[Stoves] Effect of ambient temperature on stove testing at lowpower

Cookswell Jikos cookswelljikos at gmail.com
Tue May 31 10:15:52 CDT 2016


Dear Kirk -

''Dieter has brought up the concept of retained heat cooking in an
insulated container.  Would anybody even need turn-down in a cook stove?
Is retained heat cooking the better solution, or is it good to have both?''

I think it would very much depend on what is being cooked and in what type
of kitchen setting. If this question of ambient air temperature has more
than noticeable effects on the stove performance, then it is something I
imagine a cook would approve or disapprove of and that can make or break a
sale (or a 'user' using in the case of a free stove).

Say you sell the same stove to be used in an igloo as for a maasai
manyatta...would your customer notice any differences that would affect the
quality of making dinner etc.? Retained heat works for some foods, but for
staples like fufu, (sima or ugali) that need to be boiled, and then
vigorously stirred and then simmered it gets tricky as does stir-frying.

There is (a simmering?) demand in Kenya for simmering cookstoves in SME
settings, the popular one right now is a smokey sawdust stove that is
basically a metal cylinder with a door tube that you pack with saw dust
around two glass bottles stacked like a rocket stove - you then remove the
bottles and fill with firewood and light the bottom side. This lets the
water boil on the firewood phase and then the slow burn of the saw dust
keeps the water simmering. They are used by 1000's of small eatery joints
around Kenya for keeping goats head soup warm and also keeping ugali (like
polenta) warm wrapped in polythene plastic bags!

I would like to know more about all these different tests Crispin mentions
- how many cookstove tests are there in total? Between the VITA the ProBEC
and the StarSOP, who uses which tests...do the various Govts. and Donors
agree on one test for the most part? I do suppose though that given the
phenomenal variations in global cooking and fuel type that an equally
complex set of testing procedures would be needed. My only concern is how
does the end user of the stove make use of this information in their day to
day life? Do any of them provide for a simple energy star style of rating
for ease of laymans understanding? What would the 'stars' be for,
emissions, efficiency, durability, safety?

Many thanks,

Teddy

On  post note:
In regards to cooking in igloos - Wiki says a Quilliq
<https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kudlik#/media/File:Qulliq_1999-04-01.jpg> is
used to burn seal or whale fat...I wonder what tier these would fall under?
But could lard as a cooking energy source though? Would it count as
biomass? We once tried to make a jiko with Dad that used the falling fat
from the goat ribs to flare up with enough heat to cook another set of
ribs...but they were so tasty we never managed to finish the experiment ;)








*Cookswell Jikos*
www.cookswell.co.ke
www.facebook.com/CookswellJikos
www.kenyacharcoal.blogspot.com
Mobile: +254 700 380 009
Mobile: +254 700 905 913
P.O. Box 1433, Nairobi 00606, Kenya

Save trees - think twice before printing.






On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 11:34 AM, kgharris <kgharris at sonic.net> wrote:

> Prof Lloyd,
>
> This is great!  The heat loss from the pot is less because the room
> temperature is higher.  Thus I can't keep the water temperature down.  I
> will definately think this one through and try some experiments.
>
> Dieter has brought up the concept of retained heat cooking in an insulated
> container.  Would anybody even need turn-down in a cook stove?  Is retained
> heat cooking the better solution, or is it good to have both?
>
> Thank You,
>
> Kirk
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> *From:* Philip Lloyd <plloyd at mweb.co.za>
> *To:* 'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 31, 2016 12:59 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [Stoves] Effect of ambient temperature on stove testing at
> lowpower
>
> Dear Kirk
>
>
>
> I have lurked during this discussion – forgive me for entering it now.
>
>
>
> You believed “the increase in ambient room temperature had changed the
> turn-down performance of the stove.”
>
>
>
> You may have been mistaken. I think what happened was that the ambient
> room temperature changed the measurement you were attempting to make.  At
> the higher ambient temperature there was less rate of heat loss from the
> cooking pot, so it took less fuel to keep it hot and the turndown ratio –
> as you define it – changed. So the problem may lie with your definition of
> the turndown ratio.  I use the minimal sustainable firepower, determined
> from the rate of fuel feed which just keeps the fire going, as my lower
> measure, and the maximum firepower I can achieve without significant oxygen
> starvation as the upper one, and have yet to see the sort of effect of
> ambient temperature on the ratio of the upper to the lower that you report
> with your definition of the ratio.
>
>
>
> In a word, you may be picking up a change in the heat transfer from the
> pot as the ambient temperature changes, rather than anything fundamental
> about the stove performance.
>
>
>
> I hope that suggestion assists.
>
>
>
> Kind regards
>
>
>
> Prof Philip Lloyd
>
> Energy Institute, CPUT
>
> SARETEC, Sachs Circle
>
> Bellville
>
> Tel 021 959 4323
>
> Cell 083 441 5247
>
> PA Nadia 021 959 4330
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] *On
> Behalf Of *kgharris
> *Sent:* Tuesday, May 31, 2016 8:08 AM
> *To:* Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> *Subject:* Re: [Stoves] stove test
>
>
>
> Crispin,
>
>
>
> My original statement was to point out how the increase in ambient room
> temperature had changed the turn-down performance of the stove.  This is an
> important topic if the stove principles are going to have any effect in hot
> tropical countries.  If you can comment on this I would be happy to learn
> from your experience, but please stop hijacking my posts and misdirecting
> attention to cater to your agenda against the current test methods.  Start
> your own thread if that is what you want to talk about.
>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> I will be happy to answer questions about the burning abilities and
> tecniques of our stove and combustor.
>
>
>
> Kirk
>
> ----- Original Message -----
>
> *From:* Crispin Pemberton-Pigott <crispinpigott at outlook.com>
>
> *To:* 'Discussion of biomass cooking stoves'
> <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>
>
> *Sent:* Monday, May 30, 2016 9:40 PM
>
> *Subject:* Re: [Stoves] stove test
>
>
>
> Dear Kirk
>
>
>
> > With the support of Aprovecho Research Center, I (actually we) have
> developed a very good, clean burning TLUD-ND.
>
>
>
> I think you have done exactly that. Good on you.
>
>
>
> There is no misdirection at all here. You are past the verge of changing
> the stove’s superior performance in order to get a better rating on an
> invalid metric. It is that simple. Don’t get sucked into that trap. When
> you are getting results as good as you are, there are new opportunities to
> go wrong.
>
>
>
> The only ‘misdirection’ has been supplied for years by test methods that
> guided people to edit their stoves to meet spurious requirements that did
> not bear directly on performance, or worse, actually penalised stoves for
> their superior performance.  A good example is attached.
>
>
>
> This is not something new in the stove community. Here is a quote from the
> attached Aprovecho document from 2003:
>
>
>
> *“Why was the good advice, by established experts in the field,
> represented in the VITA International Standard test, the result of several
> well funded international conferences, obscure in 2003? Both the Indian and
> Chinese governments developed tests of their own widening the scope of PHU
> to include power, rate of evaporation, time. Visser (2003) published a
> version of a water boiling test based on efficiency and appropriate power
> for boiling and simmering. What motivated this parallel activity? Why isn’t
> the VITA test in more general use?”*
>
>
>
> One reason the VITA test was not more popular was it had several
> conceptual errors and a few really poor metrics that gave mis-directing
> outputs. One is the efficiency of simmering, another is the concept of
> specific fuel consumption for simmering.  Another was the idea of an
> ‘average efficiency’ meaning an ‘average thermal efficiency’. I believe
> from my research that the specific fuel consumption for simmering and the
> average efficiency were both introduced by Baldwin in 1986 or so, before
> his book came out. Neither are acceptable metrics.
>
>
>
> The document refers to the VITA test the ‘international standard’ which is
> not supported by the evidence. Three or four minor parties agreed to it and
> it was never used by the major markets in India and China. Even Eindhoven
> University didn’t use it and they were a party to drafting it. India pretty
> much adopted the minority position taken by KK Prasad from Eindhoven and
> built that into their 1991 test. The Chinese test from that era was very
> similar. India, interestingly, produced a list of 28 standard sizes of
> cooking pot which is a record, I believe!
>
>
>
> The long-forgotten organisation Bois de Feu had a clear understanding of
> these issues and had a test method in 1982 that didn’t have these problems.
> They treated the simmering phase very carefully (and differently). Prasad
> (and Visser who was his student) developed multiple test methods over the
> years. Piet Visser and I created one in Malawi in about 2007 which later
> evolved into the ProBEC Test for heat transfer efficiency which is now a
> SeTAR SOP, currently v1.05 (SeTAR is an independently managed continuation
> of the 13 year long GIZ/ProBEC project). It doesn’t really predict
> performance, it gives a real-time heat transfer efficiency report under
> varying conditions. It is very easy to perform and it supports
> pot-swapping, similar to the Indian protocol.
>
>
>
> So, ladies and gentlemen, there are no Tier 4 stoves. That achievement
> will have to wait for the development of appropriate, valid low power
> metrics and one will need an equipment set capable of quantifying the
> result.
>
>
>
> Kirk: don’t be bamboozled. You are doing good work.  Nothing is perfectly
> correct. Independent investigation of truth is still required.
>
>
>
> Best wishes
>
> Crispin
>
>
>
>
>
> All,
>
>
>
> With the support of Aprovecho Research Center, I (actually we) have
> developed a very good, clean burning TLUD-ND.  This is real and proven and
> no amount of misdirection can change that.  It will be at Aprovecho for
> stove camp for all to examine, and I will be giving a presentation on how
> it burns so clean.
>
>
>
> Respectfully,
>
>
>
> Kirk
>
>
>
> Santa Rosa, CA. USA
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
> ------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7598 / Virus Database: 4591/12332 - Release Date: 05/31/16
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/
>
> ------------------------------
>
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2016.0.7598 / Virus Database: 4591/12332 - Release Date: 05/31/16
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20160531/c0f44388/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list