• chrome_daddy@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    32
    ·
    8 hours ago

    900F isn’t 3×300F because 0F isn’t absolute zero.

    3 × 300F =3 × (422K) =(1266K) =1819F

    This is roughly the temperature of lava. So just mere seconds should be enough to get the chicken tasty as hell.

    • AnarchoEngineer@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      7 hours ago

      900F isn’t 3x300F or 1819F because the free convection heat transfer coefficient of air increases with temperature so the surface temperature of the chicken (and the temperature of the air touching the chicken) will be lower than 3x its value at 300F. If you want the chicken meat to experience a surface temperature that is 3x higher than 300F you need to up the heat a bit more.

      Assuming the affects from Prandtl numbers are insignificant, and that a chicken is basically a sphere, the heat transfer coefficient should be roughly proportional to the fourth root of the Grashof number which is (roughly) linear with temperature difference (we’re neglecting viscosity changes because I’m tired, though those are probably significant)

      Math I probably didn’t do right says that’s about 1.69x higher of a heat transfer coefficient

      1.69x higher convection means 1.69x lower thermal resistance means we need roughly 1.69x as much temperature difference, so say the chicken is initially at 40F (refrigerator temp) that gives us 1.69x(1819-40)+40= 3,046.51°F

      That’s pretty close to the temperature at which lead boils.

      Unfortunately one shouldn’t cook around vaporized or superheated lead due to the likelyhood of it getting into the food, what a shame.

      • Sc00ter@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 hours ago

        I would say trying to cook 3x faster isnt a surface temp 3x higher, but the rate of heat transfer is 3x faster. Because then your laat step is backwards.

        Q = h a dT

        If you just calculated H goes up 1.69x, then dT doesnt need to go up MORE, it needs to go up LESS. A higher HTC increases the rate of heat transfer. Which… now you need to recalc your free conv HTC because temp changed. But if it didnt…

        3Q = 1.69h a 1.78DT

        Old DT was 260, now its 463, which is an ovev temp of 503F

        Edit: this is a transient problem we’re trying to reduce to a steady state calculation with pretty poorly defined requirements. Sounds like a typical day at work for me lol

        • zourn@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          3 hours ago

          If you start getting into radiation heat transfer, then you have to consider the difference of temperatures, but both raised to the 4th power first.

    • lad@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      8 hours ago

      One can argue that 3 developers is also not the same as one developer multiplied by three, I’m not sure if incorrect use of temperature improves the joke or spoils it

  • frank@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    75
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I’ve heard the joke around 9 women making a baby in a month by PM standards

    • pivot_root@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      8 hours ago

      Sign a 5-year contract for one baby a month, outsource the first 8 deliverables at a loss while using the time to ramp up production staggered such that it produces a baby on a monthly basis. /s

  • itsathursday@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Yes but the schedule says it should be done so we need to make it happen or the company will go bust. Come on guys we need you to work harder, everyone is putting in overtime to make this happen and you are being negative and telling us you can’t do it, what are we paying you for?

    • partial_accumen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      ·
      9 hours ago

      everyone is putting in overtime to make this happen and you are being negative

      “… now its 5pm and I’m leaving for the day, but when I come in tomorrow at 8am, I expect to see some real progress completed.”

        • onlinepersona@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          4 hours ago

          For double the pay, I’d work overtime to get something done - if I like it. I used to work 50-60 hour weeks with no overtime pay (yes, yes, I was exploited). Had I been paid overtime and at double the rate, it would’ve pushed my annual salary to 1.5-2x . But my guess is that either the manager would’ve been fired for being shit, I would’ve been fired for costing too much, or they would’ve simply hired another engineer to join the team (we did need more engineers).

  • civA
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    10 hours ago

    PMs: it’s the same picture

  • tiredofsametab@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Probably not but also partially because the numbers wouldn’t make sense to begin with in Celsius land.

  • Goretantath@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    10 hours ago

    Funnily enough, some foods I cook can be cooked at a higher temp for shorter time, and actually turn out better to my liking. Love my airfryer.