[Stoves] "Young-adult" TLUD research Re: List of woods for TLUDs?
Paul Anderson
psanders at ilstu.edu
Mon May 1 09:48:52 CDT 2017
Ron,
I am disagreeing with you. My whole point in my original message is
that I think we will be able to make the woodgas TLUD-FA gasifiers EVEN
BETTER when we do not rely on a single fan arrangement that does not let
the user (or sensors) change those flows of PA and SA.
But for the time being, a single fan is doing a reasonable job, and
nobody seems to have time or funds to do research on a "fine-tuning"
change regarding changing PA / SA ratios and strength.
Right now we still face the major challenge of having the gasifier
stoves available into households that are still being told that
"improved" stoves (ICS) are good enough. To me and I hope to many many
others, "ICS" now now means "Inadequate" cookstoves or "Inadequate
cooking solutions."
"Young adults" as people can do many worthwhile things (interesting
high school sports events and serious work in their initial
employments), and similarly "young adult" woodgas TLUD stoves can cook
meals very well, and with advantages over the ICS stoves. The young
adult TLUDs of today will mature more in the coming years. But right
now, they need the chance for "work experience" instead of being shut
out of the "scale-up" funding that continues to support the
"Inadeaquate" ICS cooking.
(Note: I am looking for a million dollars for scale up of TLUD woodgas
stoves in a great ON-GOING project in India in 2017. Lesser amounts
would be fine. Contact me "off-list" or by phone if you have some funds
or prospects for funding.)
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 11:14 PM, Ronal W. Larson wrote:
> Paul and ccs:
>
> I guess I don’t understand “/that task that I suggested needs to be
> researched.” /
> /
> /
> //I contend that changing fuel density should not be an influential
> property.
>
> I am not suggesting that you wouldn’t need to change the SA/PA ratio a
> tad for different fuels.
>
> Thanks for reminding that the Mini Moto designers seem to be in
> agreement with me.
>
> Ron
>
>
>
>> On Apr 30, 2017, at 9:46 PM, Paul Anderson <psanders at ilstu.edu
>> <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>> wrote:
>>
>> 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/20170501/7edc8554/attachment.html>
More information about the Stoves
mailing list