Half a croissant, on a plate, with a sign in front of it saying '50c'
h a l f b a k e r y
"Not baked goods, Professor; baked bads!" -- The Tick

idea: add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random

meta: news, help, about, links, report a problem

account: browse anonymously, or get an account and write.



Split Level Stove

A stove with better accessibility
  (+3, -1)
(+3, -1)
  [vote for,

I like to cook, but I'm not a big fan of the stovetop. If all the burners are burning, and you need something from the back, sometimes you burn your hand. plus, it's harder to get things in and out of the pots on the backburners.

This could be solved if the stovetop was made with two levels. The back level would be maybe 15cm above the front, increasing accessibility. It would kinda screw up the dimensions of the oven.

schematics, May 20 2004

frodocopier http://www.halfbake...lr/idea/Frodocopier
I'm all for accessibility [neilp, Oct 04 2004, last modified Oct 05 2004]


       stadium seating for pans, this is a great idea.
neilp, May 20 2004

       Er, schematics, you're not supposed to reach things on the the back burners by putting you hand over the front ones...
DrCurry, May 20 2004

       [schematics] Love this idea and would like to have such a cooktop - for me it would be functional and would look kind of industro-cool - but it could be done for induction and electric stovetops and cooktops as well. Bun++   

       The trouble with such a design would be in convincing regulators (and your insurers) that the arrangement was safe (in so far as the possibility of the upper pots slipping off the shelf) - never underestimate the capacity of the stupid and careless to harm themselves.
ConsulFlaminicus, May 21 2004

       Like this. I'd also like cookers to be available in differnt heights.
hazel, May 21 2004

       A brilliantly simple and simply brilliant idea. +
iivix, May 21 2004

       Maybe a small ledge could be put on it, to avoid slipping.
schematics, May 21 2004

       Around the side, duh.
DrCurry, May 22 2004

       Seems potentially dangerous. Two levels introduces an increased potential for tipping and fires.   

       If you ever had to remove something from a back burner very quickly (fire, overboiling, whatever), you couldn't just pull it off without it falling. If something on a front burner caught fire, it could more easily ignite something on a raised back burner.
waugsqueke, May 22 2004

       Ah. So you're really suffering from poor kitchen design, not poor stove design.
DrCurry, May 22 2004

       While at first glance, this seems like a great idea but, upon reading [waugs] reasoning, I agree that quickly yanking a burning pot from a rear burner could be disasterous. (er, disastrous)
bristolz, May 22 2004

       I like the mentality of examining and questioning the design of everything. But, I have to agree, with waugsqueke and bristolz (sp: disastrous)(sorry bristolz, it looked like a rare opportunity so I had to take it).   

       Also, it's quite common to transfer items between front and rear burners, this design would make that much less convenient.   

       Also, if a large pot is on the front burner, it may need to overlap in to the back burner space a bit to be centered over the heat source and/or not hang over the edge. Couldn't happen with this design.   

       Also, if a large pot, heavy, due to containing a large amount of water, etc. is on the back burner, you wouldn't be able to slide it to the front easily and would therefore be required to lift the weight with your arms extended. Bad back waiting to happen.
Gromit, May 22 2004

       guys, remember, this is for when all the burners are going. If you need to set something aside, take it off the stove.
schematics, May 22 2004


back: main index

business  computer  culture  fashion  food  halfbakery  home  other  product  public  science  sport  vehicle