4 ms·

The science of ice, melting, and chilling as it pertains to drinks

36 points by marojejian 13y ago

tptacek 13y ago
The Dave Arnold post at: http://www.cookingissues.com/2009/07/24/tales-of-the-cocktail-science-of-shaking-ii/ http://www.cookingissues.com/2009/07/24/tales-of-the-cocktai... (linked from this review) is arguably much more interesting than the review itself. So is everything else at Cooking Issue. Cooking Issues is amazing.
- alanctgardner2 13y ago
  Am I missing something? It seems obvious that the same mass of ice will cause the some amount of dilution and have the same heat capacity. All the stuff about surface area versus volume is just worrying about how long it takes the ice to dissolve, but it seems like they did all their experiments until the drink reached thermal equilibrium... the ice melted, and the drink got slightly watered down.
  - e12e 13y ago
    Yes, it seems obvious. But it's nice to see that the experiment doesn't invalidate those assumptions. Personally I also find it interesting to see the measurements (it's nice to know that about 12 seconds is "enough", that's certainly longer than "just a little").
  - benkillin 13y ago
    Yes, the same amount of ice will cause the same amount of dilution. What they were using as a comparison metric is how enjoyable the drink is during the typical time it takes to consume the beverage (I infer). Most of the time the beverage is consumed before the ice has fully melted in my experience. The level of dilution during the time period in which there is still solid ice is what was being compared.
hedgehog 13y ago
Humidity also has a big effect (lower is slower, it's plausible that drinks in Vegas are less diluted than in Hawaii). http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/article/66/4/10.1063/PT.3.1958 http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/a...
josefresco 13y ago
Lot's of good stuff here, could use some editing to cut down the wordiness and emphasize the conclusions. Obvious affiliate links were obvious.
- mstromb 13y ago
  Affiliate links are explicitly how the site makes money: http://thesweethome.com/how-to-support-the-sweethome/ http://thesweethome.com/how-to-support-the-sweethome/ So I guess I'm not too harsh on them.
  - josefresco 13y ago
    I debated whether or not to point this out, but found that I couldn't not say anything as it was effecting my perception of the quality and trustworthiness of the article.
marquis 13y ago
Was Ian Fleming completely wrong? "When you shake a martini, you aren’t integrating the elements in a way to create a smooth texture – you are doing the opposite. A shaken martini gets diluted too fast and gets too much air mixed into it. The result is a slightly frothy and watered down drink." I assumed he didn't want to get inebriated in order to have a non-fuzzy head for all the goings-ons but the bartender would have noticed.. http://www.drinkspirits.com/gin/james-bond-wrong-shake-martinis/ http://www.drinkspirits.com/gin/james-bond-wrong-shake-marti...
- tptacek 13y ago
  No, he wasn't "wrong". Shaking a mixed drink does alter the texture; it does incorporate air, and it does incorporate more tiny ice chips. And that quote doesn't hold temperature constant. You can trade strength for coldness and vice versa. But, if you have a target temperature, and you're using ice to cool a drink down to it, then the idea that you should stir instead of shake to reach that temperature is misguided.
ballard 13y ago
Granted the thermodynamics lesson is all well and good. The more interesting point is in the making of ice cubes (or spheres). Apart from pitching some product, it's the water. Sufficiently purified water (ie reverse osmosis) produces glass-clear ice. Cloudy ice contains dissolved sediment typical of tap and barely filter water.
paulorlando 13y ago
"Whiskey on the rocks event horizon" is the best part of the post.
nooneelse 13y ago
Ok, sure, it is great to consider the extra minutes added to the taste-window which a bigger ice block vs several smaller ones gives... But, really, what I've wondered about when I go to drink such tasty drinks is that the bigger target seems ignored. The ice wouldn't have to melt so fast if it wasn't having to counteract so much heat getting in unnecessarily. But drinks are mostly put in contact with container walls which are directly connected to the external wall in contact with the air, table/bar, and human hands. Heck, one could go all out and pick some material(s) with a lower thermal conductivity than glass. That might be worth some bother too, but I don't know that it is needed. Why is it I have a Thermos (made of stainless steel, so not optimized for thermal conductivity at all) which can keep coffee mouth-burning hot all work day, but when I go to some fancy scotch tasting establishment they hand me a chunk of glass engineered more for looks than for the task at hand?

36 points by marojejian 13y ago

The Dave Arnold post at: http://www.cookingissues.com/2009/07/24/tales-of-the-cocktail-science-of-shaking-ii/ http://www.cookingissues.com/2009/07/24/tales-of-the-cocktai... (linked from this review) is arguably much more interesting than the review itself. So is everything else at Cooking Issue. Cooking Issues is amazing.

alanctgardner2 13y ago
Am I missing something? It seems obvious that the same mass of ice will cause the some amount of dilution and have the same heat capacity. All the stuff about surface area versus volume is just worrying about how long it takes the ice to dissolve, but it seems like they did all their experiments until the drink reached thermal equilibrium... the ice melted, and the drink got slightly watered down.
- e12e 13y ago
  Yes, it seems obvious. But it's nice to see that the experiment doesn't invalidate those assumptions. Personally I also find it interesting to see the measurements (it's nice to know that about 12 seconds is "enough", that's certainly longer than "just a little").
- benkillin 13y ago
  Yes, the same amount of ice will cause the same amount of dilution. What they were using as a comparison metric is how enjoyable the drink is during the typical time it takes to consume the beverage (I infer). Most of the time the beverage is consumed before the ice has fully melted in my experience. The level of dilution during the time period in which there is still solid ice is what was being compared.

hedgehog 13y ago

Humidity also has a big effect (lower is slower, it's plausible that drinks in Vegas are less diluted than in Hawaii). http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/article/66/4/10.1063/PT.3.1958 http://scitation.aip.org/content/aip/magazine/physicstoday/a...

josefresco 13y ago

Lot's of good stuff here, could use some editing to cut down the wordiness and emphasize the conclusions. Obvious affiliate links were obvious.

mstromb 13y ago
Affiliate links are explicitly how the site makes money: http://thesweethome.com/how-to-support-the-sweethome/ http://thesweethome.com/how-to-support-the-sweethome/ So I guess I'm not too harsh on them.
- josefresco 13y ago
  I debated whether or not to point this out, but found that I couldn't not say anything as it was effecting my perception of the quality and trustworthiness of the article.

marquis 13y ago

Was Ian Fleming completely wrong? "When you shake a martini, you aren’t integrating the elements in a way to create a smooth texture – you are doing the opposite. A shaken martini gets diluted too fast and gets too much air mixed into it. The result is a slightly frothy and watered down drink." I assumed he didn't want to get inebriated in order to have a non-fuzzy head for all the goings-ons but the bartender would have noticed.. http://www.drinkspirits.com/gin/james-bond-wrong-shake-martinis/ http://www.drinkspirits.com/gin/james-bond-wrong-shake-marti...

tptacek 13y ago
No, he wasn't "wrong". Shaking a mixed drink does alter the texture; it does incorporate air, and it does incorporate more tiny ice chips. And that quote doesn't hold temperature constant. You can trade strength for coldness and vice versa. But, if you have a target temperature, and you're using ice to cool a drink down to it, then the idea that you should stir instead of shake to reach that temperature is misguided.

ballard 13y ago

Granted the thermodynamics lesson is all well and good. The more interesting point is in the making of ice cubes (or spheres). Apart from pitching some product, it's the water. Sufficiently purified water (ie reverse osmosis) produces glass-clear ice. Cloudy ice contains dissolved sediment typical of tap and barely filter water.

paulorlando 13y ago

"Whiskey on the rocks event horizon" is the best part of the post.

nooneelse 13y ago

Ok, sure, it is great to consider the extra minutes added to the taste-window which a bigger ice block vs several smaller ones gives... But, really, what I've wondered about when I go to drink such tasty drinks is that the bigger target seems ignored. The ice wouldn't have to melt so fast if it wasn't having to counteract so much heat getting in unnecessarily. But drinks are mostly put in contact with container walls which are directly connected to the external wall in contact with the air, table/bar, and human hands. Heck, one could go all out and pick some material(s) with a lower thermal conductivity than glass. That might be worth some bother too, but I don't know that it is needed. Why is it I have a Thermos (made of stainless steel, so not optimized for thermal conductivity at all) which can keep coffee mouth-burning hot all work day, but when I go to some fancy scotch tasting establishment they hand me a chunk of glass engineered more for looks than for the task at hand?