en la retención de la entrada de vapor

09:41 Aug 11, 2010 

... and I hope this discussion will teach them to write unambiguously (if anyone ever sees it).

Hi5!

00:01 Aug 11, 2010 

that the question phrase can be read in two ways, one of these being, as you say Gene, that the "parales" don't actually "interfere" with the "admission" of the steam in the sense that the steam manages to circulate well around them (which implies they are not very thick). The other interpretation is the opposite -- that the "parales" do "interfere" with the admission of steam -- but that this is offset or compensated by the total thermal activity within the basket. I think we are managing to agree!

23:40 Aug 10, 2010 

and on a slightly different topic, just wanted to point out that, as I understand it, the increased warm-up time would not affect the total cooking time because the heat the "parales" absorb during warm-up, they would give out again at the end of cooking, while the meat is "resting"; so the total heat the meat would receive during a given cooking time at a given temperature would be the same with or without parales. In general the parales wouldn't appear to affect the energy efficiency of the cooking process.

16:28 Aug 10, 2010 

For example, they could increase the warm-up time by condensing the steam. That's why I suggest the interpretation-neutral "interference".

15:43 Aug 10, 2010 

is that any metal elements (such as these "parales" that obstruct the entrance -- or admission, as you say Gene -- of steam into the basket would act as physical barriers to the circulation of steam within the basket. However, their effect is not significant, as the text says, because the incoming steam, blasting directly onto the "parales", would cause them to become very hot because the incoming steam would give up its heat to the metal of the "parales". The parales in turn would give up their heat to the air circulating in the basket, producing convection currents because as we all know, hot air rises; the air in the basket would flow in currents from the bottom to the top. These convection currents would enhance the circulation of steam within the basket, offsetting or balancing their effect as physical barriers to the entry or admission of steam. Therefore the overall effect of the parales on the circulation of steam within the basket would not be significant, as the author says.

13:55 Aug 10, 2010 

See my exchange with Deborah on her answer. I believe Deb is on the right track, but, unfortunately, the small number of words in the question leads to a possible misinterpretation.

13:47 Aug 10, 2010 

T. Ann, I think you should hang something on the board that has the word "admission" in it: "do not interfere with the admission of steam", or something to that effect. "Holding back" or "retention" would rather be understood as "not letting the steam in", while this text obviously discusses the dynamics of steam injection, rather than its timing.

00:48 Aug 10, 2010 

that the idea is that the new design is stronger, because of the addition of vertical supports/stays, while not changing the amount of steam admitted by the previous design.