Cited by 91Burn Injury Management and OutcomesHeat Transfer and Numerical MethodsThermoregulation and physiological responses

Calculating the optimum temperature for serving hot beverages

Brown, Fredericka, Diller, Kenneth R.·2008·Burns

Abstract

Hot beverages such as tea, hot chocolate, and coffee are frequently served at temperatures between 160 degrees F (71.1 degrees C) and 185 degrees F (85 degrees C). Brief exposures to liquids in this temperature range can cause significant scald burns. However, hot beverages must be served at a temperature that is high enough to provide a satisfactory sensation to the consumer. This paper presents an analysis to quantify hot beverage temperatures that balance limiting the 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 the above effects as a function of the beverage temperature. An established mathematical model for simulating burns as a function of applied surface temperature and time of exposure is used to quantify the extent of thermal injury. Recent data from the literature defines the consumer preferred drinking temperature of coffee. A metric accommodates the thermal effects of both scald hazard and product taste to identify an optimal recommended serving temperature. The burn model shows the standard exponential dependence of injury level on temperature. The preferred drinking temperature of coffee is specified in the literature as 140+/-15 degrees F (60+/-8.3 degrees C) for a population of 300 subjects. A linear (with respect to temperature) figure of merit merged the two effects to identify an optimal drinking temperature of approximately 136 degrees F (57.8 degrees C). The analysis points to a reduction in the presently recommended serving temperature of coffee to achieve the combined result of reducing the scald burn hazard and improving customer satisfaction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.burns.2007.09.012

Cites

24 of 24 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

2 of the 26 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Brown, F., & Diller, K. R.
Affiliations
  • The University of Texas at Tyler (US)
  • The University of Texas at Austin (US)
Corresponding author
Diller, Kenneth R.
Venue
Burns
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2008-08
Volume
34
Issue
5
Pages
648-654
ISSN
0305-4179 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2064923801
Cited by
91
References
26
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 11 · 2018: 8 · 2017: 5 · 2016: 8 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 3 · 2013: 1 · 2012: 2
FWCI
1.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Burns (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
University of Texas at Austin
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Burn Injury Management and Outcomes
  • Physical Sciences › Engineering › Computational Mechanics › Heat Transfer and Numerical Methods
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Physiology › Thermoregulation and physiological responses
Keywords
hot beverages, scalds, serving temperature, coffee, burns, consumer preferences, figure of merit, thermal comfort, burn prevention
MeSH terms
Algorithms, Beverages, Burns, Coffee, Consumer Product Safety, Consumer Behavior, Food Handling, Hot Temperature, Humans, Models, Biological, Skin, Skin Temperature, Thermal Conductivity, Cohort Studies

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review