Login with username, password and session length
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Phil:I have had one thought re: your questions. Some of the compounds that are responsible for the flavours are probably volatile with the amount lost depending on the cooking conditions!Best wishesR**
she says that the question is too remote from her own research interests and expertise.
I believe I have at least most of the answer to this brain teaser now and it's blindingly obvious once pointed out.When true bulk cooking is done, so we're talking fifty or one hundred or several hundred portions in one go, the chef is not going to use a teaspoon to add the spices because of the sheer quantity involved. And the spice, specifically chilli, will be in a bulk container, not the little bags most of us at home buy.What's the difference? Well, the bulk supplies are, relative to the small packets, heavily compacted (are you having a light-bulb moment at this point like I did?). So when the chef scoops out the spice with a large implement, maybe a measuring jug, or purpose-made spice scoop, there is likely to be further compaction. This means the density of the added ingredient is different to that which would be obtained from a teaspoon lifted from a small packet of spices.So if a recipe called for one teaspoon of chilli for one portion and we bulk cook one hundred portions and work out what 100 teaspoons are in volume (this doesn't work if done by weight), let's say it's five large scoops, then because the density of the bulk-container chilli is greater those five large scoops might be in reality equal to about 120 teaspoons chilli as measured by the single-portion teaspoon.So in a nutshell that's it. In true bulk cooking if you scale up by volume you have to reduce the total quantity of chilli to account for increased packing density in bulk-container spices. And I don't think most of the rule-of-thumb scaling factors specify whether it should be by weight or volume. Nor do they specify that this bulk scaling factor only really applies to true bulk cooking and not home bulk cooking that might run realistically to scaling up a recipe by no more than ten portions and where the same packet of chilli is being used for one teaspoon as for ten.Therefore, for home bulk cooking, if you make one curry and use one teaspoon of chilli then you should use ten teaspoons if you make ten, twenty teaspoons if you make twenty etc., as long as you use the same scooping implement and the same pack of spices each time where the packing density will be relatively constant.And of course no scaling should be necessary for any quantity of bulk cooked recipe if you scale by weight because then a true linear scaling of the ingredient is achieved. Cooking method differences between small quantities and bulk quantities would still have to be taken account of though.And also, by the way, I have found scientific backing for the fact that the perception of chilli heat or pungency is on a exponential scale. But that does not in any way alter the above.
I don't think that's a light bulb moment. Some references are made to "bulk" cooking, but others are clearly referring to recipe adjustments on a more likely home scale. Either way, the underlying principle is consistent with reference made to the non-linear increase in spice with each subsequent increase in portions. Increase portions by 100%, means increase spices by 50%, or in some cases only 25%. (in some this is done after the first instance)
Absolutely Classic ;D Your roughly saying you would add 100 tsp chilli to a 50L pot SS? Profit and costs in the bin.
Therefore, for home bulk cooking, if you make one curry and use one teaspoon of chilli then you should use ten teaspoons if you make ten, twenty teaspoons if you make twenty etc., as long as you use the same scooping implement and the same pack of spices each time where the packing density will be relatively constant.