Interesting article about the dreaded stall

Very thought provoking as to why.

Doesn't change the fact that the stall is our friend and is when the magic is happening.

Thanks for the link.

I've been trying to tell people that same thing for years, and they all thought I was crazy!...finally, validation.

The experiment as written is flawed fundamentally. In comparing a sponge to fat, and then to meat, the test essentially denies the effect of the collagen and how it encompasses the fibers of meat. If the collagen is not rendered, the moisture retained within the meat does not escape, as it is encapsulated within the collagen and cellular structure of the meat.

Further, a sponge in not similar to meat on several levels. While a great deal of moisture obviously is evaporated from the meat, and evaporative cooling is no doubt a part of the process resulting in the stall, it does not deny the roll that rendering the collagen is a part of the stall. I think the article, while interesting, does nothing to change the fact that it is best to start cooking early. And have a few pounds of vac-packed pulled pork in the fridge, ready to roll, just in case.

Stall? What is a stall?

Cook it till it's done and stop worrying about what happens between the time the meat goes on the pit and the time it comes off the pit.

It takes as long as it takes. Wanna speed it up? Cook at a higher temperature.

Does injectng fluids into large cuts prolong the stall?

smokainmuskoka said:

Does injectng fluids into large cuts prolong the stall?

Click to expand...

I will answer that by saying I can't answer that.

I have never injected a piece of meat. I like the taste of meat.

I'll have to go back later and read it more carefully but I did a quick look... interesting..

smokainmuskoka said:

Does injectng fluids into large cuts prolong the stall?

Click to expand...

My experience is the opposite, but, I foil. And according to this article, that would be correct.

landarc said:

The experiment as written is flawed fundamentally. In comparing a sponge to fat, and then to meat, the test essentially denies the effect of the collagen and how it encompasses the fibers of meat. If the collagen is not rendered, the moisture retained within the meat does not escape, as it is encapsulated within the collagen and cellular structure of the meat.

Further, a sponge in not similar to meat on several levels. While a great deal of moisture obviously is evaporated from the meat, and evaporative cooling is no doubt a part of the process resulting in the stall, it does not deny the roll that rendering the collagen is a part of the stall. I think the article, while interesting, does nothing to change the fact that it is best to start cooking early. And have a few pounds of vac-packed pulled pork in the fridge, ready to roll, just in case.

Click to expand...

I think you missed the point...

The sponge was meant to simulate the meat but rather to show how evaporative cooling and moisture prolong temp stall (or even temp reduction).

And the author and Blonder both agree that the breaking down of collagen play a roll in the stall but simply reject the idea that they are the driving force. This is based on the premise that there is simply not enough fat and collagen to create such a deep stall.

I actually buy into Blonder's hypothesis and believe he is accurate. It makes sense with my own experiences and will effect how I cook in the future.

That is so cool, evaporative cooling. Whowouldathunkit? Meat science rules!!

No, I understand the point. In science, at least as I understand it, if you are going to use an analog for testing, the analog only has validity if it recreats the basic properties of the material it is being use on. A sponge does not have the closed cellular structure like meat does and it does not entrain the moisture in such a manner as to mimic meat. He used a sponge as it is easy to illustrate the concept.

I do not reject the idea that evaporative cooling is a part of the stall, but, I question the methodology and conclusions. Since he has no idea, at least does not state that he tested for it, the amount of collagen in the meat, there is no idea whether or not he understands how many calories of heat were used in rendering the collagen, the fat and the water. In the end, he doesn't even have an understanding of how much water alone is in the meat.

I fail to see how his conclusions make a cogent scientific argument for how to adjust your cooking to manage a better product. It still seems to me the only way to get the job done is to apply heat and cook until the meat is done. Now, dry aging a piece of meat and then cooking it to see if the meat cooks faster through the stall, that might be interesting.

landarc said:

I fail to see how his conclusions make a cogent scientific argument for how to adjust your cooking to manage a better product.

Click to expand...

I saw it as explanation of what happens, not as how to change anthing!

This article nicely confirms the same belief as Nathan Myhrvold has on the plateau which I posted up some time ago (wet/dry bulb temperature and evaporation), I'm glad to see it in article form with some tests and data on the side! Nice to finally have some more credible information debunking the role (or should I say, lackthereof) of collagen in the stall.

Interesting read. regardless of the reasons that were stated for why things happen, one thing is true. foil makes it get done faster.

I like the article, it's thought provoking, but it is dead wrong. I am a physics major, and this article blows smoke. Pardon the pun. :laugh: The reason for the stall is detailed in the thermal equilibrium curve. The higher the thermal mass of your pit, the longer you will experience the stall. Heat approaches equilibrium after 2-3 hours, then slowly approaches the equilibrium over a long time, as the curve graft shows. Once it is achieved, the pit and surrounding can not take in more heat and the meat temp will rise. A few examples. This is why professional pits ( bbq restaurants ) never let the fire die out, you don't have a stall and the meat can be cooked based on time alone. Place a nice large piece of meat in a sealed crock pot, dutch over or ceramic slow cooker. Low and slow on your pit as you normally would, guess what, you get the stall. There should be no evaporative losses when the meat is under water and sealed. But there is still the process of thermal equilibration. Evaporative cooling is based on one main event, that is continuous convection. In order to even consider this theory plausible the airflow through the pit would have to be significant , and much more than any of us would do on a low and slow. The humidity of the pit when the airflow is controlled would not allow for evaporative cooling. You would basically need a full size fan pushing air constantly across the pit and the meat. One last point. The premise of this theory is that when the meat dries out and can no longer provide evaporative cooling, we then get a rise in temps and the pause ends. This would imply all our meat turns out like shoe leather. Try it yourself, low and slow cook anything in a pot of water and the temp curve will always have a pause at 2-3 hours. If, you were to bring the pit temp well above your intended cooking temp ( 350 ) for 3-4 hours prior to initiating your low and slow. Then allowed the temp to fall after placing your brisket in the pit, you would experience no pause. Thermal equilibrium has been reached prior to the cook.

Guamaque said:

The premise of this theory is that when the meat dries out and can no longer provide evaporative cooling, we then get a rise in temps and the pause ends. This would imply all our meat turns out like shoe leather.

Click to expand...

I think you might be misinterpreting the article... I believe the idea is that the stall ends when the outside dries out, not the whole piece of meat (as the evaporation on the surface is what is preventing the interior from passing that certain temperature)

infernooo said:

I think you might be misinterpreting the article... I believe the idea is that the stall ends when the outside dries out, not the whole piece of meat (as the evaporation on the surface is what is preventing the interior from passing that certain temperature)

Click to expand...

I think you missed the entire point... This article defies physics. Plain and simple. Experiment yourself. That's the best thing about physics, you can test the theory yourself and nobody can deceive you. Remember , the earth really was flat for a long time, and the experts said so..... The thermal mass of your entire pit and the surroundings is much greater than the fine outside crust of your meat. So when the meat's crust dries out, all of a sudden the stall is shut down and the meat temp is allowed to move on. I don't think that is science... The temperature has to equilibrate with the dirt, meat, metal, bricks, patio etc. over a long period of time before the meat temp can rise. Unless you overshoot the temp and step down as described. Experiment yourself, use a plain pot of water with a sealed lid and a digital probe inside. Low and slow, 225, you will have the stall for 3-4 hours, once thermal mass equilibrium is reached, the internal temp of the pot of water will shoot up..

Guamaque said:

I think you missed the entire point. The article defies physics, that was just one point of many. The temperature has to equilibrate with the dirt, meat, metal, bricks, patio etc. over a long period of time before the meat temp can rise. Unless your overshoot the temp and step down as described.

Click to expand...

Not trying to be an azzhat but,

You're saying that once my cooker and surrounding area are up to temperature, and my meat temperature is climbing, I dare not risk moving my cooker, or the internal temperature of the meat will begin to fall due to the need for the surrounding areas need to equilbriate again?

B-Lazy BBQ said:

Not trying to be an azzhat but,

You're saying that once my cooker and surrounding area are up to temperature, and my meat temperature is climbing, I dare not risk moving my cooker, or the internal temperature of the meat will begin to fall due to the need for the surrounding areas need to equilbriate again?

Click to expand...

Absolutely !! Thermal mass knows no boundaries. To demonstrate an extreme example , if you moved your cooker at equilibrium, with pit and meat temps the same, to a snow bank, of course the meat temp will fall , even if you keep the pit temp the same, all the heat is going into the snow and not your meat, until the snow temp is equilibrated with the pit.