Submerged Clay Saucer?


 
But with that in the water, won't it help hold the temp between? I thought the point of the clay saucer was to help hold heat and thus prevent temp spikes and also use less charcoal?
 
In between what? Water can not get hotter than 212 (at sea level). Anything in the water can not get hotter than the water.

Water is a much more efficient heat sink (which is why I use it for low/slow cooking). It absorbs heat then releases it by converting it to steam. This limits how hot water can get. Clay only partially acts as a heat sink. It absorbs heat and at the outset offers some delay in its release, but it does not convert it. It is released as heat, eventually at virtually the same rate it absorbs it, meaning that if your fuel gets going really good and temps rise or spike the clay will not prevent the effects of the rise or spike from affecting your cook.
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K Kruger:
...if your fuel gets going really good and temps rise or spike the clay will not prevent the effects of the rise or spike from affecting your cook. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you saying that all things equal, a cooker will reach just as high temps with a clay saucer in the pan as without?
 
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Dave Russell:
<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by K Kruger:
...if your fuel gets going really good and temps rise or spike the clay will not prevent the effects of the rise or spike from affecting your cook. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Are you saying that all things equal, a cooker will reach just as high temps with a clay saucer in the pan as without? </div></BLOCKQUOTE>
Yes. It will also take longer to bring temps down.
 
Correct. Possibly much longer. Simply closing vents won't do it. Cutting the draft might curtail or limit the burn, but it will not affect the heat that has been absorbed by the clay. That will be released for some time.

Yes, Dave, I am saying precisely that. If the fire is under control and kept restricted, fine. But if it gets away from you the clay will heat and keep heating as long as the fire is there. Though there will be some delay (and this delay will cause cooker therms, especially at the grate, not to register the problem for a while), rising temps below will cause the clay to absorb increasing heat. Because the clay does not convert the heat to another form (as water does with steam) it does not have the heat sink capabilities of water. It will release the heat as heat - at significantly higher temps. The end of this, then, is also delayed, much like how rocks heated in a campfire, or asphalt in the sun, stay hot much longer after the fire is put out or the sun goes down, which is what Dan is saying.
 
I've used the saucer only a handful of times and noticed that temp changes from vent adjustments took longer, but that temp recovery was much quicker after having the lid off.

As to my queastion though concerning reaching max temps, I've noticed several posts by folks that seemed to suggest that they used clay in the pan for low-n-slow, and nothing but foil for HH. That seemed confirmed my assumption that clay (or sand, for that matter) would require a percentage of the fire's btu's to keep it hot. Thanks for the input, guys!
 
Yes and not exactly sure why. If one can control temps well enough to keeps them low clay or sand isn't really necessary. Unlike water it offers no real assurance or insurance. It offers the delay, but I'm not interested in that.

I cook in rather high ambient temps, mostly, in direct sun, no windbreak. For low/slow, for me, water works much better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

 

Back
Top