[Stoves] Top lit updraft combustors

Tue Dec 19 15:03:39 CST 2017

Nolbert and all,

I just want to thank you and the others for looking into the use of TLUD 
technology for masonary heaters.   Nice website for the MH Association   
http://www.mha-net.org/

I would be delighted to work with you and the MHA in any ways that 
incorporate either TLUD stove technology or other methods (such as 
modified flame cap that is not yet being studied) that emphasize 
pyrolysis and therefore also have strong interest in the resultant 
charcoal.   Maybe there is or will be a small group of such 
enthusiasts.  If so, count me in.

I live in Illinois, but that puts me into the North America focus of 
your group!!

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 12/17/2017 7:38 AM, Norbert Senf wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 16, 2017 at 10:12 PM, Ronal W. Larson 
> <rongretlarson at comcast.net <mailto:rongretlarson at comcast.net>> wrote:
>
>     Norbert  cc Biochar list, Andrew, MHA (Masonry Heating
>     Association) list, and Terrence and Steven
>
>     1. Hello to MHA and Terrence and Steven - who I see are in Ontario
>     Government departments.  Feel free to jump in.
>
>     2,  I am particularly thinking of folks in Ontario modifying MHA
>     systems so they produce char (mostly to go in the soil).  I
>     believe MH users could find that fuel costs could become negative.
>      (This idea thanks to Andrew)   The fuel piles will have to be
>     larger or re-fired more often - but these char-makers seem to be
>     cleaner.
>     I think it pretty unlikely to get through US departments as
>     rapidly as OMAFRA and OMOECC, where Government official seem to
>     believe there is global warming.
>
>     See few comments below - and thanks for yours.
>
>     (snip)
>
>     *[RWLC:   I think we are a long way from having acceptance of a “
>     software simulator”.*
>     *I would have guess that most of your MH units are “one-off”. 
>     They can’t be tested in the field at low enough cost?*
>
>
> In the masonry heater industry we have a precedent from Austria. They 
> have a proprietary calculator, that is accepted for certifying one-off 
> heaters. The main nuts and bolts behind the math is the European 
> EN-13384 chimney calculation standard. You basically calculate the 
> friction (pressure) losses for "worst case scenario" which is with a 
> half load, in the summer, and verify that the appliance will draft 
> properly. Damien Lehmann in France has developed an open source 
> version and we are trying to extend it to include additional heater 
> types than only the Austrian style. Austrian heaters are "channeled", 
> where the pressure loss calculation is based on the channel cross 
> sections and length. In North America we have started building for 
> example, a Russian system that is based on buoyancy and has 
> significantly less friction and that the Austrian calculator can't handle.
>
>     * How much change in “fuel analysis” during a batch burn**? Hadn’t
>     heard of this.  but found several papers related toMHA, such as*
>     http://mha-net.org/docs/temp/2017-10-16%20Pemberton-Pigott%20-%20Decombustion%20Theory.pdf
>     <http://mha-net.org/docs/temp/2017-10-16%20Pemberton-Pigott%20-%20Decombustion%20Theory.pdf>.
>     *Mt tentative conclusion is that this is un-needed for TLUDs, but
>     i am surprised at the assumptions needed.  I look forward to
>     understanding this and why measurements aren’t enough.*
>
>
> After seeing Crispin's presentation on this at the Stove Design 
> Challenge event in 2014 at Brookhaven Lab in NY, a team from the 
> University of Buffalo did some work with it on a cordwood boiler. They 
> found that with a batch burn of standardized briquettes and a constant 
> fuel composition assumption "...H2O is underpredicted at early times 
> and overpredicted during the charcoal oxidation stage, resulting in a 
> mean error of approximately 64%". The good news is that the two sort 
> of cancel each other out. I think the error in calculating overall 
> efficiency was somewhere in the 3% range.
>
> For our calculator effort, we need an accurate flue mass flow rate and 
> therefore need to measure H2O. Therefore, Crispin's approach should 
> tie in well with this.
>
> *[RWLE:  I googled for Testo 330-2 and “inexpensive NDIR benches” (on 
> behalf of Andrew’s emphasis on this) and tentatively concluded we 
> can’t yet get equipment CO and particulates in the range of $100. 
>  (NDIR = Non-dispersive infra-red)*
>
> Yes, that would be a stretch. A Testo is in the $2500 range. There is 
> an interesting NDIR bench on ebay for $26.00:
> https://www.ebay.com/itm/NDIR-Infrared-Carbon-Dioxide-CO2-Sensor-Module-MH-Z14A-Serial-Port-0-5000ppm/282697897512?epid=14007377319&hash=item41d21b9628:g:cZ4AAOSwjodZ5eRL
>
> but it only goes to 5000 ppm, likely for HVAC room occupancy 
> measurements. In principle, you would only need to shorten the chamber 
> in order to get a higher range. At least that is what I have seen on 
> some older Horiba benches.
>>
>> CO is interesting to watch, but we don't care that much about it. It 
>> is not regulated in North America, and is not a health issue except 
>> in dense urban areas. When we tested the Austrian eco-labelled air 
>> system, PM dropped about 50% and CO dropped about 80%. We were a lot 
>> more excited about the PM drop, because this is the number that 
>> matters here to regulators. Europeans have told us that the United 
>> States is about 10 years ahead of Europe in air quality regulation. 
>> Largely due to California, in particular Los Angeles. The Europeans 
>> are only just now recognizing the PM problem in urban areas from 
>> diesel and wood burning, and addressing this in their regulations.
> *[RWLF:   Good.  Maybe that helps the garage testing of TLUDs a bit.  
> If you ever hear of something in the $100 range,  I believe a lot of 
> people on this list would be willing to add PM to what they are 
> already able to do  quite cheaply to get weight,  temperatures, and 
> times for energy efficiency computations.
>
> *
> Before my Testo arrived, I was able to do some useful stuff by 
> measuring opacity. $1.00 CdS sensor, light source, ohm-meter:
> www.mha-net.org/graphics2/17121701.JPG 
> <http://www.mha-net.org/graphics2/17121701.JPG>
>
> It shows you where in your cycle the PM is, but is hard to correlate 
> with the "EPA number"
>
> -- 
> Norbert Senf
> Masonry Stove Builders
> 25 Brouse Road, RR 5
> Shawville Québec J0X 2Y0
> 819.647.5092
> www.heatkit.com <http://www.heatkit.com>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20171219/7571cc30/attachment.html>