Diastatic Power for Weyermann Barke Malts

Williams 728
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.
Beerwildered

Beerwildered

Finding my way to beer heaven
HBT Supporter
Joined
Jan 6, 2019
Messages
261
Reaction score
227
Location
New Hill, NC
I’m putting together a recipe for an IPL and want to use Weyermann Barke Pilsner and Barke Vienna in the recipe.

However, I’m coming up short on some calculations because I’m missing some key info - specifically Diastatic Power.

Does anyone know where I can find this - or how I might calculate it from readily available data such as spec sheets? (Attached)

IMG_0538.JPG
IMG_0537.JPG
 
You're looking for the saccharification time. Those times are on the high side (one would expect 5 mins for highly enzymatic malt and 10 mins for most base malts, these are 15 and 20), so you should assume the enzymatic power is low. If you have the Weyermann grain sack, it's got a QR code that IIRC gives lot specific info (or maybe that's what this is...), rather than just crop year. I don't recall if what lists WK, which more directly translates to Lintner which is what I assume you're looking for.
 
Thanks. This is super helpful.

I am looking for the degrees lintner, but short of that, this is very helpful.

Sounds like a longer sach rest is what’s needed to get the best efficiency.
 
The actual lot info will be better if you scan the bag. Dug up a sample, still lists sach time instead of WK or L, but should narrow it to a closer figure than just a max number.
 
Beerwildered said:
Sounds like a longer sach rest is what’s needed to get the best efficiency.
Click to expand...

Hold your horses... Did you download the analysis sheet for the lots of malt that you actually bought? The spec sheets you posted are meant as "quality guarantees" meaning in this specific case that Weyermann guarantees that saccharification time will never exceed 15 minutes even in the worst possible case. It simply does not imply that the malt you have on hand has such a low diastatic power, to determine that you need the actual data for your lot.
 
Vale71 said:
Hold your horses... Did you download the analysis sheet for the lots of malt that you actually bought? The spec sheets you posted are meant as "quality guarantees" meaning in this specific case that Weyermann guarantees that saccharification time will never exceed 15 minutes even in the worst possible case. It simply does not imply that the malt you have on hand has such a low diastatic power, to determine that you need the actual data for your lot.
Click to expand...

The problem is that Weyermann doesn’t seem to directly reference DP on any of their sheets. At the very least I’m looking for average numbers for the Barke Malts.
 
I use Barke Pils a lot, and occasionally Barke Munich (haven't used the Vienna). No problems converting, ever.

It's probably fine no matter what, only issue might be if you're using a bunch of non-enzymatic starchy adjuncts, and even then probably okay.

But as said, you need the actual lot information.
 
I don't think their Barke Vienna is far from their (or any company's) standard Vienna, which is typically ~100 Lintners or a bit less. This is a fairly high value. So Barke Pils is probably a bit more active than Vienna..continental pils is often described being MIN 75 so could be full 100.
 
Last edited:
ba-brewer said:
https://bsgcraftbrewing.com/barke-line
the propaganda does not list a number but it says superior diastatic power, assuming those two grains make up the bulk of your IPL and you don't have a bunch of adjuncts or non-base malts you should not have issues.

What else is going to be in your grain bill?
Click to expand...

I saw that. “Superior Diastatic Power” - which presents a problem.

Here’s what’s happening in detail:

I’m building an IPL. My grain bill is as follows:

58% Barke Pilsner
34% Barke Vienna
3% Acidulated Malt
5% Carafoam

However, as I built the recipe in Brewersfriend, I couldn’t find the Barke Malts, so I substituted straight Weyermann Pilsner and Weyermann Vienna for the fermentables.

My OG came out to 1.059

Later, I discovered the Barke Malts in Brewersfriend and I changed the recipe to reflect that. The problem is that when I did that - changed from normal Weyermann Pilsner to Weyermann Barke Pilsner, my OG dropped significantly to 1.048.

This doesn’t seem likely to me. I think that the Brewersfriend info is wrong - but I’m trying to prove it.

The only way that I know to do that is to gather the numbers and test.

I know that the easy fix would be to just increase my grain bill to meet my OG numbers - but that assumes the info is correct in the first place... and I’m dubious.

Seems to me that a base malt Pilsner with “Superior Diastatic Power” should produce a similar extract gravity. Right? I don’t know, but I want to know before I add water and find out.
 
You're looking at extract potential, not diastatic power. Apples to oranges.

There it should be nearly identical to regular Pils. Both about 80% extract.

Your calculator must have bunk data.
 
I don't see anything in your grain bill to have to worry about diastatic power, and would not worry about it.

The BSG info sort of implies a possible lower extract compared to newer varieties of barley, but still a excellent extract yield.

For the first brew I think I would go with lower gravity number and if it is wrong then you can water down the wort if you really care about the starting gravity. Next time adjust accordingly.

I have not used the Barke malt but in general I get higher efficiency from Weyermann pilsner malts.
 
The difference should be pretty negligible. Like 80% vs 81% dry basis extract. Like 37 instead of 38 ppg. That's not gonna create the swing the OP is seeing. Someone put bad data into Brewer's Friend. BeerSmith back in the day had a similar issue where it's generic Maris Otter was absurdly low for no reason.
 
Qhrumphf said:
The difference should be pretty negligible. Like 80% vs 81% dry basis extract. Like 37 instead of 38 ppg. That's not gonna create the swing the OP is seeing. Someone put bad data into Brewer's Friend. BeerSmith back in the day had a similar issue where it's generic Maris Otter was absurdly low for no reason.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I was thinking. I’ll brew with the grain bill as is and see what we get.
 
Qhrumphf said:
The difference should be pretty negligible. Like 80% vs 81% dry basis extract. Like 37 instead of 38 ppg. That's not gonna create the swing the OP is seeing. Someone put bad data into Brewer's Friend. BeerSmith back in the day had a similar issue where it's generic Maris Otter was absurdly low for no reason.
Click to expand...
Looking back the gravity difference you are correct, there should not be that much difference.

I use beersmith for my recipes, but I also calculate gravity using a spreadsheet made from the generic information in palmer "how to brew" so I can get a estimate on my first runnings. The generic number give about the same overall number as the detailed information in beersmith. Helps me find out if I buggered up a setting in beersmith too.
 
ba-brewer said:
Looking back the gravity difference you are correct, there should not be that much difference.

I use beersmith for my recipes, but I also calculate gravity using a spreadsheet made from the generic information in palmer "how to brew" so I can get a estimate on my first runnings. The generic number give about the same overall number as the detailed information in beersmith. Helps me find out if I buggered up a setting in beersmith too.
Click to expand...

I can’t find the Barke Malts in BeerSmith - even in the add ons. Do you have them?
 
Beerwildered said:
The problem is that Weyermann doesn’t seem to directly reference DP on any of their sheets. At the very least I’m looking for average numbers for the Barke Malts.
Click to expand...

The Kolbach Index is a measure of its modification. I can assure you all of the Barke malts have high DP.
 
In many cases if you want accurate recipe calculations you have to answer the malt data yourself. The sheet you attached, while only a spec sheet and not lot-specific data, has enough info to enter it your self.

Some simple googling on how to read it is all you need (MoreBeer has a good overview). The 80.5% dry extract for the Pils and 79% for the Vienna is good enough to roll with. As they're listed as minimums the worst case is the specific lots are slightly higher and you overshoot instead of undershoot, easily diluted down post boil.

Relying on others for that info is what gets you in this position in the first place. And the confusion over extract vs DP shows it's high time to learn.

Add the correct data yourself to Brewers Friend OR BeerSmith. The latter will let you. If the former won't you need to abandon inferior software.
 
Qhrumphf said:
In many cases if you want accurate recipe calculations you have to answer the malt data yourself. The sheet you attached, while only a spec sheet and not lot-specific data, has enough info to enter it your self.

Some simple googling on how to read it is all you need (MoreBeer has a good overview). The 80.5% dry extract for the Pils and 79% for the Vienna is good enough to roll with. As they're listed as minimums the worst case is the specific lots are slightly higher and you overshoot instead of undershoot, easily diluted down post boil.

Relying on others for that info is what gets you in this position in the first place. And the confusion over extract vs DP shows it's high time to learn.

Add the correct data yourself to Brewers Friend OR BeerSmith. The latter will let you. If the former won't you need to abandon inferior software.
Click to expand...

My intention was to do just that. Why do you think I asked the question in the first place? I appreciate the help.
 
Out of curiosity, what was the big concern over DP to begin with?

Just because they were the “barke” versions?
 
SanPancho said:
Out of curiosity, what was the big concern over DP to begin with?

Just because they were the “barke” versions?
Click to expand...

I don’t get it either. DP is not a useful metric in any practical way AFAIK.

Kolbach Index and Extract Potential parameters are the ones to look out for.
 
SanPancho said:
Out of curiosity, what was the big concern over DP to begin with?

Just because they were the “barke” versions?
Click to expand...

No - I was looking for DP because it was the single piece of data that I didn’t have to be able to enter a custom fermentable into the software (either Brewersfriend or BeerSmith, btw)

I was trying to track down a discrepancy in OG between two seemingly similar malts. See post #10
 
RPIScotty said:
I don’t get it either. DP is not a useful metric in any practical way AFAIK.

Kolbach Index and Extract Potential parameters are the ones to look out for.
Click to expand...

Ok. If that’s how you roll - please calculate potential OG based on the grain bill I posted in #10. I’m not sure how to do it based on the information accessible to me.
 
Beerwildered said:
Ok. If that’s how you roll - please calculate potential OG based on the grain bill I posted in #10. I’m not sure how to do it based on the information accessible to me.
Click to expand...
Put 100 for the DP. It's gonna be close enough to accurate and shouldn't make a lick of difference. Protein, moisture, and extract are the important ones. DP only matters when you don't have enough. In your case you have plenty.

http://www.morebeer.com/brewingtechniques/bmg/noonan.html
 
Beerwildered said:
Ok. If that’s how you roll - please calculate potential OG based on the grain bill I posted in #10. I’m not sure how to do it based on the information accessible to me.
Click to expand...

The best thing to do if you don’t have the lot data directly from Weyermann is to make a reasonable assumption as to the FGDB and Moisture.

I tell people to use the following generic values in The Brewing Engine:

945EBE64-CAA3-4B4E-9EFF-2E95ECD5E8D3.png
 
Lefou said:
I use Brewers Friend regularly and they've done no less than several updates on the malt data and re-arranged the yeast data tables in the past few months.
Click to expand...
I took a quick browse through their website and saw neither Barke grains (Barke Munich the only explicit Weyermann grain at all), but saw lots a few numbers in process that were definitely wrong.

I don't use it and not sure if there's a paid database I don't have access to, or if I was just looking in the wrong place.
 
Beerwildered said:
No - I was looking for DP because it was the single piece of data that I didn’t have to be able to enter a custom fermentable into the software (either Brewersfriend or BeerSmith, btw)

I was trying to track down a discrepancy in OG between two seemingly similar malts. See post #10
Click to expand...

Ah, got it. Glossed over that part.
 
Beerwildered said:
No - I was looking for DP because it was the single piece of data that I didn’t have to be able to enter a custom fermentable into the software (either Brewersfriend or BeerSmith, btw)

I was trying to track down a discrepancy in OG between two seemingly similar malts. See post #10
Click to expand...

I looked at Brewer's Friend and DP is not a required value for entering a custom grain so just leave it blank.

I would concentrate on extract potential in ppg because that is what BF is using. You can get Extract Potential (ppg) from caclulating the Dry Basis As-Is Extract Potential (%) as follows:

Dry Basis As-Is (%) = Dry Basis Fine Grind (%) * (1-Moisture (%)

Extract Potential (ppg) = (Dry Basis As-Is (%) * 0.04621) + 1

You can use the values from Post #34. As an example based on your grain bill:

58% Barke Pilsner (DBFG = 81.5%, Moisture = 4.06%) -> DBAI = 0.815 * (1 - 0.0406) = 0.782 = 78.2% or 1.036 ppg
34% Barke Vienna (DBFG = 81.5%, Moisture = 4.06%) -> DBAI = 0.815 * (1 - 0.0406) = 0.782 = 78.2% or 1.036 ppg
3% Acidulated Malt (DBFG = 81.9%, Moisture = 6.80%) -> DBAI = 0.819 * (1 - 0.0680) = 0.763= 76.3% or 1.035 ppg
5% Carafoam (DBFG = 76.4%, Moisture = 5.15%) -> DBAI = 0.764 * (1 - 0.0515) = 0.725= 72.5% or 1.034 ppg

I didn't see any volumes or total grain weight listed for your batch but punch those numbers in and see how it stacks up to what you observed.

Just to reiterate: Extract potential is king here.
 
Qhrumphf said:
I took a quick browse through their website and saw neither Barke grains (Barke Munich the only explicit Weyermann grain at all), but saw lots a few numbers in process that were definitely wrong.

I don't use it and not sure if there's a paid database I don't have access to, or if I was just looking in the wrong place.
Click to expand...

No, there isn't a paid database. One of the options in your profile is to show the other members' custom added grains if you would like.
upload_2019-4-22_9-47-13.png


For the DP, you can add it either via Lintner or WK.

As you can imagine, getting all of the information from the manufacturer can be tough (like in this case) so it's likely that someone just guessed or got the wrong information. I'm trying to track it down, but they haven't answered my request yet.
 
RPIScotty said:
I looked at Brewer's Friend and DP is not a required value for entering a custom grain so just leave it blank.

I would concentrate on extract potential in ppg because that is what BF is using. You can get Extract Potential (ppg) from caclulating the Dry Basis As-Is Extract Potential (%) as follows:

Dry Basis As-Is (%) = Dry Basis Fine Grind (%) * (1-Moisture (%)

Extract Potential (ppg) = (Dry Basis As-Is (%) * 0.04621) + 1

You can use the values from Post #34. As an example based on your grain bill:

58% Barke Pilsner (DBFG = 81.5%, Moisture = 4.06%) -> DBAI = 0.815 * (1 - 0.0406) = 0.782 = 78.2% or 1.036 ppg
34% Barke Vienna (DBFG = 81.5%, Moisture = 4.06%) -> DBAI = 0.815 * (1 - 0.0406) = 0.782 = 78.2% or 1.036 ppg
3% Acidulated Malt (DBFG = 81.9%, Moisture = 6.80%) -> DBAI = 0.819 * (1 - 0.0680) = 0.763= 76.3% or 1.035 ppg
5% Carafoam (DBFG = 76.4%, Moisture = 5.15%) -> DBAI = 0.764 * (1 - 0.0515) = 0.725= 72.5% or 1.034 ppg

I didn't see any volumes or total grain weight listed for your batch but punch those numbers in and see how it stacks up to what you observed.

Just to reiterate: Extract potential is king here.
Click to expand...

This is helpful. Let’s see if I’ve got this.

I’m doing an 11 gallon batch here - so...

12 lbs Barke Pilsner: 12lbs * 36ppg/ 11 gallons = 39.27
7 lbs Barke Vienna: 7lbs * 36ppg/11 gal = 23
.5lbs Acidulated: .5*35/11=1.6
1 lb Carafoam: 1*34/11=3.09

Total = 67

Now I need to adjust this for efficiency, right? My efficiency is 70% - so this puts me at 46.87... or an OG of 1.046 which is almost exactly what Brewersfriend calculated...

so it looks like maybe the Barke numbers are correct but the Weyermann Pilsner numbers are messed up somehow.

Either way, it looks like I need to increase my grain bill a bit to meet my desired OG.

Also: thank you for your help.
 

Similar threads

oldschool
Ireks Malt
Replies
12
Views
891
jdauria
jdauria
Bayou Fatma Brewer
Is 54 Diastatic Power enough?
Replies
31
Views
1K
MicroMickey
MicroMickey
whatstyleguidelines
Lots of Munich/Vienna vs a little Aromatic/Melanoidin/Dark Munich
Replies
2
Views
626
whatstyleguidelines
whatstyleguidelines
Ali01
Pilsener as base malt for porter?
Replies
10
Views
1K
kevin58
kevin58
HutBrew
Efficiency more than 10% higher than most brews.
Replies
14
Views
1K
dmtaylor
dmtaylor

Latest posts

Back
Top