"twice the crispiness"

[johnspartan]

To heck with trivial things like world peace and heart disease, we tackle IMPORTANT issues here…

Bought a candy bar (no sense giving them free advertising), with packaging that promised “extra crispy — Twice the Crisp! (of regular brand).”

Which led me to wonder… how would you justify being twice as crispy? Is it something that’s quantified? I guess it must be if you can double your accomplishment of it. Is there a crispiness numeric scale? Is it universal, or is there metric crispiness and the King’s crispiness? Are there crispiness conversion tables?

Side note… from Wikipedia: “Crunchiness differs from crispiness in that a crispy item is quickly atomized, while a crunchy one offers sustained, granular resistance to jaw action.” I’m sure that helps… ummm… almost none at all.

[QuercusMax]

Maybe it’s not that the crispiness of each individual particle is twice as potent, but it has twice as much of the crispy element? So they’ve taken out chocolate (or whatever) and replace it with “crisp”?

[Santo_Rugger]

Half the force needed to produce a brittle fracture. It’s a unitless number, since it’s relative.

[Sapo]

@Santo_Rugger

Half the force needed to produce a brittle fracture. It’s a unitless number, since it’s relative.

How is that different from crunchiness? (since wiki mentioned it)

[Squink]

@Santo_Rugger

Half the force needed to produce a brittle fracture

Nah, that’s too simple.
The quantification of crispness:

The definition of the sensation of crispness (and some related textures) is proposed to be the sudden drop in load experienced on the jaw adductor (closing) muscles and/or the load sensors in the tooth suspension when a crisp food item breaks between the teeth. Force deflection curves of some starch-based crisp foods were analysed and replotted as weighted frequency curves of the magnitude of the load drop. It is suggested that crumbliness, crispness, crunchiness and hardness are descriptors along the load-drop-size continuum. It is possible that a large number of small fracture events suppresses the development of large fracture events by competing for the available energy, thus affecting the sensation of crispness. The frequency curve provides a mechanical signature of the crisp food.

[Santo_Rugger]

@Sapo

How is that different from crunchiness? (since wiki mentioned it)

When it’s crunchy, you can do it again.

@Squink

Nah, that’s too simple.
The quantification of crispness:

:dubious:

Half the drop in force, half the time to total drop, or half the area under the curve of load vs. time.

[Squink]

@Santo_Rugger

I’ll bet they picked the definition that gave them precisely “twice the crispiness”

“2.37 times the crispiness” doesn’t have quite the same ring to it, and would probably confuse consumers.

[Keeve]

@johnspartan

Side note… from Wikipedia: “Crunchiness differs from crispiness in that a crispy item is quickly atomized, while a crunchy one offers sustained, granular resistance to jaw action.” I’m sure that helps… ummm… almost none at all.

According to that, a Rice Krispy or a piece of stale bread would be crispy, and a peanut would be crunchy. A piece of meat or cheese would not be crunchy because the sustained resistance has to be granular, i.e., with some brittleness. I suppose.

[Philster]

I would have bet crispiness increased exponentially with certain forces. If the SDMB and physics-related questions here have taught me anything, it’s expect some answer to include the use of ‘exponentially’.

Other than that, I got nuttin’.

[Smeghead]

This must be measured by the same lab that promises that makeup provides “127% more lushness”.

[Sunspace]

@Smeghead

This must be measured by the same lab that promises that makeup provides “127% more lushness”.

Or 13.5% more lushness in metric. Because American companies use US Customary units.

[Santo_Rugger]

@Smeghead

This must be measured by the same lab that promises that makeup provides “127% more lushness”.

I bought a bicycle seat once that promised 82% more penile blood flow. I wasn’t sure if it was volumetric flow rate, velocity, or… well, something else.

[johnspartan]

I hope I never get so serious as to read phrases like “magnitude of the load drop” and “load-drop-size continuum” and not think of… umm… the effects of fiber

[Tom_Tildrum]

So, can crispiness ever be negative? Or does it just go down to zero?

[drastic_quench]

@Squink

I’ll bet they picked the definition that gave them precisely “twice the crispiness”

“2.37 times the crispiness” doesn’t have quite the same ring to it, and would probably confuse consumers.

I would go out of my way to buy a snack that advertised 2.37 times the crispiness. You know exactly what you’re getting!

[Balthisar]

It says twice the crisp, and not twice the crispiness, right?

[Sapo]

@Santo_Rugger

I bought a bicycle seat once that promised 82% more penile blood flow. I wasn’t sure if it was volumetric flow rate, velocity, or… well, something else.

Must. Not. Reply. To this.

[WF_Tomba]

I would suggest quantifying crispiness and crunchiness by the loudness of the sound you hear while chewing the food. This would be measured by essentially giving someone a hearing test while they chew.

[Askance]

@Santo_Rugger

I bought a bicycle seat once that promised 82% more penile blood flow. I wasn’t sure if it was volumetric flow rate, velocity, or… well, something else.

… did many women buy that model?

[Chez_Guevara]

@Tom_Tildrum

So, can crispiness ever be negative? Or does it just go down to zero?

According to Table 4.3 of standard intensity crispness values for low moisture foods (Meilgaard, 1999) crispness begins at 0 and goes up to 9. It’s a bit like the Mohs scale of hardness, only slightly more tasty. A granola bar, for example, is given a crispness value of 1 whereas melba toast gets a 9. I’m surprised to see goldfish given a 6, though. All those I’ve eaten have been quite moist, if not downright wet.