h a l f b a k e r yIncidentally, why isn't "spacecraft" another word for "interior design"?
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,
|
|
|
smartstovetop
a device that heats the water just below boiling point | |
It's really simple !!
this stovetop automatically finds the right amount of heating required to just not boil something
Since if you're trying to boil something on an ordinary stove top, you probably open the pot so it doesn't cook over.. but you don't need to reach the boiling point,
just below
the boiling point is just fine !
so this device has a detector. when you're pot starts shaking a bit because the water starts to boil, it lowers the heat input, just a bit
or perhaps the device could detect the state where the small bubbles start to come up, just before the water boils
and stay in that state !
Related application
R_2eA_2eR_2eE_2e_20S_2eT_2eE_2eA_2eK_2e
[normzone, Sep 15 2010]
[link]
|
| |
I like it too, but I think the invention lies in the sensor to
reliably detect boiling. As it is, there's a bit too much
"maybe".... |
|
| |
I rarely boil water with the lid on. I think it slows
down the process. Maybe a laser? The apparent
opacity of the water will change with the boiling
state. |
|
| |
in't there temperature sensors ? : point it at the area you want to measure, etc. |
|
| |
Oooh... right. There is a temperature dependence! |
|
| |
Yes, but then it ceases to be just a smart stove top, and
becomes some sort of external sensor that can control the
cooker. |
|
| |
Why not just embed a platinum-rhodium thermocouple in an electric stove top and rig it to a decent PID controller and a triac, with a setpoint of 99.0 centigrade ? Those things are pretty damned accurate. Only good for electric stoves though. |
|
| |
Some high-end lab equipment can certainly achieve that level of accuracy. |
|
| |
//thermocouple in an electric stove top// |
|
| |
Your stovetop will be at exactly 99°C. The temperature of
the water will be anyone's guess. |
|
| |
Also, in most cooking, you want the water boiling. It may be
at a gentle simmer, a high simmer, a boil or a rolling boil.
But it'll generally be at 100°C (or a bit higher, depending on
your water, salt...). So something based on the degree of
bubbleness in the water would be necessary. |
|
| |
Perhaps a load cell in the burner, and an empirically-tuned
algorithm to detect the change in pattern of pot-jiggling
when the contents were just on the verge of boiling. |
|
| |
bounce a laser off the water and check the precise
return frequency for a larger percentage of free
hydrogen at the water's surface? |
|
| |
You're gonna need to know the altitude of the stove. Folks in the Swiss Alps or Denver will have a lower boiling point. And if you were in a plane at 35,000 feet, and if you had a sudden loss of cabin pressure, and if, as the plane was plummeting to the ground, passengers might like one last hot beverage, well, then, uh... oh, nevermind. Bun for improving the technology, from the only guy on planet Earth who could burn water on a stove. [+] |
|
| |
Or a single camera above the cooker, watching all pots. How
difficult can it be for software to figure out that something's
bubbling, and how much? |
|
| |
Pressure cookers are the work of the devil. |
|
| |
Ooooh, Schrodinger's pressure cooker ... nice ! |
|
| |
nice to read those comments ! |
|
| |