[Stoves] stove
Frank Shields
franke at cruzio.com
Mon Dec 11 22:13:45 CST 2017
Hi Michael, Stovers;
This is a good example where the 6-Box system would be useful.
Set up the system so it makes good tea. The process is to control the
variables and modify one at a time to improve the process. There are
lots of steps you can do but would take some time, test methods and a
little equipment. All simple but not good at this time. Once you have a
good fuel, good technique, and can produce a good cup of tea I suggest
the following:
Box-1) Observe the fuel for size, moisture, cleanliness etc.
Box - 2: Record the process loading the combustion chamber.
Box- 3: Record the combustion chamber; stove model etc.
Box-4: Establish info regarding the utensils used; metal, size,
heavy-light etc.
Box-5: Record the process; stirring, amount of water, amount of tea,
sugar added etc.
Box-6: Determine a good repeatable Completion Point. Perhaps water just
starts to boil or i can hold my hand on the side of the pot for just one
second.
You need to know what an improvement would look like for you. Quicker
tea but not care of amount of fuel. Save on fuel, walk away with less
manipulation, air quality, amount of char left, quality of char
produced, etc. Whats important is what the end user decides important.
Now all steps are controlled and should be repeatable. You can change
one Box at a time and see if that improves the process. Use dryer wood
or stir more frequently. Use a lighter pot or less water. Add wood more
frequent in smaller quantities - try to get the best conditions.
Because no-one else is doing the same system you will not be able to
compare to other systems. But you might be able to improve your own. And
there are lots of measurements for the fuel that can be made (not
described here) but use simple test methods and no need for a real lab.
Perhaps just some basic equipment.
Frank
Gabilan Laboratory
On 12/11/17 6:24 PM, Michael N Trevor wrote:
> Lets look at this another way.
> NO lab,
> NO equipment
> How do I test?
> I thinking how well it cooks my tea is a good tool
>
> On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 1:56 PM, Xavier Brandao <xav.brandao at gmail.com
> <mailto:xav.brandao at gmail.com>> wrote:
>
> Dear Kirk,
>
> Thanks a lot for contributing to the debate, and for sharing your
> story.
>
> Now this is really interesting.
>
>
> You developed a stove that is, from what I read, highly performing.
>
> You needed to use a lab protocol to develop it, you used the WBT.
> You say it allowed you to improve the stove, to the level it is today.
>
> /“Perhaps the same results could have been achieved without the
> WBT, but I could not have measured them, so there might have been
> changes in the stove that made no improvement because I couldn’t
> test them. A lot of luck would have been involved.”/
>
> You could have improved your stove while using another lab
> protocol. There are other lab protocols allowing to measure the
> performance without relying on luck, of course there are.
>
> The questions that I think of: were some of the results of the WBT
> useful, some other misleading? All of them useful? Did you develop
> and improve your stove thank to, or despite the WBT? Would you
> have made your stove better with another lab protocol, or worse?
>
> It would be great to compare the way you did the testing with the
> WBT, and the way you would have done it with another lab protocol.
> And see how results may have differed.
>
>
> Can people working with other protocols on the List react?
>
>
> Best,
>
>
> Xavier
>
> *De :*Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
> <mailto:stoves-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org>] *De la part de*
> Kirk H.
> *Envoyé :* mardi 12 décembre 2017 02:12
> *À :* Ronal W. Larson; Discussion of biomass cooking stoves
> *Objet :* Re: [Stoves] stove
>
> Ron and All,
>
> I did use the WBT to develop the Wonderwerk 316 stove. It was
> however only part of the overall testing. Mainly I used it to test
> changes in the stove intended to get more of the heat produced by
> the stove to the surface of the pot, and less heat lost out the
> sides of the stove. I used the same pot/skirt/pot-stand
> combination through all of this part of the testing, so the WBT
> showed only the results of the changes in the stove. I was not so
> concerned about the geometry of the cooking surface because it
> will change for different uses; pot, frying pan, wok, plancha, or
> whatever. I was concerned only with getting the most possible
> heat that is produced by the stove to the cooking surface.
> Perhaps the same results could have been achieved without the WBT,
> but I could not have measured them, so there might have been
> changes in the stove that made no improvement because I couldn’t
> test them. A lot of luck would have been involved.
>
> This way of using the WBT was only at Aprovecho. At Berkely we
> were testing the stove as designed at Aprovecho, not making changes.
>
> Kirk H.
>
> Sent from Mail <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>
> for Windows 10
>
> *From: *Ronal W. Larson <mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net>
> *Sent: *Monday, December 11, 2017 3:32 PM
> *To: *Kirk H. <mailto:gkharris316 at comcast.net>
> *Subject: *Re: stove
>
> Kirk:
>
> Nice.
>
> The stove list has had a lot of disagreement about the water
> boiling test (WBT). Can you say that you used that a lot to make
> iterative improvements? And eventually of course at Apro and
> Berkeley. Any way that today’s results could have been made
> without the WBT?
>
> Ron
>
> On Dec 11, 2017, at 3:44 PM, Kirk H. <gkharris316 at comcast.net
> <mailto:gkharris316 at comcast.net>> wrote:
>
> Sent fromMail
> <https://go.microsoft.com/fwlink/?LinkId=550986>for Windows 10
>
> <Kirk stove.mp4>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> Garanti sans virus. www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
>
> <#m_-2426642016079343952_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
> <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/ <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/
>
--
Frank Shields
444 Main Street Apt. 4205
Watsonville, CA 95076
(831) 246-0417 cell
franke at cruzio.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171211/3af3ca1d/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: franke.vcf
Type: text/x-vcard
Size: 264 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171211/3af3ca1d/attachment.vcf>
More information about the Stoves
mailing list