/ck/ - Food & Cooking

Yes

Direct heat. The heat goes straight up to the meat directly.

the directness of the heat cooks the meat

If the heat is going to the meat directly, it's direct. If it's heating up something else that's in turn heating the meat, like a pan, it's indirect

>>20141987
JFC do you know what indirect and direct mean as words?

both

>>20141987
>Hey guys I need help with a question for my final exam in culinary school. In the figure given, is the meat being cooked via direct or indirect heat?
Maybe try googling the definitions for "direct" and "indirect" and see if that helps you. Dumbass.
How did you manage to make it to where you could take the final exam without having a basic understanding of the terminology used in cooking?

>>20142002
but wait don't people who put their chicken off to the side of the coals call it "indirect heat"? even though literally it's the heat from the coals cooking the chicken, just not as intensely. if that counts as indirect heat then there is some definition or formula that specifies an angle or distance from axis, assuming the heat is rising more or less directly up

>>20142005
Well its not really clear. It does seem direct to me, but I know of BBQ made like this and you would say its smoked/indirect.

>>20142025
It's no different than when people say "people of color" are not the same as "colored people," but they are both blacks. Words can mean anything you want them to. It doesn't matter if other people can't understand what you are trying to say, because they be ignint (ignorant) and rayciss (racist), and they should be beaten up so badly that an amber lamps (ambulance) will need to be summoned. If anyone axes (asks) you about what happened, just say that some nazi (socialists) wypipo (white people) attacked him or her while they were walking home from a Subway, and that they done did shout "this be MAGA country" before putting a noose around they neck and pouring bleach in they eyes

>>20142002
the heat of the air cooks the food

Got to be indirect. Cause its too high up to be direct.

>>20141987
Trick question. Conductive heat fatso.

There's only one way to directly cook a steak: put it right on the coils or the glass.

>>20142060
>It's no different than...
>unrelated incomprehensible shitpost
No, anon, it's quite a bit different.

I think the important thing here is context and expertise. In the culinary world there very well may be accepted standards of distance, angle, or cooking configuration that are considered direct and indirect heat exposure, even if it's not clear by simply referencing the dictionary definition of the words.

>>20142073
>No, anon, it's quite a bit different.
>I think the important thing here is context and expertise. In the culinary world there very well may be accepted standards of distance, angle, or cooking configuration that are considered direct and indirect heat exposure, even if it's not clear by simply referencing the dictionary definition of the words.
What you posted was literally an incomprehensible shitpost because it not only didn't answer any questions, but raised more questions.

>>20142077
This is what I do

>>20142051
Well, the PoO of the heat is indirectly heating the meatballs, but those meatballs are being directly heated from that black line in between them and the heat PoO

>>20141987
This is a trick question. Based on this image you can't tell if the meat is directly over the flame or pushed over to a side of the grill with no direct flame. Need a top down view for proper analysis.

>>20142096
wait wait wait so what's the definition of indirect then? how many degrees off-centre does the food need to be to be considered indirect?

>>20142110
This is direct heat

>>20142115
but what is indirect then

>>20142115
here lookit what google just said

>>20142110
The three middle dots are being cooked with direct heat. The upper left dot and the lower middle dot, which are not directly over the heat source are being cooked via indirect heat.

>>20142125
But aren't the ones over the heat source just being cooked via heated gases from the heat source?

>>20142125
that makes sense. I just realized I don't know shit about fire/gas thermodynamics at all. Like radiant heat vs hot air rising vs heat conduction in a gas medium

>>20142115
>>20142125

Wrong. It’s still 4 foot away from the flames. The meatballs are being smoked. It’s indirect heat

>>20142144
what formula are you using? surely you need to consider the following variables:

De = distance from flame in elevation/height

Da = distance from heat column in azimuth (can be expressed as degrees/radians or simply length of radius from heat column)

Hs = size of heat source in radius or length

Ht = temperature of heat source

With these known variables you should have a defined limit where something is considered direct or indirect heat, maybe directly above a very hot and wide heat source can still be considered indirect heat so long as De is high enough. Maybe it can be super hot and wide coal bed and De can be very small, as long as Da is very large, etc

>>20142167
It needs more. What do you think about using the mallard reaction as the threshold for direct heat? Once you have a threshold then it’s simple college thermodynamics

>>20142184
I think that as so long as the energy transfered to the meat from either touching the coals themselves or from the air between the 2 in a none enclosed environment exceeds that of the energy it is receiving from another source, like the conduction from the grill or radiation, the it can be considered to be heated directly.

>>20142144
You're right, that was my bad

>>20142184
I guess if you can calculate for the maillard reaction by using reasonable constants (just assume 20ºC ambient air temperature at sea level) and also assume semi-closed but not sealed space of a reasonable volume, and then perhaps you need to have a correction for which kind of meat or veggie (I'm only guessing maillard reaction for say, plain sugar, would have a constant temp but for different meats and veggies the optimum maillard reaction may vary slightly by some degrees) and then you work out the geometry with standardized thermodynamic assumptions, one could build a simple calculator with constants and use-adjustable variables and this would give you a fairly accurate and workable estimate of the direct/indirect limen.

>>20141987
direct heat means direct. the heat is coming straight up from the source, to the food. if you put the meat off the the side (like in an.. INDIRECT HEAT setup in a grill) then it would be indirect.
blasting something with a searzall would be direct
cooking something in a pan (with a burner underneath) would be indirect
cooking something under the broiler would be direct
cooking something on a baking sheet, with the heating element under it would be indirect

>>20142330
so direct means that the only accepted medium between the heat source and the food is air? any other medium, even a pan which itself is hot but intermediary, does not count as direct?

>>20142330
Heat goes in more directions than up tho

>>20142060
>>>/pol/

>>20141987
wasn't the school supposed to teach you this?

>>20142377
Yeah, well if learning was something I could do don't you think I would've gone to college instead of HS home economics postgraduate?

>>20142382
but anon anyone can learn if they got moxie. you got moxie, don't ya, kid?

if it is being affected by radiant heat is is direct. if it is only being cooked by convection it is indirect.

>>20142443
so how do you splain this then mister fantsy pance >>20142124

>>20142060
turn off your computer once in a while, jesus fucking christ

>have to complete a 100 word essay on this subject for my thermodynamics clsss

It’s over

>>20143299
>it's due in 3 months
kill me

Well faggots I failed my exam thanks a lot

>>20144978
well what did you do that for