[Stoves] Major stove-test proposal

Sun Apr 21 13:35:23 CDT 2013

Dear Ron

You will like this. You can create any tool you like for measuring anything you like as long it will pass peer review. Once it has been accepted as valid and uses valid metrics and acceptable definitions, it can be used to conduct approved tests. If it can be conducted simultaneously with other tests, no problem. You can report both results.

If your metric is mass of char per dry mass of input fuel, for example, that could give a mass-related metric (a fuel production efficiency). A better metric might be energy output in the form of char divided by the energy available in the input raw material. That would be a form of energy efficiency in the secondary fuel.

There are a set of definitions (with many clearly stated ‘efficiencies’) so when it comes time to define the metrics and describe the testing tool, the protocol should be written in the light of those.

What you want to do is to have an experiment that normalises just about everything so no matter what the fuel or stove or circumstances, the result is valid. You don’t want a test that is only valid for one particular set of circumstances. For example you would not want to have emissions per kg of fuel because if you used a different fuel, the results are not directly comparable which would obviate the whole point of creating a comparative matrix.

I will circulate some definitions perhaps before the end of this week to kick things off.

Regards

Crispin

From: rongretlarson at comcast.net [mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net] 
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 1:42 PM
To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves; Crispin Pemberton-Pigott
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Major stove-test proposal

Crispin  -  cc Stoves:

   Does your "Toolkit" include a proposal for how one should report the efficiency of char-making in a cookstove?

Ron

  _____  

From: "Crispin Pemberton-Pigott" <crispinpigott at gmail.com <mailto:crispinpigott at gmail.com> >
To: "Discussion of biomass cooking stoves" <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org <mailto:stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org> >
Sent: Sunday, April 21, 2013 11:15:33 AM
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Major stove-test proposal

Dear Paul

Further to this I can report that there is significant progress on systematising this proposal into the form of a Standard with three sections, or three titles that biomass combusting devices naturally fall into. In fact that could even be refined further by saying that there are three testing approaches that provide comparisons contained in one methodology.

They are: devices that heat water only (which is so common that they can be specifically tuned for that alone); devices that are used for cooking (they can be controlled enough to give a cook a good cooking experience with enough power and controllability); and comparative testing where an absolute measure is not required, but which tests one stove against another doing exactly the same thing (usually for determining the relative performance of a locally or culturally relevant task). 

The measurements are based on a determination of what constitutes a decent and acceptable cooking experience, which of course varies from region to region. Working back from that, it is possible to set certain targets for performance that are scientifically rooted and defined.

The definitions required are being compiled at this time. A few people have been asked for input and then I will circulate it further. It is very much open for discussion. The Stove Testing Toolbox is a set of agreed methods with their attendant definitions and metrics, each of which exists independently and is valid on its own. At the moment there are two ‘tools’ that seem to be well defined enough to work well.

One is for determining the heat transfer efficiency of a hot stove at high power and the other is for determining the average heat transfer efficiency over a long burn at one or more power levels including ignition. The latter captures the influence of the thermal mass of a heavy stove – something building into the Chinese National Standard at the moment though it does so in a manner that has not been examined in much detail. Emissions are easily added to the TET numbers based on the mass emitted per net MJ in the pot. Determining the MJ in the pot of a wok or for frying has been a problem. This has been addressed.

The thermal efficiency tests (TET) are similar to the BS, Indian and SeTAR tests meaning they track the heat transferred including the Cp of the pot.

More details will follow when the documentation is organised.

Regards

Crispin

This was not cross-posted to the biochar list

+++++++

Stovers and biochar folks.

The message below and attachment were sent but not distributed (because of too many other recipients).

That explains why there was so little discussion!!  

I consider this document to be highly important.    So here it is, a month late but still to be read.

Paul S. Anderson, PhD  aka "Dr TLUD"
Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>    Skype: paultlud  Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website:  www.drtlud.com <http://www.drtlud.com> 

-------- Original Message -------- 

Subject: 

Major stove-test proposal

Date: 

Thu, 21 Mar 2013 18:41:54 -0500

From: 

Paul Anderson  <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu> <psanders at ilstu.edu>

To: 

Discussion of biomass cooking stoves  <mailto:stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>,  <mailto:biochar at yahoogroups.com> "biochar at yahoogroups.com"  <mailto:biochar at yahoogroups.com> <biochar at yahoogroups.com>, Hugh McLaughlin  <mailto:wastemin1 at verizon.net> <wastemin1 at verizon.net>, Bob Fairchild  <mailto:solarbobky at yahoo.com> <solarbobky at yahoo.com>, Noeli Anderson  <mailto:nvanderson at yahoo.com> <nvanderson at yahoo.com>, Doc Anderson  <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu> <psanders at ilstu.edu>, Ranyee Chiang  <mailto:rchiang at cleancookstoves.org> <rchiang at cleancookstoves.org>

Dear All,

Here at the GACC Forum, a truly major proposal about adjustments of 
stove-testing method has been made.   It is just beginning to reach 
those who should be involved.   Feel free to forward the attached 
document to others.   And I understand that some additional proposals 
are being formulated, but I have no details on them.

I will send further comments eventually, but you can start 
discussions.   The conference is very productive.  Including some truly 
meaningful TLUD progress!!!

Paul

-- 
Paul S. Anderson, PhD  aka "Dr TLUD"
Email:  psanders at ilstu.edu <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>    Skype: paultlud  Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website:  www.drtlud.com <http://www.drtlud.com> 

_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org <mailto:stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org> 

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page
http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org

for more Biomass Cooking Stoves,  News and Information see our web site:
http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20130421/1ba639da/attachment.html>