|
Jan posted:You should also stop eating food, after all, many people reported getting trichinosis from pork, salmonella from chicken and lettuce, e. coli from assorted meats and produce. Good call, I'll just eat air and sunlight like Russian barbie.
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 05:53
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
 Good news for pot users! 1 hour at 140F, ambient temp 0.9F higher than yesterday's tests. 10 quarts of water in a 12 quart vessel, but this time steel (used the same volumes for the cambro). Plastic wrap cover. 0.10 kilowatt hours of energy used. I apologize to everyone I ever told to get a cambro because plastic is a better insulator than metal, blah blah blah Steve Yun fucked around with this message at 06:45 on Dec 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 06:33
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:People should just not use ping pong balls based on the annoyance of having to wash them afterwards wash...them? you mean after the hot water has gotten them dirty?
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
nice. Thanks for the science!
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 06:36
|
|
|
Glottis posted:wash...them? you mean after the hot water has gotten them dirty? I dip seal my ziplocs to squeeze the air out. Sometimes marinade gets in the water.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 06:37
|
|
|
Glottis posted:wash...them? you mean after the hot water has gotten them dirty? I dunno about you Dr Autoclave but when I'm dropping meat into a ziploc or vacuuming them I'm almost bound to get a dirty touch or drop here or there Steve Yun fucked around with this message at 07:01 on Dec 15, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 06:41
|
|
|
Thank you for testing all this. I know pingpong balls are not for me. Too much hassle. One thing that I would subjectively argue is a pro for a cutout lid vs no lid is less loss of water from evaporation. Not sure how significant that is for medium length boils but over 12 hours it might be a factor.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 08:46
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:I apologize to everyone I ever told to get a cambro because plastic is a better insulator than metal, blah blah blah And in general liquid in a stockpot will have less surface area than the same volume of liquid in a Cambro (although you can have squat pots like saucepans where this isn't true). Less surface area, less evaporative cooling. Cambros are kinda designed exactly backwards for how you'd theoretically want it, with the vessel narrower at the bottom and wider at the top, which means proportionally more water surface area when they're full. But this is all all-else-being-equal poo poo, same as before, and so (again) it's not really worth worrying about for cooking at home, and it's something that you can expect to vary from pot to pot (rather than being something you can generalise about all pots or all Cambros or whatever).
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 10:38
|
|
|
SubG posted:Volume and stuff Brb making an acrylic pyramid for my anova to perch majestically on.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 15:46
|
|
|
Hopper posted:Thank you for testing all this. I know pingpong balls are not for me. Too much hassle. I did a 72 hour brisket at 135 on my cut out lid tub with the water to the brim (as in when I put the lid on I displaced water out of it onto the counter). After three days water was still in contact with the lid.
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 17:43
|
|
|
Crunkjuice posted:I'm planning on doing a rack of lamb next weekend. It's also the first time I'm using a vacuum sealer over Ziploc. Have any of you guys had issues with bones poking through a vacuum bag? Still super new at this and wasn't sure if it's a real worry. Sharp bone? Stick a carrot cube on it like: 
|
|
#
?
Dec 15, 2016 23:57
|
|
|
When I did rack of lamb I wrapped the bone ends in parchment paper. It's thick enough not to get easily torn, and rounded out the ends enough so the bag wasn't compromised.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 00:28
|
|
|
I ended up getting some vacuum sealed racks from Costco, so I'm going to sous vide 2 of them as is and the third I'm going to season and vacuum seal myself and taste the difference. The bones feel pretty tame, so I think I'll be ok. Those are great ideas for if it's an issue in the future.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
the yeti posted:Brb making an acrylic pyramid for my anova to perch majestically on. 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 03:55
|
|
|
Just wrap sharp ends with a bit of saran wrap
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 04:22
|
|
|
SubG posted:You mean a pyramidal frustum. I, yeah I guess I do don't I 
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 17:55
|
|
|
 10 quarts of water in a 12 quart steel pot, covered by plastic wrap. Starting at 74F, takes 0.47 kilowatt hours and 41 minutes to get to 140F (actually it beeped at 139.7 but whatever)  10 quarts of water in a 12 quart cambro, covered by plastic lid. Starting at 74F, takes 0.47 kilowatt hours and 39 minutes to get to 140F So with a covering, it takes in the ballpark of 3-5x as much power to bring room temp water up to 140F as it does to maintain 140F for an hour, which costs about 6 cents in electricity.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:04
|
|
|
Why not just use hot water to start with
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:06
|
|
|
Flash Gordon Ramsay posted:Why not just use hot water to start with You should, and it's also likely that the cost of gas used to get your water hot is even cheaper than your electricity. But this shows that if you are lazy or forgetful and started with room temp water, or are reusing water from a previous cook from the day before, it's not the end of the world. Edit: it's also nice to know it's roughly in the ballpark of 40 mins to heat up water to 140F Steve Yun fucked around with this message at 19:37 on Dec 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:10
|
|
|
If you use a pot you can put it on the stove while you use the circulator. Just check it every 5-10 minutes and stop it before it goes over and you're good to go.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:14
|
|
|
Are there any fish that can live at SV temperatures? I have an idea.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 19:22
|
|
|
anothergod posted:If you use a pot you can put it on the stove while you use the circulator. Just check it every 5-10 minutes and stop it before it goes over and you're good to go. Yep, this is what I do. I puddled some sausages last week. Filled the pot with the hottest water I could get from the tap, then onto the stove, took about 3 minutes to get up to 155. I pulled it off at 150 so the residual energy from the range could be absorbed but not put it over 150. I felt like a genius when I thought of using the stove to speed up the water-heating step.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 21:17
|
|
|
Flash Gordon Ramsay posted:Are there any fish that can live at SV temperatures? I have an idea. Pompeii Worm (Alvinella pompejana) Named for the hydrothermal vents near where it lives, this underwater critter thrives in temperatures that are almost hot enough to boil water. The Pompeii worm is the world’s most heat-tolerant multicelled creature, able to withstand temperatures above 176°F (80°C).
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 21:19
|
|
|
Comedy option: baby loach in tofu hell
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 21:29
|
|
|
I have an Anova love it blah blah blah thinking about getting a unit for a friend of ours for Christmas. Anyone got any good deals floating around? Doesn't have to be the same brand I have or anything. I know there were a bunch of 100 dollar deals but I think I missed them all.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 21:31
|
|
|
One other thing that occurred to me from the testing is that radiative/convective loss from the sides of the sous vide vessel is not a big deal. I was toying with the idea of putting a cambro inside a cambro to insulate it, but considering it only costs 1-2 pennies to run for an hour in a single layer vessel, insulating doesn't seem necessary.
Steve Yun fucked around with this message at 22:43 on Dec 16, 2016 |
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 22:02
|
|
|
I find something super hilarious about penny counting energy usage of a sous vide.
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 22:34
|
|
|
If anything, now you can look at people covering their cambros in insulating material and tell them they're wasting their time (and have some evidence to back it up)
|
|
#
?
Dec 16, 2016 23:43
|
|
|
When I was new to sous vide I didn't use a lid. I know this isn't exactly the same thing that ya'll are talking about, but... use a lid or wrap it up! It's good for things like evaporation and consistency!
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 00:11
|
|
|
For a 1-2 hour cook it doesn't even seem necessary to use a lid (not a whole lot of water is going to fly off in two hours), but I'll be doing long cook tests over the next week and a half to see what difference a lid or ping pong balls make in terms of evaporation
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 00:32
|
|
|
http://recipes.anovaculinary.com/recipe/sous-vide-egg-nog I'm super confused by this.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 01:03
|
|
|
Crunkjuice posted:http://recipes.anovaculinary.com/recipe/sous-vide-egg-nog You're pasteurizing your nog.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 01:13
|
|
|
Hey guys, got a question: Do you find that your meats are juicier and more tender when you use ziplocs over a foodsaver bag? This has been bugging me for a while, that the meats I vacuumed in a foodsaver were not as juicy as I expected. A couple weeks ago on Cooking Issues, Dave Arnold argued that foodsaver bags are sucking water out of your meat when you vacuum them, and that this is not an issue when you use chamber vacs since their vacuuming process is different and because their bags don't have capillary action. Has anyone else noticed this? Should we be using ziplocs preferentially over foodsavers? If we are forced to use foodsavers, should we hit the seal button before it hits its maximum vacuum?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 01:30
|
|
|
My lovely seal-a-meal can barely suck the marinade off what I'm sealing, I think I'm safe.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 02:12
|
|
|
Steve Yun posted:Hey guys, got a question: I dip-seal ziploced a couple filets tonight and did observe that they were notably juicier than other steaks I've cooked. I've always vac sealed them before. There was much less juice in the bag when done cooking and much more on the plates when the meal was finished.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 02:26
|
|
|
Compression will push liquid out, which is why people vac seal cubes of watermelon to compress them or whatever. No?
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 02:43
|
|
|
uPen posted:My lovely seal-a-meal can barely suck the marinade off what I'm sealing, I think I'm safe. Point being if there's an effect due to the strength of the sealer, it's going to vary a lot between sealers (and individual sealers over their life). Other investigators who have looked into the subject report a substantial effect on fish and poultry, but call the effect on beef `slight'. They also report that the effect is very sensitive to vacuum strength, and their low end is 90% or about 91 kPa, which is something you're unlikely to run into unless you're using a commercial vacuum.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
I feel a lot better about being a cheep gently caress and using bargain zip lock bags. I haven't done any cooks longer than 8 hours though...
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 03:06
|
|
|
SubG posted:Yeah, the low end Rival sealers pull somewhere around 5 kPa. A high end countertop Weston or whatever will pull around 80 kPa (with 1 atm being ~101 kPa). Other models fall somewhere in the middle. AFAICT, he's using a chamber vacuum for the test in that link. The argument Dave made recently on his podcast, and what Theres A Will Theres Moe and I may be experiencing, is that Foodsaver bags are sucking more water at lower pressures than chamber vacs do. The criss-cross lines on foodsaver bags seem to suck water out through something like capillary action, unlike in a chamber vac where air leaves easily without pushing as much water out.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 03:10
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 00:52 |
|
|
Steve Yun posted:AFAICT, he's using a chamber vacuum for the test in that link. The argument Dave made recently on his podcast, and what Theres A Will Theres Moe and I may be experiencing, is that Foodsaver bags are sucking more water at lower pressures than chamber vacs do. The criss-cross lines on foodsaver bags seem to suck water out through something like capillary action, unlike in a chamber vac where air leaves easily without pushing as much water out. If you're pulling a 90-odd percent vacuum you're potentially rupturing cell walls, pulling water out of the tissue, and liberating water that's trapped by proteins in the meat. You're also potentially changing the effects of cooking at the same temperature by changing the environment in the bag (or rather you're certainly doing this, but the effects aren't necessarily going to be noticeable in the final result). Note that it isn't really moisture loss that's the problem here: during cooking any water that's in the bag is free to go where it wants to, and so you're going to get something close to equilibrium over typical s-v cooking times. In other words, the initial distribution of water during sealing isn't going to determine the distribution of water in the meat at the end of the cook. The real problem is the change to the texture of the meat due to the vacuum, which is more or less irreversible and isn't really about the water itself. It's also worth noting that perceived juiciness isn't simply correlated to moisture level, but involves both the texture of the meat and the amount of e.g. fat and gelatine in and retained by the meat. Which is highlighted by the observations made by the guys in that post I linked, who say that the meat was wet but still felt dry when chewed.
|
|
#
?
Dec 17, 2016 03:25
|
|