Diastatic Power for Weyermann Barke Malts

[Beerwildered]

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)

 

[Qhrumphf]

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.

 

[Beerwildered]

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.

 

[Qhrumphf]

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.

 

[Vale71]

Sounds like a longer sach rest is what’s needed to get the best efficiency.

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.

 

[Beerwildered]

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.

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.

 

[ba-brewer]

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?

 

[Qhrumphf]

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.

 

[ESBrewer]

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.

 

[Beerwildered]

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?

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.

 

[Qhrumphf]

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.

 

[Qhrumphf]

And in your recipe even IF it was poor you'd have zero issues.

 

[ba-brewer]

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.

 

[Qhrumphf]

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.

 

[Beerwildered]

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.

This is exactly what I was thinking. I’ll brew with the grain bill as is and see what we get.

 

[Beerwildered]

This is exactly what I was thinking. I’ll brew with the grain bill as is and see what we get.

Also wondering if @Yooper has any input into the Brewersfriend numbers

 

[ba-brewer]

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.

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.

 

[Beerwildered]

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.

I can’t find the Barke Malts in BeerSmith - even in the add ons. Do you have them?

 

[ba-brewer]

No I don't have it either. I make a copy of existing items then modify as needed if there is not one, mostly just for inventory stand point.

 

[Yooper]

Also wondering if @Yooper has any input into the Brewersfriend numbers

Let me check into it, and get back to you ASAP. When are you brewing?

 

[Big Monk]

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.

The Kolbach Index is a measure of its modification. I can assure you all of the Barke malts have high DP.

 

[Beerwildered]

Let me check into it, and get back to you ASAP. When are you brewing?

Thanks! Hoping to brew on Wednesday.

 

[Silver_Is_Money]

A blurb I came across on the Weyermann website didn't mention numerical specifics, but it stated that their Barke malts are known for their "superior diastatic power".

https://www.weyermann.de/fra/news.asp?go=ne&show=yes&idne=3502&umenue=yes&idmenue=&sprache=

 

[Beerwildered]

A blurb I came across on the Weyermann website didn't mention numerical specifics, but it stated that their Barke malts are known for their "superior diastatic power".

https://www.weyermann.de/fra/news.asp?go=ne&show=yes&idne=3502&umenue=yes&idmenue=&sprache=

Yep. I saw the same thing.

 

[Qhrumphf]

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.

 

[Beerwildered]

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.

My intention was to do just that. Why do you think I asked the question in the first place? I appreciate the help.

 

[SanPancho]

Out of curiosity, what was the big concern over DP to begin with?

Just because they were the “barke” versions?

 

[Big Monk]

Out of curiosity, what was the big concern over DP to begin with?

Just because they were the “barke” versions?

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.

 

[ba-brewer]

Out of curiosity, what was the big concern over DP to begin with?

Just because they were the “barke” versions?

look at post #10 and post #11

 

[Beerwildered]

Out of curiosity, what was the big concern over DP to begin with?

Just because they were the “barke” versions?

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