[Stoves] China and cookstoves [Was Re: A user-centered, iterative engineering approach for advanced biomass cookstove design and development]
Paul Anderson
psanders at ilstu.edu
Thu Nov 30 09:05:50 CST 2017
Cheng and all, (and a mention of Todd Albi). see below.
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 11/29/2017 10:15 PM, lh cheng wrote:
> Another Chinese little project. Surely, it is cookstove, not heater.
> Too expensive, 1500RMB (230 USD), in rural area, a big number, very
> big, no one buy, not even one, in rural area. For user, many
> uncertainties to use new type of stove. if free of charge, a
> trustworthy friend who is an expert about this stove, that might be fine.
I was wondering about the price of that pellet burner stove. Yes, it is
expensive, but expensive is a relative term. It could be imported into
America where $230 is inexpensive, but the price here would be so much
higher and it would then be expensive here.
>
> stove thing should be open-source ( just like Dr Anderson's Champion
> Stove ), DIY, or made by acquaintance, it is something about family, a
> cultural thing, especially in country side. In city, electricity or
> LPG is enough.
Is there any prospect in China for DIY. And what would be the
acceptance of a stove made with thin metal? Generalizing, it seems
that heavy construction of stoves is the standard in China. Todd Albi
might be able to shed some light on this.
>
> a good approach for stove design maybe is that, basic knowledge of
> stove design spread among people, and people help each other.
What do you have in mind? in the context of China? I have
difficulty imagining stove design work in China outside of the factory
context.
>
> concerning "stove intervention", during 1959-1961 in China, more than
> 30 millions of people died because a stove intervention movement. and
> people have memories.
Please provide more information about this statement about 30 million
deaths.
Welcome to the world of the Stoves Listserv. We appreciate your insights.
Paul
>
> best regards
>
>
> 2017-11-30 2:13 GMT+08:00 Nikhil Desai <pienergy2008 at gmail.com
> <mailto:pienergy2008 at gmail.com>>:
>
> Paul:
>
> It's not worth getting excited over this paper, though I explain
> below I wholeheartedly commend the authors what ought to have been
> Stoves Lesson 1 forty years ago. (They even refer to Manibog 1984,
> which started me off on formal research in stoves.)
>
> I note
>
> "The existing available semi-gasifier biomass cookstoves all
> lacked user-desired functions such as auto-ignition and flame
> adjustment. Field visits to homes near Beijing revealed that
> most homes with semi-gasifier stoves had suspended use due to
> breakage or difficulty using them for cooking. We identified
> several design features that led to frequent breakage, namely
> cracking of the inner combustion chamber wall and stove grate
> blockage from slag that formed due to high temperature
> combustion and inefficient ash removal. In addition, most
> semi-gasifer cookstoves required fuel loading from the top, a
> feature that made it impossible to add fuel during cooking
> and, according to stove users, greatly limited its
> functionality to meet daily cooking needs."
>
>
> Is it enough to say "Decades of disappointing stove intervention
> programs highlight the need for new approaches and development
> efforts"? Based on a study of 16 homes over a few weeks in
> summer-time with "structured and semi-structured interviews with
> primary cooks at 2 d and 6 weeks post-installation of the
> prototype stoves"?
>
> The conclusion "Our proposed design strategy can be applied to
> other stove development initiatives in China and other countries."
> should be read in combination with "The unique features of the
> particular semi-gasifier, biomass cookstove discussed here need
> not be directly transferable to other regions in China. Rather,
> the user-centered, iterative engineering design process presented
> could be replicated in other provinces and regions to identify
> optimal stove design that is responsive to the local context."
>
> Still, the most relevant observation - which need not have
> required this study - is simply this:
>
> " Stove designs (Tryner et al 2014 and 2016) that
> over-emphasize technical performance early in the stove
> development process limit the extent to which user input
> obtained later in the process—if sought—can lead to stove
> design modification. The user-centered and iterative
> engineering design approach we present prioritized local
> users’ preferences and aspirations, and sought to combine user
> input with high technical performance. Our results suggest
> that valuable engineering insights are gained in the early
> stages of stove design through targeted field-based data
> collection that yield information unattainable in the laboratory."
>
>
> Which is why the WHO/ISO TC-285 exercise is so immature, it needs
> to be aborted.
>
> I wonder who would digest and apply this lesson of user-centered
> iterative engineering method. I suspect you have, and perhaps
> others can claim such a trail of experience instead of just
> reporting WBT-based performance metrics as in the BAMG Catalog of
> stoves for GACC.
>
> I am afraid this paper might end up like Manibog's and various
> other stove evaluation reports that have repeatedly said,
> essentially, "User matters." It is only after determining the
> service standard (cooking and other tasks desired by the user) and
> the objective of an intervention (not necessarily limited to the
> efficiency and pollutant emissions, and in some contexts not even
> these) that a stove designer can go about designing a product.
>
> Large programs of such research, guided by competent and unbiased
> proponents., ought to have been generated when GACC began. It is
> still not too late; GACC just needs to be placed in a proper home,
> independent of its US masters.
>
> Nikhil
>
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 29, 2017 at 11:04 AM, Paul Anderson
> <psanders at ilstu.edu <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>> wrote:
>
> Ron,
>
> Not correct. The stove type was not TLUD. It was essentially
> a trickle-feed forced air pellet heater (as in the home
> heating units) but made at the size of a cooking stove. Nice
> work, but not a TLUD and no real chance to make charcoal
> because the pellets are burned to ash under the streams of
> forced air. It might become very successful. Good approach
> to designing changes. But also heavy and expensive compared
> to the TLUD stoves that are currently having great success in
> West Bengal.
>
> Paul
>
> Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
> Email:psanders at ilstu.edu <mailto:psanders at ilstu.edu>
> Skype: paultlud Phone:+1-309-452-7072 <tel:%28309%29%20452-7072>
> Website:www.drtlud.com <http://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
> <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/
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20171130/76cbf32b/attachment.html>
More information about the Stoves
mailing list