[Stoves] Fuel qualities as the limiting factor, and getting rid of WBT (Was: Frank on helium surrogate)

Crispin Pemberton-Pigott crispinpigott at outlook.com
Mon Jan 30 20:11:17 CST 2017


Dear Frank

"I do not see a direction you are heading that will reduce smoke. Or do much of anything. There is no plan.‎"

Smoke reduction is one way to get more for less because the smoke is unburned fuel. All stoves should have better ‎combustion up the point that there is basically nothing left to burn.

Burning wood with more than 20% moisture is uncommon in that traditional devices are just not very good at it an everyone knows that.

If the boxes you describe included 'service functions' ‎and 'service standards' as Nikhil calls for, then the method is going to work. While combustors can be designed in abstract it doesn't mean people will, or have to, adapt to the technology.

The advantage of interviewing them first is to establish what they are interested in and what constitutes 'adequate service'.

Fuel flexibility is one parameter often overlooked. In Java, Cecil found that particular woods were used for certain tasks only because of the way they burned at that power level, for example. The service standard is not really the fuel, it is the controllability, the sustained heat flow rate. Meet that requirement with a different fuel and the customer may be satisfied.

Regards
Crispin

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20170131/c145c764/attachment.html>


More information about the Stoves mailing list