available at www.sciencedirect.com
Department of Mechanical Engineering, The University of Texas at Tyler, Tyler, TX, USA
Department of Biomedical Engineering, The University of Texas at Austin, 1 University Station, C0800, Austin, TX 78712-0238, USA
article info
abstract
Article history:
Hot beverages such as tea, hot chocolate, and coffee are frequently served at temperatures
between 160 8F (71.1 8C) and 185 8F (85 8C). Brief exposures to liquids in this temperature
range can cause significant scald burns. However, hot beverages must be served at a
Keywords:
temperature that is high enough to provide a satisfactory sensation to the consumer. This
Hot coffee
paper presents an analysis to quantify hot beverage temperatures that balance limiting the
Scald injury
potential scald burn hazard and maintaining an acceptable perception of adequate product
warmth. A figure of merit that can be optimized is defined that quantifies and combines both
Burn prevention
1.
Introduction
2.
649
650
Fig. 1 Physical representation of the skin as a semiinfinite medium subjected to convection heating on the
surface.
(1)
(2)
651
Definition
Value
Units
Scaling factor
Activation energy for
burn process
Duration of burn
Universal gas constant
(8.314 103)
3.10 10 98
6.27 10 8
1/s
J/kmol
4
8.314 10 3
s
J/kmol K
0.53
1.0
10 4
Damage function
First degree
Second degree
Third degree
(3)
Vx; t
Zt
0
Zt
dVi x; t
dt A eDE=RTx;t dt
dt
(4)
3.
652
Fig. 4 Level of injury after 4 s at a depth of 0.1875 mm for step changes in surface temperature ranging from 100 8F to 190 8F
(37.887.8 8C) for 4 s. (a) Linear scale for injury. (b) Logarithmic scale for injury.
(5)
4.
Coffee combination
Mean temperature
Standard deviation
Range
108
Black coffeestrong
Black coffeeweak
41.072.4 8C (98.1190.4 F)
41.978.5 8C (107.4178.3 8F)
300
653
5.
FoDT
logVT
dT
3:5 1
0:70
2
dT
(6)
Discussion
By applying the FoD criterion, an optimal drinking temperature of approximately 136 8F (57.8 8C) is defined. However,
since the FoD as a function of temperature passes through a
minimum value in this region, the slope of the curve is zero or
at values close to it. Thus, it is not appropriate to specify a
distinct value for the optimal temperature. Rather, a range of
temperatures can be identified for which the FoD is close to its
minimum value. This range extends from approximately
130 8F to 140 8F (54.460 8C), where the FoD values are 0.13 and
0.15, respectively. Specification of an optimal range of serving
temperatures allows for uncertainties in the model for
measured tissue properties and assumptions to match actual
physiological processes.
The FoD demonstrates a highly asymmetric behavior with
respect to temperature, which is understood as it is a
combination of two primary components. The data for
consumer preferences for drinking temperature of hot coffee
is assumed to be completely symmetric with a normal
distribution about the mean value, with no indication of a
bias toward either higher or lower values. The data by Lee and
OMahony [8] provide on indication that such a bias exists.
Conversely, the injury function is exceptionally asymmetric
with temperature, rising exponentially with continuously
increasing temperatures. As a consequence, the FoD has a
strong bias toward recommending lower temperatures for hot
beverages. The effect of the scald hazard is far more important
at temperatures above the average consumer preferred
drinking temperature than it is below. Clearly, the combination of these two diverse considerations provides a rational
basis for making a recommendation for hot beverage
temperature.
It must be pointed out that the drinking temperature is
often times different, and lower, than the serving temperature. This difference can depend on a number of factors such
as the time delay between service and consumption, the
thermal properties of the container into which the beverage is
decanted, and the quantity and temperature of condiments
added. Scald accidents occur most frequently in conjunction
with the beverage being served, when it is hottest, and the
consumer drinks the beverage when it is coolest. This analysis
assumed that there was a single temperature of the beverage
that could be used for the analysis, when in practice there may
be a range of temperatures to be considered. The analysis
could be modified to include these other factors, but they
would require making further assumptions that are specific to
particular cases of application. The most conservative and
safe approach is to use a single temperature for the analysis
unless there is compelling evidence to motivate otherwise.
Another factor which is not included in the analysis is the
effect of clothing overlaying the site of a hot beverage spill. It is
well known that the clothing will provide a thermal buffer
against transfer of heat from the liquid to skin. A rough
estimate of the temperature diminution by clothing is 5 8C
(9 8F), but this number can vary widely. On the other hand,
654
6.
Conclusions
Acknowledgements
This study was supported in part by the Robert M. and Prudie
Leibrock Professorship in Engineering at the University of
Texas at Austin.
references
[1] Roberts DC, Whitaker IS, Drew PJ. Perineal scalds from drive
through restaurants: a public health hazard. Burns
2007;33:25860.
p. 85134.
[12] Diller KR. Modeling of bioheat transfer processes at high
and low temperatures. Adv Heat Trans 1992;22:157358.
[13] Diller KR, Pearce JA. Issues in modeling thermal alterations
in tissues. Ann NY Acad Sci 1999;888:15364.
[14] He X, Bischof JC. Quantification of temperature and injury
response in thermal therapy and cryosurgery. Crit Rev
Biomed Eng 2003;31:355421.
[15] Pennes HH. Analysis of tissue and arterial blood
temperatures in the resting forearm. J Appl Physiol
1948;1:88122.
[16] Wissler EH. Pennes 1948 paper revisited. J Appl Physiol
1998;85:3541.
[17] Ross DC, Diller KR. An experimental investigation of burn
injury in living tissue. ASME J Heat Trans 1976;98:2926.
[18] Diller KR, Valvano JW, Pearce JA. Bioheat transfer. In:
Kreith F, Goswami Y, editors. The CRC handbook of
mechanical engineering. 2nd ed., Boca Raton: CRC Press;
2005. p. 4-282361 [Holmes K. Appendix A. p. 4-3513].
[19] Carslaw HS, Jaeger JC. Conduction of heat in solids, 2nd ed.,
London: Oxford University Press; 1959.
[20] Diller KR, Hayes LJ, Blake GK. Analysis of several models for
simulating skin burns. J Burn Care Rehabil 1991;12:17789.
[21] Diller KR, Klutke GA. Accuracy analysis of the Henriques
model for predicting thermal burn injury. In: Roemer RB,
editor. Advances in bioheat and mass transfer. New York:
ASME; 1993. p. 11723.
[22] Diller KR. Development and solution of finite difference
equations for burn injury with spreadsheet software. J Burn
Care Rehabil 1999;20:2532.
[23] Diller KR. Modeling skin burns on a personal computer. J
Burn Care Rehabil 1998;19:4209.