h a l f b a k e r yBirth of a Notion.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
The scenario - you have a measuring jug with some unknown quantity of liquid. To determine the volume of liquid remaining, you set the
jug down on a level surface, bringing your face down so the meniscus of the liquid is at eye level, and read off the amount remaining
in the jug from the gauge printed
on the side of the vessel.
Say you now want to pour 100ml from your jug into some other container, you're forced to lift the jug, tilt it to initiate the pour,
estimating as you go the amount being administered. Once complete the jug is placed back down, and the new value is read off, revealing
the remaining quantity of liquid. Maybe it shows you didn't pour quite enough, so you repeat the process, dribbling a bit more in,
before placing the container once more down on the bench to read off the final figure. Repeating as necessary.
Scientists might employ a burette for performance of this kind of measurement, with a variflow spigot providing the interface, but such
things are rarely to be found, or if in a rush, take time to properly set up. Measuring jugs are handy and convenient, wouldn't it be
nice to be able to rely on them more easily?
What if you could read off the amount in your jug at the exact same time you were mid-pour?
Enter a new kind of graduated volume scale. Here, lines radiate from a central focus located at the spout of the jug. The meniscus of 1
Litre of liquid in a jug poised to pour will be at a more horizontal angle (say 15°) than the meniscus of a liquid in the same jug
poised to pour only 500ml which might be at 45°. If graduated appropriately, the volume of remaining liquid is now readable at pour-
time, enabling the doling-out of more exact quantities of liquid to the benefit of their cooking, amateur chemistry or occult alchemic
investigations as the situation allows.
This seems simultaneously like such an obvious idea, it surely can't be original (yet google offers me no prizes in a cursory search)
and such a ridiculous one that it would appear to be a good fit for residing here for your collective consideration and review.
2-Cup Angled Measuring Cup
https://www.oxo.com...suring-cup-453.html
[tatterdemalion, Mar 10 2021]
Knowing when it’s half full or empty
Knowing_20when_20it...20full_20or_20empty
[xaviergisz, Mar 10 2021]
[link]
|
| |
Link - is that the kind of thing you mean? |
|
| |
This is an absolutely wonderful idea...+ Have a bun
even if there is a measuring cup like that. |
|
| |
/ scientists might employ a *brunette*.../ Read
that three times and thought how could brunettes
measure better? |
|
| |
[a1] yeah, precision is lost as you get to the bottom of your pour, and it probably wouldn't work at all well for more viscous
liquids since their might be a significant volume stored in non-level waves and transient pour-shapes - irrespective, you have to be
*exactly* on that poised-to-pour level of inclination for it to read accurately, which might be tricky to achieve in practice. |
|
| |
[tatterdemalion] so it was one of those that gave me the idea - at first glance, I thought that's what it was doing, but apparently
not - that angled insert is used to show the user exactly how far up the liquid is - without them having to bend down to look at the
meniscus edge-on, since you can see exactly where it touches the slanty measure. Even with that thing, it still only reads off when
the jug is level, which means putting it down between pours. |
|
| |
[xandram] thankyou, you're far too kind - maybe if blondes have more fun, it may be the case that through some kind of karmic
balance, brunettes are naturally better at measuring things - I'll leave that up to someone else to adjudicate on though. I did have
to look up that scientific measuring thing, I remember using one at school but thought it was called a "titrator" - apparently not -
burette is the deal apparently. |
|
| |
I thought of the OXO jug too, but this idea is different from and
cleverer than that |
|
| |
I used to have a non-oxo version of the linked jug and it is not what this idea describes. |
|
| |
No reason not to have both sets of lines (straight and angled) on the same jug |
|
| |
I'm sure I've seen one with curved lines, starting at the spout
as per this idea, but ending up horizontal on the "handle"
side. I presume you would choose the level line that your
liquid is tangential (or near enough) to. A cursory search
failed... |
|
| |
Of course, if you’re serious about measuring liquid accurately in the
kitchen you’ll use a pipette |
|
| |
And thanks for teaching me a new word! |
|
| |
Should be easy to DIY this with a clear glass jug, a permanent marker pen capable of writing on glass, and some kind of clamp setup to hold the jug at a fixed angle and also to allow tipping. Maybe firmly attach the jug to a camera tripod. Fill the jug with exactly one litre of water, tilt until it is almost dripping, and draw the first line. Then gradually pour 100ml into a measuring jug or other calibrated container, and draw the second line. etc. until empty. |
|
| |
Yes [xandram], a blonde would never do, too ditsy. Redhead,
too firey, only a true brunette burette will do. |
|
| |
Excellent idea, zen, and described so us not so scientific types
can understand it. |
|
| |
You'll need a standard vertical scale as well. Usually, you
have a starting amount, say 500ml, which you will make
not of on the vertical scale. If you want to pour out
150ml, you pour and keep pouring until the angled scale
reaches 350ml. |
|
| |
It's possible to calculate the volumes to at least a
reasonable degree, if I ever make enough progress down
my to-do list so that I reach "Learn 3D drawing software*"
Then I can 3D print a version of this. I can see it being
useful in science too, we have beakers with gradations on
the side, why not have the pouring scale too? |
|
| |
*This is two after "Learn Portugese" |
|
| |