[Stoves] stove

[Nikhil Desai]

Frank:

Whether the cook wants to or can use a particular fuel or a heavy cast iron
pot or a thin plate metal pot and is comfortable raising or lowering it, we
cannot tell without getting groudlevel intelligence. Theories are only an
easy way out.

Science would first strive to identify the problem, then understand what
variables can be controlled in what contexts and how, THEN move, if needed,
to the IWA exercise.

Putting cart before the horse, over and over again, is a proof of insanity
.

Nikhil

On Dec 14, 2017, at 10:56 PM, Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com> wrote:

On 12/14/17 5:37 PM, Nikhil Desai wrote:

Frank:

You wrote, "I don't know if we can get the variables controlled enough to
do what you suggest about determining high and low power possibilities.
That may be left to Cecil and his ethnography work to see what people like
best."

I'm thinking (as Tami suggests) that a stove works best with a good active
combustion. We should not try to slow the flame to lower the Power. Perhaps
that can be done at Box-4. Use a heavy cast iron pot or a thin plate metal
pot depending on the power wanted to get into the task. Lift the pot higher
than optimum to lower Power or add more water.

<snip>



Even in a narrow geography of one agroclimatic zone, the variations in fuel
quality and prices, stove use patterns, may vary quite a bit and you may
not find the control over variables that you want. (Except, say, you had a
processed fuel that can be delivered economically and reliably.)

Fuel quality and stove use patterns will vary. The purpose of what i
suggest and what others have left unmentioned when using processed fuel in
their stove tests. And it is true that we may not find the control over
variables that we want - That's science. At least we will know precisely
what the problem is.

<snip>


Nikhil

Regards

Frank Shields
Gabilan Laboratory
Keith Day Company, Inc.




On Tue, Dec 12, 2017 at 12:44 AM, Frank Shields <franke at cruzio.com> wrote:

> Dear Philip,
>
> There may be a lot more things we can determine once we get control of the
> six variables And that will depend on how much control we can get. Even the
> discussion Paul and Crispin are having as the CO and CO2 reactions will
> need control of the biomass properties and packing before answers (with
> help with using helium surrogate) is determined.  And we must be using real
> wild biomass prepared for the combustion chamber or the results will mean
> nothing when the stove and test results are delivered to the receiving
> site.
>
> I don't know if we can get the variables controlled enough to do what you
> suggest about determining high and low power possibilities. That may be
> left to Cecil and his ethnography work to see what people like best.
>
> But I do feel certain that nothing will be done (like for the past ten
> years) until we do get control of the variables. This is not an engineering
> problem - like it has been treated. Simply going from biomass fuel > to >
> completed task. And how well people like using the stove.
>
> Regards
>
>
> Frank Shields
>
> Gabilan Laboratory
>
>
>
>
>
>


-- 
Frank Shields
444 Main Street Apt. 4205
Watsonville, CA  95076
(831) 246-0417 cellfranke at cruzio.com

<franke.vcf>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171216/04c5279b/attachment.html>