Your English writing platform
Discover LudwigExact(6)
A maximum cooking efficiency of 51.8% was recorded for pan A on electrical coil cooktop.
Statistical analyses reveal that pans had a greater impact on cooking efficiency than that of cooktops.
Statistical analyses of heating time (2 10.22 min), cooling time (28 82 min), and cooking efficiency (16 81%) revealed the existence of significant differences not only among different pans and cooktops, but also in their interactions.
The design was adapted to meet performance needs such as: heating rate, cooking efficiency, energy distribution, electric power generation, exhaust emissions and time taken to boil water using standardised water boiling tests.
Because ICSs improve cooking efficiency compared with a traditional stove, ICSs can reduce the amount of fuel required, fuel gathering time, and cooking time all of which have the potential to improve health and increase household income.
Cooking efficiency was in the order of 28, 39.3 and 70%, respectively, for natural gas, electric coil, and induction cooktops.
Similar(54)
Maximum cooking efficiencies of 35.5 and 81.3% were recorded for pan C on natural gas and induction cooktops, respectively.
Differences in cooking efficiencies are due to differences in heating principles and cooktop wattage; pan size and shape, composition, base thickness and mass.
These findings confirm that a lot of heat is lost during cooking if the ash-removing hole is open, resulting in high wood fuel consumption and low thermal efficiency per cooking session.
Compared to light and humidity, temperature was more stable and predictable, and night temperature showed a stronger correlation efficiency to cooking quality than day temperature, and the daily temperature range had contrary effects compared to day and night temperature on grain quality.
All users reported that the stove reduced smoke, increased cooking speed and fuel efficiency, and stated that the stove's portability was a benefit.
Write better and faster with AI suggestions while staying true to your unique style.
Since I tried Ludwig back in 2017, I have been constantly using it in both editing and translation. Ever since, I suggest it to my translators at ProSciEditing.

Justyna Jupowicz-Kozak
CEO of Professional Science Editing for Scientists @ prosciediting.com