more heat control ?'s

[Dan H.]

I read about clay saucer, sand, etc. Sand I know I wont bother w/ so In assuming these things hold onto and stabilize heat better (from all i've read) what if I threw in a bunch of rocks like the survival dudes use to keep warm. I mean apperantly this is a stradegy for holding heat through a cold night i guess. I don't know but the guys heat em up and then cover w/ dirt or sand and sleep on them, i've seen this and read this a lot. Just thought i'de see what everyone thought cause I find myself thinking "what the heck is gonna be next?"

I also thought maybe the saucers create a shape that will also catch fat drippings better as to not spill on the fire below to or something. Maybe this is another reason there used, there shape for catching drippings. i'm just imagining everything and anything INSIDE the water pan, w/ water pan still in place and foiled. I visualized a hump in the middle of pan, but really not sure what this would all look like or if water pan is still used. thanks -Dan
edit: also maybe you all could help me understand what foiling "1 1/2 to 2 inches from bottom of pan" means. I've actually ever only noticed a "Brian S" on here type this probably just by quincidence... wow i mis-spelled that, and probably mis-spelled mis-spelled as well, sorry.

 

[K Kruger]

Clay saucers and sand are used as heat sinks, just like water. They are not really for holding heat per se, they are for absorbing it in order to help stabilize lower cooktemps. They absorb and release--like water does--but ceramic/sand can get hotter than water, often not desired but with planning, not hard to deal with. Rocks would work but you'd want to be certain that they were solid--no air pockets--so that they wouldn't explode.

Some of us here use nothing in the pan regardless of cooktemp, some, like me, use water for low heat cooks (with Florida ambient temps and cooking in the direct sun, I need something for low heat cooks like for bacon). For waterless cooks, foiling the pan catches drippings and keeping the foil off the bottom of the pan (in other words not making the foil flush with the bottom) makes an air pocket between the foil and pan. This prevents the drippings from burning.

 

[Dan H.]

I understand the foil now everyone, makes since. I was interested in saving fuel. I search "clay saucer" and seems some folks have luck not burning as much fuel. As funny as it is I didn't realize a saucer was a heat sink option. I'm assuming its not as much of a "sink" as water I suppose w/ the thin walls and things but I can understand how this could be a good thing. I think I understand. It's just a little more stable/assisting in keeping temps for low and slow then using nothing but foil..? Makes since. So you save fuel because your not boiling a lot of water, and get a little assistance in stabilizing low temps for cooking w/ just enough material that is not as overkill as water, correct? So in that case I'de like to try it.
edit. btw i've just used foil for a little while now, should I just stick w/ that? I seem to do ok w/ it, no probs yet.

 

[Don Irish]

Dan,
The whole idea is thermal mass to absorb heat (and it does release heat as the fire dies). As Kevin said, the clay saucer can/will get hotter than water. Water can only get up to 212 (sea level, normal atmospheric pressure, etc.) afterwards it turns to steam. Making steam takes much, much more energy than warming up water (I’d look it up in my old thermodynamics texts but I’m too lazy – which is why I like to BBQ). The clay saucer can get up to ? temp (when it melts, explodes, vaporizes – much higher temp than is generally possible in the WSM). I am a total convert to clay saucer because clean up is a snap and thermal mass remains constant throughout the cook – no adding water (one time I spilled some on the fire – not good). I just added the sand option and things were even better. With just the saucer I did have some trouble keeping temps down on hot days as Kevin describes, I think with the sand that will no longer be a problem. Rocks would do the same thing as sand...just adding more thermal mass. Overall I think I use less fuel than with water, it is easier to set up, no mid cook water adding problems, quick clean up….I don’t see any down side.

 

[Larry Wolfe]

Another option is to use 2 firebricks. They fit in the standard WSM water pan fine and I cover with 2 layers of foil. I have been using firebricks for a couple years now and previously used sand and haven't noticed one bit of difference between the two. Just another option to think about...

 

[Dan H.]

ok thanks, so I guess that the bricks/rocks/whatever will accomadate the drippings accumulation? i'm still imagining a "hump" or at least less space for drippings if foil is ran over the top... i'm quin for next two maybe three days.. briskit may be one and just preparing myself. thanks

 

[Dave/G]

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Larry Wolfe:
Another option is to use 2 firebricks. They fit in the standard WSM water pan fine and I cover with 2 layers of foil. I have been using firebricks for a couple years now and previously used sand and haven't noticed one bit of difference between the two. Just another option to think about...

The firebricks and the inside of the pan are uncovered? You just put two layers of foil over that naked setup and press down a bit around the bricks to grab drippings? I used two firebricks last week and worked well

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>