First Space-Baked Cookies Took 2 Hours In Experimental Oven (go.com) 93
pgmrdlm shares a report from ABC News: The results are finally in for the first chocolate chip cookie bake-off in space. While looking more or less normal, the best cookies required two hours of baking time last month up at the International Space Station. It takes far less time on Earth, under 20 minutes. And how do they taste? No one knows. Still sealed in individual baking pouches and packed in their spaceflight container, the cookies remain frozen in a Houston-area lab after splashing down two weeks ago in a SpaceX capsule. They were the first food baked in space from raw ingredients.
Italian astronaut Luca Parmitano was the master baker in December, radioing down a description as he baked them one by one in the prototype Zero G Oven. The first cookie -- in the oven for 25 minutes at 300 degrees Fahrenheit (149 degrees Celsius) -- ended up seriously under-baked. He more than doubled the baking time for the next two, and the results were still so-so. The fourth cookie stayed in the oven for two hours, and finally success. Parmitano cranked the oven up to its maximum 325 degrees F (163 degrees C) for the fifth cookie and baked it for 130 minutes. He reported more success. As for aroma, the astronauts could smell the cookies when they removed them from the oven, except for the first.
Italian astronaut Luca Parmitano was the master baker in December, radioing down a description as he baked them one by one in the prototype Zero G Oven. The first cookie -- in the oven for 25 minutes at 300 degrees Fahrenheit (149 degrees Celsius) -- ended up seriously under-baked. He more than doubled the baking time for the next two, and the results were still so-so. The fourth cookie stayed in the oven for two hours, and finally success. Parmitano cranked the oven up to its maximum 325 degrees F (163 degrees C) for the fifth cookie and baked it for 130 minutes. He reported more success. As for aroma, the astronauts could smell the cookies when they removed them from the oven, except for the first.
Well (Score:2)
What do they taste like?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, I can't believe with the smell of cookies throughout the station someone didn't take an "unofficial" bite!
Re:Well (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Well (Score:4, Insightful)
"One dozen cookies were retrieved, within reasonable experimental error bounds."
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Space.
Re: (Score:2)
We won't know. The cookies were packaged up to be sent back to Earth for testing. There's no way on the ISS to determine if the cookies are safe for consumption per NASA regulations.
Re: (Score:2)
You sound like someone who's never eaten raw cookie dough.
Who bakes cookies like that? (Score:3, Informative)
Chocolate chip cookies need 350 degrees f for 10-12 minutes. Baking at 300 for 20 changes how they come out.
You have to cook the interior of the cookie no wonder why they were coming in under baked.
Re: (Score:1, Funny)
Goodness, it's a pity they didn't ask you first. I guess they never bothered to look it up? You should call up NASA and let them know.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Oh dear. It sounds like none of them are very good at this. Maybe you could help them out too? I'm not sure if you're a layman. But maybe if they knew they had a bad oven, they could try harder to make a good one next time?
What is.it with this condescending meme of yours? (Score:2)
Yes, the oven can not be used to bake good cookies. Zwieback (rusk) maybe. Or re-heating something. The error was already trying it, instead of waiting for a suitable one, or building it right from the start, if possible.
No, taking longer with a lower temperature does not result in the same thing. Caramelization starts at 150 deg C and you get a different level/brownness at 180 deg C, no matter how long you wait.
And most obviously, you will dry out the cookies, as the temperature gradient is lower and you w
ZERO G (Score:5, Insightful)
300 is too low. That is obvious to literally everyone who ever baked anything. {...} They only didn't go higher because their oven sucked.
They aren't baking cookies in your kitchen.
They are baking cookies IN SPACE, which has pretty hard limitations coming with it.
- Limits impose by LAWS OF PHYSICS, like *thermal convection(%) not existing in zero G* (it's been some time since I last followed the story, but a quick check on their website seems to show that they currently aren't using forced convection neither. They seem to be using thermal elements completely surrounding the chamber in order to creat a pocket of heat in the middle - like some kind of high tech science fiction bulgarian pepper roaster [wikipedia.org])
- Limits by the technology, like how much energy has the station to spare for that kitchen appliance, how much isolation can prevent it from being a liability, how much the heating element can heat to increase the pocket's temperature without melting themselves, etc. (answer: it can go all the way up to 350F, though it has very good insulation according to the website, so it probably uses a lot less watts to do so that you kitchen oven).
- Limits of chemistry: the chemical transformation of food cooking (caramelisation, Maillard reaction, etc.) need to be happening at a certain (high) temperature (Maillard needs at least 140C/280F) and the two preceding point might put some hard limits on how much heat can be delivered to the core of the cookies.
TL;DR: They need to adapt to tons of peculiarity that aren't found in you kitchen. This type of tests are about testing this adapting.
Oh, and had you ever done anything hard in your life, then you'd know that it's usuall the simple, obvious things that get you. Because hard things require focus. {...} As I said once before: Always have a seven year old child around. Or maybe in this case a layman.
There is also a chef in the team developing this device - he's the guy who is supposed to have a good idea about cooking - actually much better than yours given his level of experience given that he is doing it professionnally, not between session of ${JAVASCRIPT_FRAMEWORK} debugging.
It's not only a bunch of engineers who might be so focused on the technical details that they forgot to call mom at home and ask her what settings she uses when she bakes them cookies.
But again, the main key point is that mom's setup WILL NOT WORK IN THIS PECULIAR CASE, because THE PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT IS COMPLETELY ALIEN (no gravity, no convection, limited energy, safety concerns to the station and the personnel, etc.).
And learn to bake.
They *ARE* learning to bake. Except in a completely unusual setting that is entirely new to the culinary science of Mankind.
And thus they need to discover what are the peculiar settings required to bake in this wonderful new case.
Baking at 150C/300F for 20m and 2h is one of the tests on the path toward discovery.
To paraphrase a classic:
Their mission is TO BOLDY BAKE WHERE NO CHEF HAS BAKED BEFORE(*).
---
(*) - May or may not involve green-skinned waitresses.
(%) and thus you lose the best ever and most efficient way to transfer heat.
You need to fall back on thermal conduction, and air (as found in the oven) is one very lousy conductor, and radiation with is quite small at this tiny scales.
Re: (Score:2)
I would be interested to hear what the results and cook times were when they tested the oven on terra firma before sending the whole kit up to the space station. We are only getting one side of the story. For all we know it's a crappy oven even in the lab.
Limitations (Score:2)
For all we know it's a crappy oven even in the lab.
On ground, the technical limitations it's designed around will still apply (max energy consumption, isolation, avoiding the heating elements to melt) though some constrain would be relaxed in practice (there is convection, so the heat can more easily move away from the heating elements so there's a lower chance the device cooks itself and melts).
On the ground due to gravity, convection is going to happen, so it's going to be *orders of magnitude more efficient* at transfering heat. (Like: insanely more effi
Re: (Score:2)
It's like you clowns have never heard of a convection oven. They have a small fan at the back to keep the air moving. I use mine for everything as it cooks more evenly and a little faster.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like you clowns didn't realize that that small fan is
yet another mechanical part that could fail - even more so because it would be a part under strong thermally induced mechanical stress, and also experiencing strong thermal gradiants
and
would need to be easily serviceable onboard.
Re: (Score:2)
It's like you clowns didn't realize that that small fan is
yet another mechanical part that could fail - even more so because it would be a part under strong thermally induced mechanical stress, and also experiencing strong thermal gradiants
and
would need to be easily serviceable onboard.
careful. So careful they can piss on a plate and not make a splash.
It's a fucking convection oven fan! There are literally tens of millions of them in operation every day. They last for decades. In gravity, which stresses the bearings more than sitting in null-g. And this is an experimental installation. No one's life depends on the baking of cookies at the space station. (Though it may feel like it does.) Neither of those "problems" is even remotely a problem. Neither of these design goals is even
Re: (Score:2)
No one's life depends on the baking of cookies at the space station.
Yeah, something that can literally start a fire, and have a fan to blow the flames to something else on the station couldn't possibly be life-threatening!
Has it occurred to you that the point was to see how it worked without convection? 'Cause if you can figure out how to do it without convection, then you don't need to bring along that fan on future missions where you're actually trying to cook food that the astronauts eat.
Space is hard (Score:2)
It's a fucking convection oven fan! There are literally tens of millions of them in operation every day. They last for decades.
And some fail within 5 years (the warranty period that EU would like to enforce for any larger/more expensive appliances, beyond the current 2 years standard).
This is the most perfect example of over-thinking, over-engineering, and general derpiness we've seen out of NASA in quite some time.
ISS by now is more than 2 decades old, and is currently planned to last another decade at least. For such a gigantic project, the amount of elements that failed and needed replacement is mind-blowing small. That's because everything is over-engineered. That's the whole point.
And this is an experimental installation. No one's life depends on the baking of cookies at the space station.
Indeed(*). But if the final production oven fails, you end up with a (very ex
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
But wait there's more! The lack of convection is a gift that keeps on giving. Mr. Cookie is going to be surrounded by a pocket of steam that will keep the dough moist making it a wet process instead of a dry one. Also, this will reduce the amount of oxygen available to the exterior of the cookie slowing chemical reactions (carmelization) that require it.
My armchair space-nut wager is that the increased cooking time had less to do with temperature and more to do with waiting for the steam blanket to diffu
Re: (Score:3)
Space is hard. Even stupid easy things are hard in space. It's hard to overstate this. If doing something in space sounds easy then you are probably missing something.
Case in point, I want to ask "Wouldn't it have been easier to put a fan in the oven to force convection?" Applying the previous lesson I have to assume that there is some non-obvious reason they didn't do that which boils down to "It would have killed everyone aboard."
Space may be hard, but it's not THAT hard. This has been NASA's problem since the Shuttle era, making mountains out of every mole hill they find, without any ability to discern what's actually a real risk and what isn't. We get told to sit down and shut up when we question why there wasn't a fan in the oven when just five minutes of thinking about it makes it pretty damn easy to discern there's no possible risk. The heating elements are by far the biggest power draw, which is what they have to be concern
Re: (Score:2)
The steam would be less of an issue than you might think. The problem with steam isn't that it's wet, but that (when terrestrially produced and subject to convection) it's cold. Food can brown and burn surrounded by steam, as long as there's enough radiant heat to get the food -- and the steam -- to the appropriate temperature. You see the same thing in industrial bread ovens, which can be both full of steam and crazy hot.
Point of failure (Score:2)
Case in point, I want to ask "Wouldn't it have been easier to put a fan in the oven to force convection?" Applying the previous lesson I have to assume that there is some non-obvious reason they didn't do that which boils down to "It would have killed everyone aboard."
Acccording to the team, they decided against it because it's yet another part that can fail.
(Well, that's the case even here on earth: not every single forced convection oven lasts multiple decade)
And sending a replacement in orbit would cost an insane amount, due to price-per-kilo of current launches.
(And that's the part where "space is hard" kicks in)
So the team preferred to first try a solution that doesn't even require the part to begin with.
(Answer of the trial: it does kind of work if you're somewhat
Re: (Score:2)
They went to 325F, which isn't that far off from the 350F peragrin said is needed.
I don't know about your oven, but if I left cookies in my terrestrial oven at 325F for 2 hours they wouldn't just be done, they'd be charcoal. (I have plenty of experience with burnt cookies.)
Comment removed (Score:4)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Since convection is not possible or difficult in zero gravity, heating is accomplished through electric heating elements (similar to that found in a toaster oven), powered by electricity drawn from the International Space Station’s internal power system. Heating elements are placed such that a sufficient pocket of heat is created around the food sample.
.
Re: (Score:2)
The raw cookie dough will continuously absorb a humongous amount of energy turning water into water vapor. Only when most of the water is gone will the cookie heat up significantly.
Since there's no convection, the oven is depending on infrared emissions and the thermal conductivity of air to heat up the cookie. The first of which is very limited at 325 degrees, and the second of which has always been very low. Just think of a winter jacket. All that's doing is putting a bunch of unmoving air between you and
Re: (Score:2)
The heating elements will not be anywhere near 325 degrees. 1600 F is the likely approximate temperature, the elements will be glowing red, and that heats the oven interior to 325 given time.
Many earth-bound ovens have a "broil" element located above the food. It's not going to be heating the food by rising hot air.
Re: (Score:2)
why do you say there is no gravity
Because it's a convenient linguistic shortcut, Captain Pedantic.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Generally, you don't want burning hot stuff in a space station. That it reaches temperatures sufficient to bake anything in a way that is considered safe is impressive by itself.
And that oven doesn't work like anything we have on earth. Because there is no gravity, there is no natural convection. They could have used a fan, if hot stuff is bad, what about spinning hot stuff that blows hot air and cookie crumbs? So no fan. They designed their oven so that there is a static pocket of hot air in the middle, wh
Re: (Score:2)
You raise an interesting language point.
My native language is French, and the word I wanted to use is "pesanteur". That word is defined as the effect of gravity on objects on the surface of the earth, it is derived from "poids" which means "weight". The literal translation would be something like "weigthfulness".
However, it is often translated to "gravity" (see https://www.linguee.com/french... [linguee.com] ), so it seems that the meaning is ambiguous in English.
Anyways, I am not shocked to see this level of pedantry on
Re: (Score:1)
Chocolate chip cookies need 350 degrees f for 10-12 minutes. Baking at 300 for 20 changes how they come out.
You have to cook the interior of the cookie no wonder why they were coming in under baked.
Here's the caveat, this baking is done at 1 atmosphere and 1 "g" (in theory) with an average temperature of 20 C/70 F. Even while at high altitudes, there are different baking instructions so the same is not hard to factor when thinking on a space station.
Wow, that's a surprise (Score:5, Interesting)
Or maybe it's just the use of the individual sachets - the hot air isn't in direct contact with the actual ingredients, so the heat must be transferred throughthe sachet to the ingredients rather than just convection to the exposed surface of the cookie? That seems most plausible to me, and is probably linked to why fan ovens need less baking time than convention ones at the same temperature, so maybe they could start there.
Re: (Score:2)
Convection probably doesn't work properly, so heat has to propagate strictly by warming the air nearest the heating element? We'd have to know the design of the oven, but if it doesn’t have a fan to circulate the air, I’m sure it takes much longer to get the whole system up to temperature.
Re: (Score:3)
I'm still going with convection (or lack thereof) being the main cause of the difference. (And to address the air pressure issue mention
Re: Wow, that's a surprise (Score:5, Informative)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
If they had put in a $5 fan, and it broke, they would have exactly what they had now. There has to be a less stupid explanation for why there wasn't a fan. (if indeed there wasn't one)......
(a little research later...)
OK first off everyone here needs to shut up and read the wikipedia page on convection. Then we can actually have an intelligent conversation. Among other factors not mentioned in this discussion, it turns out that there is is plenty of convection in zero g (or, for the pedantic, in
Re: (Score:2)
Also, what is the atmosphere like in the ISS? It is Sea-Level pressure, or is it like a mountaintop in there? Altitude and the corresponding air pressure there makes a difference in the time it takes for an egg to boil, so that may be a big factor.
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
If I want to hear from an asshole, I'll fart, thank you.
Re: (Score:1)
Heat rises and those temperatures are already on the low side for baking, presumably constrained for fire safety reasons.
Re: Wow, that's a surprise (Score:3)
When there is no gravity, what direction is âoerisesâ?
1). The temperature was not high enough to induce the chemical reaction to âoebakeâ the sugars in the batter in the same time as on earth. What microreaction in the semiliquid batter is influenced by gravity?
2). Heat transfer through the baked portion to the interior batter is apparently worse in space.
3). The air flow was limited due to lack of forced convection (no fan), and we learn natural convection isnâ(TM)t so great in sp
Re:Wow, that's a surprise (Score:4, Informative)
> Or maybe it's just the use of the individual sachets
That and 300*F. The Maillard Reaction is necessary for baking cookies and that starts about 360*F external temperature. Most ovens set for 350 have surges above that so we use 350 as a standard temp for baking the plurality of foods.
The pouches also prevent evaporation, unless they were exotic material. Imagine if on earth you put dough in pouches in 360*F steam - that's not going to make a crisp cookie. If it's not crisp it's not really cookie. Technically I think they made bad muffins.
I wonder if they had any food scientists involved or just mechanical engineers. They can't have tasted like cookies on Earth.
Try a 350*F hot plate with a slow revolution to create some gravity for them to spread.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No it doesn't, it starts at 280.
Well at least they didn't ask you .
Re: (Score:2)
The Maillard Reaction [wikipedia.org]
runs from 280F to 330F.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's toast (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:It's toast (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:3)
It's essentially a toaster, so instead of cranking up the heat to (deliberately) burn the sides of the toast, it's got a lower temperature to allow the heat to move through the food - a bit like sous vide, but in air instead of water.
It does seem rather mean to send a batch of cookies/biscuits/biscotti up there, make them cook them and then send them home again *without leaving them at least one*!! I'm sure it's because they're expensive, and because they want to science out of them, but really, how much mo
Eek! (Score:2)
Re: Not environmentally friendly cookies (Score:2)
I disagree (Score:5, Funny)
"Italian astronaut Luca Parmitano was the master baker"
Italian? Then they are not cookies, they are biscotti.
Re: (Score:1)
haha and if they were german then it would be geback instead! and if they were spanish they would be making galletas. langages are funny right
Is this some fetish-thing? (Score:1)
Because baking cookies in space makes absolutely no sense, given how expensive this is.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Seems like a fail. Cookies are the last thing you want to cook when actual nutrition is the question.
Re: (Score:2)
They care about the chemistry, not nutrition. That's why all the cookies were sent back to Earth.
Re: (Score:2)
I know that. They still get the chemistry of cookies...
Re: (Score:2)
Unless of course they are intending to market them... Nabisco and NASA teaming up to make Space Chips Ahoy!
How much do you think a space nuts CEO would spend on some cookies made on the international space station.
Die Eier von Satan (Score:3)
Eine halbe Tasse Staubzucker Einen Viertel Teelöffel Salz Eine Messerspitze türkisches Haschisch Ein halbes Pfund Butter Ein'n Teelöffel Vanillenzucker Ein halbes Pfund Mehl Einhundertfünfzig Gramm gemahlene Nüsse Ein wenig extra Staubzucker Und keine Eier
In eine Schüssel geben Butter einrühren, gemahlene Nüsse zugeben und den Teig verkneten
Augenballgroße Stücke vom Teig formen Im Staubzucker wälzen und sagt die Zauberwörter Simsalbimbamba Saladu Saladim
Auf einen gefettetes Backblech legen und bei zweihundert Grad für fünfzehn Minuten backen und keine Eier
Bei zweihundert Grad, fünfzehn Minuten backen Und keine Eier
~
Well, that is seriously too low. (Score:2)
No surprise there. 150 degrees C is too low. 180 would be better.
Re: (Score:2)
I suspect they went on the conservative side of things to avoid having to dump waste heat in space station, which is a non-trivial problem if you get carried away baking.
If you can keep most of it contained by taking it up in the phase changes, you've got less to worry about beyond the inevitable losses.
Re: (Score:2)
If there was convection, yes. But there's no convection in orbit because there's no gravity.
Re: (Score:2)
It's a common shorthand phrase, Captain Pedantic.
First space-caked bookies? (Score:2)
Dunno dude, you sure you turned the oven ON?
What do you mean they didn't eat them? (Score:2)
Monstrous!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They must be pretty terrible engineers if they can't break into a cookie jar. ;
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Err... astonauts are the type of person that does that. NASA is pretty risk adverse and won't let them eat something that's never been consumed by a human before. If something goes wonky medical care is a bit of a difficulty up there.
IIRC when they grew lettuce for the first time on the ISS it was the same thing. They had to ship it to earth for analysis before they could eat it. At
Re: (Score:2)
What kind of person bakes cookies and then instead of eating any, puts them in a bag and throws them in the ocean?
Is this a valid Jeopardy response for "Racehorses for $200"?
Seabiscuit
Not nearly as pointless (Score:2)
One HELL of a delivery to order (Score:2)
Weird to have them bake the cookies then "Well we dunno what they taste like, we sent them to the Earth."
The results are finally in (Score:3)
The results are finally in ...And how do they taste? No one knows.
So, the results are not yet in.
Space bakers (Score:2)
Any mediocre baker knows that bake time and bake temperature aren't inversely proportional. There's actually a lot of science involved.
money well spent ... (Score:1)