[Stoves] Thermal efficiency

CEDESOL Foundation lists.cedesol at gmail.com
Wed Apr 18 07:36:32 CDT 2012


What was the test protocols?  Greetings Chrispin.

On 4/17/12, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Friends
>
>
>
> We have been conducting a series of thermal efficiency tests on three
> stoves, more than 50 altogether, and I am sharing a consistently good result
> from two of them. Here is one:
>
>
>
> Thermal Efficiency
>
>
> 66.7%
>
> 67.1%
>
>
> 67.1%
>
>
>
>
> 67.6%
>
>
>
>
>
> That was achieved at about 2 kW power level.
>
>
>
> The other was at a similar level:
>
>
>
> Thermal efficiency
>
>
> 73.0%
>
> 71.3%
>
>
> 70.8%
>
>
>
>
> 69.9%
>
>
>
>
>
> I am pretty sure I have not seen this for a high power level before. Very
> low power can achieve high efficiencies but it is not a very useful heat.
> With these two we are seeing 1.4 kW absorbed into the pot. Pretty
> impressive.
>
>
>
> I will ask permission to share the data for what will be 69 tests in all.
>
>
>
> One set involved repeating a test done in another country with a similar
> though not identical protocol. The result was within 2.3% so the approaches
> are getting comparable results. Given that the fuel was not identical,
> altitude difference and not exactly the same pot, the difference is
> negligible.
>
>
>
> Other lab (recalculated to correct a minor error)
>
>
> 69.4%
>
> 69.4%
>
>
>
> SeTAR Lab with a slightly smaller pot and 1.1 litres less water in it
>
>
> 66.7%
>
> 67.1%
>
>
> 67.1%
>
>
>
>
> 67.6%
>
>
>
>
>
> It is nice to see this performance level achieved consistently. We are
> seeing a consistent performance variation with pot diameter: bigger is
> better.
>
>
>
> Regards
>
> Crispin
>
>
>
>

-- 
Sent from my mobile device

David Whitfield V.
Executive Director
CEDESOL Foundation




More information about the Stoves mailing list