THE BBQ BRETHREN FORUMS

Welcome to The BBQ Brethren Community. Register a free account today to become a member and see all our content. Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Zilla, from the man nathanm himself:

Meat is mostly water! There was a classic Star Trek epiosode where an alien species refers to humans as "ugly bags of mostly water" and that pretty much sums up what any animal is (well, the ugly part can be debated). So no matter whether you inject or brine or just use meat as-is, there is plenty of water in the meat to evaporate. In the case of brisket it is about 71% water.

The method of heating the meat does not matter, the same effect occurs for both radiative and convective heating.

Now, as it so happens, radiant heating plays essentially no role in most barbeque, because radiant heating is only important when there is a high temperature source. Most barbeque is smoked with an air temperature (dry bulb) of 90C/194F to 110C/230F. At those tempertaures radiant heating is insignificant. Most barbeque rigs / smokers have the fire baffled so the meat does not directly recieve IR radiation from it.

South American asado (from Chile or Argentina especially) does use radiant heat, but that is a very different method.

However, even if there was radiant heating, it wouldn't matter. The point about wet bulb temperature is that evaporating water takes energy, so a wet surface that is evaporating will be cooler than a dry surface. It doesn't matter how you heat it, if the surface is wet, then it will be cooler than a dry surface if water can evaporate.

When he says that wet bulb / dry bulb is about gas, I think there is some confusion. Wet bulb temperature is the temperature of a wet surface which is cooled by evaporation. It is a surface temperature. The air temperature is the dry bulb temperature. The reason that "gas" (i.e. air) is involved is that in order for the water to evaporate it must go into the air. If the air is already "full" of water (meaning that relative humidity is 100%) then evaporation can't occur.

Anybody who sweats knows this - sweating is done to take advantage of evaporative cooling. The reason that we feel more uncomfortable in high humidity is that our sweating doesn't work as well.

I am not sure that he understands that the temperature tests I did were not in a water bath. I took a vacuum sealed brisket and cooked it next to an uncovered brisket, but they were in the same oven. The sous vide bag simply stopped the evaporation.

There is a TINY effect due to collagen, but it is so tiny that it does not show up unless you use a differential scanning calorimeter. If there was a large collagen effect, then we would see it in the temperature profile for the sealed brisket with no evaporation. But we don't.

The test I did was in a convection oven, but a "free draft wood smoker" will not change anything. Water still evaporates! The existence of some smoke in the air won't stop water from evaporating. The smoke build up on the surface of the brisket may hinder evaporation slightly. The free draft part means that the smoker would, if anything, have a lower humidity than in the convection oven because the convection oven recirculates air to some degree while the smoker may, or may not depending on how open the dampers are.

The amout of draft in the smoker, the way air circulates, how full the smoker is, the dry bulb temperature in the smoker, the relative humidity of the air outside the smoker will all make small differences. That is why different people report a "stall" of different temperatures and durations.

The humidity outside the smoker has some effect, but only a small effect. The hotter air is, the more water it will hold. If you take air and heat it up to 90C/194F to 110C/230F, it will be very low relative humidity, no matter how moist the air outside is.

Finally, he can find no reference supporting what I am saying here because, as far as I know, nobody has explained the BBQ "stall" this way before. It is a new explanation. I suspect that some food scientist somewhere may well have figured this out, but I am not aware of any. But that doesn't mean it is wrong - it just means it is new.

The paper he quotes from Journal of Food Science supports ALL of what I am saying, by the way. It is a good early article on the topic of roasting meat. It confirms that there is substantial evaporative losses, and it confirms that the meat cooks with the surface at the wet bulb temperature.
 
Great information and thanks for chiming in with it and the link to Egullet! BTW Nathan is correct, I do not understand any of this on a practical level, it is all new to me. Thanks for posting this information. I went over to Egullet site and the conversations taking place are on a pretty high level IMO. Is Nathan going to publish his findings in a journal for peer review? I think I'd like to follow that conversation or at least try to follow it. I have a question about natural peanut butter...I wonder if he would take a stab at that one too, seriously! (No comments from the gallery Vinny) :-D
 
Hi Zilla!

You are most welcome, I love reading discussions such as these and find it both enhances my knowledge of science in general and also helps with cooking skills! Admittedly a lot of people could careless for why certain things happen, but it intrigues me.

I don't think he would be publishing them, but I cannot speak for him!

What is your question on PB? I could ask him if you like...
 
OK here it is, I use all natural peanut butter in my house and one of the many ways I like to prepare it for use is to add some molasses to it. As you probably know in natural peanut better the oil separates form the ground peanuts. What I have found is that if you add say 1/4 to 1/2 cup of molasses to lets say 3 cups of peanut butter ( it does not seems to matter what the proportions are) the whole thing seizes up in to a very stiff mass. What was once a very loose soft peanut butter is now something like a very stiff cookie dough. If you're real careful and fold the two together and don't over mix it you may be able to incorporate the two and still have a spreadable product. In addition to enhancing the flavor the molasses has the added positive effect of keeping the oil from separating from the ground peanuts.

My question is, why does this happen and is there a way to stop it from happening to better mix the two together?
 
I think sometimes we make things more complex than they need to be too.

If we could somehow layer water and have the top and bottom layer at 150 degrees and the middle 50 degrees, heating the top and bottom layer would not result in much heat gain until the middle area was able to get to the same temp as the rest. All the extra heat going into the top and bottom layer would get sucked up by the middle area trying to get to the same temp. That avoids the whole need to even consider chemical reactions and the like.
 
That still does not explain why in a brisket the temperature of the middle increase is linier until 165* and then stops. What is it about that temperature?
 
Hi Zilla, here is what I have gleaned:

Because your PB is made up of dry particulate matter immersed in oil, when you add the moist molasses, the particules quickly hydrate and seize up. As you continue to add more, they cease to absorb moisture and a smoother consistency starts to form.
 
As explained in the thread Zilla, it is because of the surface evaporation and the "wet vs dry bulb" -that is why the temperature "stops" there... until the surface dries out, evaporation will stop the surface and hence the interior temp from rising past a certain temperature
 
I wonder if "the collagen stall" and the "evaporative cooling stall" are two different things that just happen to occur at roughly the same time, together working to make the IMT stall as significant as it is. It seems unlikely, but both concepts seem to have science behind them.

If the wet bulb hypothesis is correct, shouldn't foil correct the stall, since the environment in the foil will be 100% RH?

I did a brisket on monday and it stalled @ 157* for about an hour so I foiled it and it still took some time before it started climbing at a reasonable rate.

Also, couldn't mopping lengthen a stall indefinitely?

My guess is that its a combination of evaporative cooling, which reduces cook temps, and the phase change, which increases exponentially and at 160ish its a runaway train, sucking up any heat difference between it and the wet bulb.

As the surface temp nears the wet bulb temp, the rate of heat absorption will decrease, couple that with increasing phase change, and maybe we have our stall.
 
This thread just goes to show you that you learn something everyday. Im just not sure what it is that I learned today:icon_blush:

Thanks to all that have posted here. This is very interesting.
 
If the wet bulb hypothesis is correct, shouldn't foil correct the stall, since the environment in the foil will be 100% RH?

I did a brisket on monday and it stalled @ 157* for about an hour so I foiled it and it still took some time before it started climbing at a reasonable rate.
I think that is exactly right but foil is not going to give you a true 100% RH environment like you get in the sous vide process.. so I would expect it to still take a bit of time. I'm a total novice to all this but found both these threads fascinating.

I was actually wondering if cooking with water in the pan on a bullet smoker may reduce stall time (likely not considerably) since I would guess the environment is more humid than w/o water?
 
I think that is exactly right but foil is not going to give you a true 100% RH environment like you get in the sous vide process.. so I would expect it to still take a bit of time. I'm a total novice to all this but found both these threads fascinating.

I was actually wondering if cooking with water in the pan on a bullet smoker may reduce stall time (likely not considerably) since I would guess the environment is more humid than w/o water?

I think the key is knowing the wet bulb temp in the smoker. Nathan suggests that the meat stalls at wet bulb temp, however I'd have to see it to believe it. Somehow I can't see a 275* smoker having a wet bulb temp of 160*, that's a 100* of evaporative cooling.
 
This thread just goes to show you that you learn something everyday. Im just not sure what it is that I learned today:icon_blush:

Thanks to all that have posted here. This is very interesting.

I'm with you. That stall can make you sweat when you a pressed for time, like having the party start in three hours and you've been waiting at 165 for two. Haha
 
Collegen and breakdown...;}-

I agree with this also,some meats have more connective tissue and some don't,it it's done when it's done. Briskets and Butts deserve this extra time, The longer in the heat,the tenderer it gets,thus is why I leave the lid to my smoker closed until the time to check is at hand(appox.1.5hrs./lb.). at that time I will do the doneness test,toothpick ,and if needed,leave it until it hits 200*f then take out and wrap and cooler the meat...Butts;when the bone pulls,it's done,wrap and rest.:thumb:
If I'm doing something wrong or different, I could not tell,everyone eats it up so fast it don't matter.Besides,I have no teeth and when I can gnaw some Grindage without wrestling with it,it's good:doh:
Betty013.jpg

Betty004.jpg
 
Back
Top