[Stoves] A photo of a lab test from Ulaanbaatar

Tue Aug 27 16:31:44 CDT 2013

Dear Crispin,

Sounds great! I agree that light scattering is better for some uses
although I have been rattled by certain stoves (mostly fan stoves) that had
a lot of smaller PM that was missed by the laser.

But for improving a stove I believe that light scattering is OK just not
for comparing stoves with different types of fires.

The big filters can be purchased from HI-Q Environmental Products Co. at
www.HI-Q.net

We are doing a lot of stove improving and, like you, I believe that the
major reason for having emissions equipment is to get to better
performance. Testing should not be a good in and of itself. There are too
many serious problems needing to be addressed, as you say.

All Best,

Dean

On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 11:17 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <
crispinpigott at gmail.com> wrote:

> Dear Dean****
>
> ** **
>
> The filter is on the output of the Dusttrak DRX and is inside a canister.
> It has a 37mm filter and we have 5 canisters. It can be changed in a few
> seconds. There are apparently (not located yet) multiple sources for
> pre-weighed canisters that can be fitted that already have a filter inside
> and a total dry weight. All that one has to do is weigh the final result
> which is a pretty simple approach. I would like to do that wherever
> possible.****
>
> ** **
>
> For comparative testing we do not use the filters. At this time there is
> no requirement for absolute measurements (certification against a numerical
> target). It is planned that the Jakarta lab will have this capability. It
> requires far more cost per test to do certification and the things tested
> for will be limited as a result. A certification lab staff complement is
> higher and they spend about 20% of their time calibrating equipment. ****
>
> ** **
>
> Even for major expenses that are involved in programmes on the scale of
> thousands of stoves, relative performance against a local baseline is
> accepted. That by no means says the results are comparable across other
> methods. The readings are only as good as the equipment times the protocol
> times relevance to the local cultural practises.****
>
> ** **
>
> Because of the fewness of the labs and the real need at this stage for
> real time measurement to assist product developers, it is likely we will
> got for real time measurements of PM into the future. The real time
> measurement of mass using for example a TEOM 1405 (oscillating
> microbalance) is a step up and fits well with the variable dilution system.
> They have a very high capacity for a short time blast of PM such as we get
> in stoves during ignition. For a 150 mg max unit we can increase the
> dilution to perhaps 100 or 200 then reduce it to 4 or 5. The combination of
> a TEOM and the current setup means we can decrease the dilution by a factor
> of 6.66 which is a big improvement in precision.****
>
> ** **
>
> I say your new large filter at the GERES lab and it looks really good. It
> looks off-the-shelf with the PM10 impactor.  Where do we get one?****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks
> Crispin****
>
> ** **
>
> *From:* Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] *On
> Behalf Of *Dean Still
> *Sent:* Tuesday, August 27, 2013 1:13 PM
> *To:* Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> *Subject:* Re: [Stoves] A photo of a lab test from Ulaanbaatar****
>
> ** **
>
> Dear Crispin,****
>
> ** **
>
> Is the PM measured using a pump and filter system? What diameter filter
> are you using?****
>
> ** **
>
> Best,****
>
> ** **
>
> Dean****
>
> ** **
>
> On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 8:41 AM, Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <
> crispinpigott at gmail.com> wrote:****
>
> Dear Friends****
>
>  ****
>
> I am circulating this as an into to the test methods applied in Mongolia
> (and other places). It is a pretty good example of what the main
> measurements look like.****
>
>  ****
>
> The photo is of one of the two computer screens which side by side. On the
> top left is the Digital Scale Capture Tool (DSC) available for $50 once off
> payment to Jeremy fuzzychaos at gmail.com (as a thank you).****
>
>  ****
>
> On the left of the DSC screen is the mass from the scale per 10 seconds.
> On the right is the (approx) calculated power in kW reported per minute.
> The data is saved to disk each 10 seconds. Multiple copies of the DSC can
> be run at the same time, one for each scale used.****
>
>  ****
>
> Below the numbers screen is the average kW plot so far in blue and the
> cumulative mass burned (also so far) curve in red.****
>
>  ****
>
> Below that is the mass change detected by the scale per 10 seconds. The
> value is shifted by the wind and moving fuel but overall as time passes,
> the precision is high, about 1 part in 5000. The burn rate (green line) can
> be seen to be declining towards zero as the fire burns out. ****
>
>  ****
>
> There are 4 gas readings. This is the minimum if you want PM from a fire.
> On the left is the CO2 level in the diluter. The other three are measured
> directly from the stack (or hood). The CO is the concentration in the
> chimney, in this case. The next CO2 is the CO2 in the chimney and is of
> course higher than the CO2 in the diluter. The ratio between them is the
> level of dilution, in this case it is 3.232:1. The PM measured in the
> diluter is multiplied by the number 3.232 to give the equivalent of the
> direct measure from the chimney (which might be too high to measure
> directly). The dilution is variable with the turn of a knob.****
>
>  ****
>
> The O2 on the right is the O2 in the chimney. ****
>
>  ****
>
> Notice that the total of the O2 and CO2 on the right does not add up to
> 20.945%, the O2 concentration in the ambient air. This is because there is
> H2 burning (from the fuel) and being turned into H2O. That H2O is not
> measured on this screen and as you don’t know what it is looking at this
> picture, you can’t tell if the equipment is working perfectly or not. Maybe
> it is a measurement error, maybe it is diluted by water vapour (which it
> is).****
>
>  ****
>
> The CO is very low at 18 ppm. The value for EA is about 1.67 and Lambda is
> therefore 2.67. ****
>
>  ****
>
> 2.67 x 18 ppm = 30. So the CO(EF) is 30 ppm, meaning that if there was no
> dilution by air, the CO cell would read 30 instead of 18.****
>
>  ****
>
> The CO/CO2 ratio is 18/(6.730 x 10,000) = 0.0002674 or 0.0266% (very
> good).****
>
>  ****
>
> The ‘modified combustion efficiency’ is ****
>
>  ****
>
> 6.73/(6.73+18/10,000) = 0.9997 = 99.97%****
>
>  ****
>
> The kW blue line for power is the running average from the beginning so
> the value 11kW refers to the whole test as a whole.****
>
>  ****
>
> The PM value will be multiplied again by Lambda (dilution) to get a
> PM2.5(EF) value. This is the rating that the stove gets. ****
>
>  ****
>
> Quick review:  PM reading x dilution in the diluter x dilution by excess
> air = emission factor value. This is later multiplied by the mass burned x
> the volume of gases produced by the fire based on the fuel analysis. The
> result is the mass of PM (and by the same method the CO and any other gas)
> emitted during the test.****
>
>  ****
>
> Because the data is collected in real time, the stove can be tuned to find
> the best operating parameters. Sections of the test can be analysed later
> to create a plot of how the heat transfer efficiency, for example, changes
> with power or fuel condition (etc).****
>
>  ****
>
> Best regards****
>
> Crispin****
>
>  ****
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> 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/
>
> ****
>
> ** **
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
>
> to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
> 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/20130827/74fa60b3/attachment.html>