[Stoves] "Young-adult" TLUD research Re: List of woods for TLUDs?
Paul Anderson
psanders at ilstu.edu
Sun Apr 30 22:46:07 CDT 2017
Ron,
A single controller (that does not allow for changing the ratio and
amount of air to PA and SA) is, by definition, unable to do that task
that I suggested needs to be researched.
And there certainly are SINGLE controls since the Woodgas campstove had
2 settings, and now Mimi-Moto has a dial with about 5 settings, but no
change of ratio.
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: psanders at ilstu.edu
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: www.drtlud.com
On 4/30/2017 5:13 PM, Ronal W. Larson wrote:
> Paul, List and ccs:
>
> Well I haven’t heard a reason why my yesterday statement on only
> needing a single controller (limiting fuels to the non-oily variety)
> was incorrect.
>
> This is to hope we can have more discussion on this quite important
> point.
>
> I am quite sure I saw a TLUD design a few years ago that used a single
> air control. Anyone able to help?
>
> I don’t know anything about Nathan Puffer’s work.
>
> Ron
>
>
>> On Apr 29, 2017, at 9:33 PM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu
>> <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> Ron,
>>
>> I disagree. You wrote:
>>> preferring to use one controller for both is that the ratio of
>>> primary to secondary should always be the same
>> The point is that the ratio is NOT to always be the same. Even the
>> different packing of the fuel in to the TLUD can make primary air
>> (PA) flow more easily, creating more gases and needing a change in
>> secondary air (SA) to get optimal performance.
>>
>> Automobiles have sensors for all kinds of issues, with automated
>> adjustments. Just not practical yet for cookstoves that need to be
>> inexpensive. Bu who knows, someday solid biomass as initial fuel
>> could be pyrolyzed and have the gases combusted in very controlled
>> ways that would seem like Science Fiction if said today. I believe
>> that it will be justified for the woodgas/TLUD stoves, but not for
>> the old-hat ICS stoves, including rockets.
>>
>> Nathan Puffer''s work was not quantitatively evaluated. It was a
>> demonstration that made its point but was not in a way that could be
>> into large numbers of stoves at that time and still today.
>>
>> Paul
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
>> Email:psanders at ilstu.edu
>> Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
>> Website:www.drtlud.com
>> On 4/29/2017 9:46 PM, Ronal W. Larson wrote:
>>> Paul, cc Nathan and list
>>>
>>> Thanks for bringing up the two subjects of a) separately
>>> controlling secondary air, and b) oily (mostly seed?) fuels.
>>>
>>> I agree that we should be controlling secondary air, but I am pretty
>>> sure that we should and can do this with the same controller as for
>>> the primary air. Most TLUDs already can and should control primary
>>> air, but make no effort to control the secondary air. My reason
>>> for preferring to use one controller for both is that the ratio of
>>> primary to secondary should always be the same if we want (or can
>>> live with) a fixed ratio for excess air. One controller is cheaper
>>> and is easier for the cook. Anyone disagree?
>>>
>>> On the subject of using Jaropha seeds, I am pretty sure that we
>>> would need a larger amount of “secondary” air than for non-oily
>>> fuels, but that there still could be a single air controller (just
>>> with a larger SA/PA ratio [ maybe goes from about 6:1 up to 7:1
>>> ??]. Note that these oils cannot combust as they pass through the
>>> hot charcoal above the downward moving pyrolysis front (no oxygen in
>>> that stream). But I presume the temperature is enough for them to
>>> arrive above the char as quite a different set of gases. So, I’d
>>> like to hear more about what Nathan found. Any cite we can look up?
>>>
>>> I agree with the rest of Paul’s comments. TLUDs are not yet a
>>> mature technology - but it is growing up; it is not standing still.
>>>
>>> Ron
>>>
>>>
>>>> On Apr 29, 2017, at 8:14 AM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu
>>>> <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To all, 29 April 2017 [This note contains
>>>> some new content and explanations for the advancement of TLUD stoves.]
>>>>
>>>> 1. Ron: I and probably some others have successfully used dung
>>>> as the input fuel into TLUDs. I am not recommending dung, but if
>>>> it is being burned, then a TLUD is preferred for cleaner burning.
>>>>
>>>> 2. AD: I agree with Ron that the TLUD stoves are better with
>>>> both light and hard (heavy) wood than direct burning of them in any
>>>> direct-burning (ICS) stove.
>>>>
>>>> 3. Main point, to Neil and all: TLUDs are not burning wood
>>>> directly. TLUDs turn wood into gases. THEN the gases are
>>>> burned. So poplar, maple, maize cobs, dung, etc. are ALL becoming
>>>> gases first. THEN the burning of those gases might be somewhat
>>>> different (but not as much as the direct burning of those diverse
>>>> fuels).
>>>>
>>>> TLUD stoves are just arriving into their "young-adult stage." In
>>>> contrast: not infancy, not childhood, maybe still "youth", but
>>>> certainly not full maturity, and a long way from the "old age" of
>>>> the ICS "Inproved or Inadequate" direct-burning cookstoves. This
>>>> is because we are still learning about better and better ways of
>>>> mixing the combustible gases with the incoming secondary air (SA)
>>>> (This is where the BURNING takes place to make the heat that goes
>>>> to the pot. TLUDs are DIRECTLY burning GASES, not solid fuels.
>>>> ) (Please see my "Classification of Stove Technology and Fuels"
>>>> documents (1-page and 4-page versions) at
>>>> http://www.drtlud.com/2017/04/11/classification-stove-technologies-fuels/
>>>> )
>>>>
>>>> The _solid _wood and dung etc are an intermediate stage of the
>>>> fuel. Sort of a "storage" stage. Then pyrolysis "transforms
>>>> solids into gases plus charcoal". The created gases are then
>>>> burned SEPARATELY (by centimeters and seconds, but certainly
>>>> separately) from where the gases were created. We do not have
>>>> clear terminology for this, in layman's terms. The closest might be
>>>> "gas burning stoves that make their own gases."
>>>>
>>>> So, what development is happening in the early "young-adult"
>>>> stage? Control of primary air, learning about solid "intermediate"
>>>> fuels, and improving combustion of the gases, as well as "new
>>>> clothes" with sizes and mateials.
>>>>
>>>> Consider this: We have known of FA (forced air or fan assisted)
>>>> TLUD stoves from the 1990s. And there has been much progress. But
>>>> NO TLUD on the market has SEPARATE controls for "variable flows" of
>>>> primary air (PA) and secondary air (SA). THAT control is what
>>>> will make the difference regarding Neil's initial question that
>>>> pointed to differences in the initial fuels (and therefore
>>>> differences in the resultant gases and quantities of gases that are
>>>> being burned.)
>>>>
>>>> Note that TLUDs can be made with different flows of PA ans SA by
>>>> changing the sizes and number of holes. That is a form of "tuning"
>>>> the TLUD for a specific fuel. This works great for one initial
>>>> fuel, but only good but acceptable with other fringe fuels. I am
>>>> NOT referring to that work as being "variable flows". I am
>>>> referring to when the user can change the flows, even during one
>>>> batch of fuel.
>>>>
>>>> There has been some researach (mostly unreported and set aside) on
>>>> variable control of primary and secondary air, using fans. I have
>>>> experimented several times. The "million-dollar-grants" have had
>>>> laboratory equipment with controlled and measured separate air
>>>> flows. Nathan Puffer did it when we were looking at Jatropha SEEDS
>>>> as a fuel. Seeds give off additional gases from the vaporization
>>>> (not pyrolysis) of combustible vegetable oils (carbohydrates),
>>>> which are much more plentiful in seeds than in stems and branches
>>>> and leaves, thereby overwhelming the insufficient supply of SA in a
>>>> "regular" TLUD-FA.
>>>>
>>>> There is a good reason to not have separate control of PA and SA.
>>>> That reason is the user, the cook. To need to "dial-in" the right
>>>> flow of SA (assuming PA flow stays the same) is, for the most part
>>>> and for most non-scientist cooks, an extra task that could easily
>>>> be done incorrectly. And there are the financial reasons of
>>>> increased cost and maintenance.
>>>>
>>>> But with "separate air-flow control" (not an established term and
>>>> NOT justifying an acronym like SAC, as in TLUD-SAC), Neil or anyone
>>>> could put many very different initial fuels into a TLUD and have
>>>> greater control of the burning of the gases.
>>>>
>>>> More work is needed before TLUD stoves can reach their full
>>>> potential, while growing in "young-adulthood". Today (2017), maybe
>>>> 40% of what can be known about TLUD stoves is now known (but not
>>>> necessarily put into practice by stove manufacturers).
>>>>
>>>> (This note is being placed at the EPosts section of my website
>>>> www.drtlud.com so that it can be accessed continually instead of
>>>> only one time on the Stove Listserv.)
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>> Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
>>>> Email:psanders at ilstu.edu
>>>> Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
>>>> Website: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/20170430/6db4a1c0/attachment.html>
More information about the Stoves
mailing list