spreadsheet I use for recipe design. Obviously I saw
some significant variations in the results, but I'm curious to know if
my results are correct. Would someone be so kind as to plug these
values into their favorite brewing software and see if their numbers
match mine?
Target, pellet, 90 minutes, 10.4% AA, 0.70 oz
Daniels: 16.16 IBUs
Tinseth: 12.35 IBUs
Rager: 13.93 IBUs
Fuggle, whole, 30 minutes, 4.1% AA, 1.50 oz
Daniels: 6.00 IBUs
Tinseth: 10.39 IBUs
Rager: 6.01 IBUs
Fuggle, whole, 15 minutes, 4.1% AA, 0.20 oz
Daniels: 0.64 IBUs
Tinseth: 1.38 IBUs
Rager: 0.39 IBUs
Total IBUs
Daniels: 22.80 IBUs
Tinseth: 24.13 IBUs
Rager: 20.32 IBUs
Does anyone have particular preferences, based on empirical tests,
between these three methods?
Thanks!
-Sean
--
You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline. It
helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear
weapons, but at the very least, you need a beer.
-- Frank Zappa
|
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 18:19:12
From: John Bleichert
Subject: Re: IBU Calculations
|
OrganicVeggie <organicveggie@gmail.com > wrote:
> Howdy all,
> John Bleichert posted a handy-dandy Perl script for calculating IBUs
> at:
>
> http://home.earthlink.net/~syborg/sc/sc.html
>
Just to avoid confusion, that's the link (above) to a text-based
spreadsheet. The Perl script is here:
http://home.earthlink.net/~syborg/ibu.pl
The perl script is a wee bit less accurate than the spreadsheet. Glad
you're getting some use out of them, OV!
> Using the logic, I tried to integrate the Tinseth, Rager and Daniels
> methods into the spreadsheet I use for recipe design. Obviously I saw
> some significant variations in the results, but I'm curious to know if
> my results are correct. Would someone be so kind as to plug these
> values into their favorite brewing software and see if their numbers
> match mine?
>
> Target, pellet, 90 minutes, 10.4% AA, 0.70 oz
> Daniels: 16.16 IBUs
> Tinseth: 12.35 IBUs
> Rager: 13.93 IBUs
>
> Fuggle, whole, 30 minutes, 4.1% AA, 1.50 oz
> Daniels: 6.00 IBUs
> Tinseth: 10.39 IBUs
> Rager: 6.01 IBUs
>
> Fuggle, whole, 15 minutes, 4.1% AA, 0.20 oz
> Daniels: 0.64 IBUs
> Tinseth: 1.38 IBUs
> Rager: 0.39 IBUs
>
> Total IBUs
> Daniels: 22.80 IBUs
> Tinseth: 24.13 IBUs
> Rager: 20.32 IBUs
>
> Does anyone have particular preferences, based on empirical tests,
> between these three methods?
>
> Thanks!
>
> -Sean
> --
> You can't be a real country unless you have a beer and an airline. It
> helps if you have some kind of a football team, or some nuclear
> weapons, but at the very least, you need a beer.
> -- Frank Zappa
>
-----------------------------------------------
John Bleichert syborg@earthlink.net
The heat from below can burn your eyes out!!
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 13:32:53
From: OrganicVeggie
Subject: Re: IBU Calculations
|
On Nov 30, 2:56 pm, John 'Shaggy' Kolesar <s...@shagg.net > wrote:
>'m pretty sure we'd need the OG of the boil, as that is usually a factor
> in the various methods (unless you posted that and I missed it).
Whoops. One of those days, I guess. :)
Boil volume (start): 11.5 gal
Boil volume (end): 10.0 gal
OG (boil start): 1.047
OG (boil end): 1.052
>> Does anyone have particular preferences,
>> based on empirical tests,
>> between these three methods?
>
>It's not really a matter of one method being more correct
>than another. Each is designed to work best on different
> styles of brewing.
That's pretty much what I figured... I typically use Daniel's method.
Not because I have strong feelings, but simply because it's what I had
access to originally (when I first started to care) and now I'm used to
it. I was just curious to see which method different brewers picked and
why.
Hopefully curiosity won't kill this cat. ;)
-Sean
|
| | |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 22:02:19
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: IBU Calculations
|
On 30 Nov 2006 13:32:53 -0800, <organicveggie@gmail.com > wrote:
>>> Does anyone have particular preferences,
>>> based on empirical tests,
>>> between these three methods?
>>
>>It's not really a matter of one method being more correct
>>than another. Each is designed to work best on different
>> styles of brewing.
>
> That's pretty much what I figured... I typically use Daniel's method.
> Not because I have strong feelings, but simply because it's what I had
> access to originally (when I first started to care) and now I'm used to
> it. I was just curious to see which method different brewers picked and
> why.
If you're already used to Daniel's method, then that's the most important
thing. I'd just keep using it. There's nothing really "better" about the
other methods that would make it worth switching and re-familiarizing yourself
with something new.
John.
|
| |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 20:56:03
From: John 'Shaggy' Kolesar
Subject: Re: IBU Calculations
|
On 30 Nov 2006 09:58:30 -0800, <organicveggie@gmail.com > wrote:
> Using the logic, I tried to integrate the Tinseth, Rager and Daniels
> methods into the spreadsheet I use for recipe design. Obviously I saw
> some significant variations in the results, but I'm curious to know if
> my results are correct. Would someone be so kind as to plug these
> values into their favorite brewing software and see if their numbers
> match mine?
I'm pretty sure we'd need the OG of the boil, as that is usually a factor
in the various methods (unless you posted that and I missed it).
> Does anyone have particular preferences, based on empirical tests,
> between these three methods?
It's not really a matter of one method being more correct than another. Each
is designed to work best on different styles of brewing. IE, if you're a
partial boil extract brewer then you may use one method, whereas a different
one may be more useful if you're an all-grain brewer.
Keep in mind that all of the methods/formulas are still just estimates. IMO,
the best thing to do is just pick one method and stick with it.
John.
|
| | |
Date: 30 Nov 2006 16:13:24
From: Ed Edelenbos
Subject: Re: IBU Calculations
|
"John 'Shaggy' Kolesar" <spam@shagg.net > wrote in message
news:slrnemuhl5.du4.spam@weizen.shagg.net...
>
> Keep in mind that all of the methods/formulas are still just estimates.
> IMO,
> the best thing to do is just pick one method and stick with it.
>
>
> John.
That is what occurs to me. I use recipator for all of my recipes. I'm not
sure how accurate the formulae are... and offhand, I'm not even sure which
IBU formula is used (Tinseth I think). I know (basically) what to expect
with the numbers it chunks out though. Which in the end is the important
thing... useable numbers.
Ed
|
|
