[Stoves] TLUD stoves and tests

Peeters Frans peetersfrans at telenet.be
Sat Jul 28 01:01:44 CDT 2018


Dears,

     To stop the endless disscution on WBT with CHARCOAL counted or not counted in Efficienty…..
There is an easy way to SEPARATE CHARCOAL from ASH !
Put it in WATER and the CHARCOAL FLOATS , scim it off, after draying at 110 degrees celcius and weighing ,you count it as NO WASTE .

    A pressure cooker is bad , it destruct essential proteines with SULFUR at 120 celcius .

Regards
F. 



Van: xvr.brandao at gmail.com
Verzonden: donderdag 26 juli 2018 22:54
Aan: 'Ronal W. Larson'; 'Discussion of biomass'; 'Kirk Harris'
Onderwerp: Re: [Stoves] TLUD stoves and tests

Dear Ron,

I don’t think the new ISO standard includes the WBT, I think you are the only person claiming that.

Until there exists reviews of the WBT protocol demonstrating it is valid, the « cites for inadequacy that are very old » (some are from 2016 and 2017) will be the only proofs there is.

« [RWL3:   Can you give cites on these three sentences?  Maybe from some group that treats char as waste? »
See the table from Riva and al., Fuzzy interval propagation of uncertainties in experimental analysis for
improved and traditional three – Stone fire cookstoves below, this is with the WBT:


Some of the stoves tested were « Micro-Gasifier Stoves with FAN »

« [RWL4:   I have - and I recall no statements about TLUDs or char-making. »
See above.

« They want to do more testing to get an accuracy that is un-needed and wasteful of time and money. »
Only with the WBT I believe. I don’t think the CSI protocol needs more test sessions.

Everyone,
Is there a way we could get our hands on the documents of the new ISO standard, and share it with everyone on the List?
Could we crowdpay it for example, and leave it on a website or a server for everyone to see?

I think it is really a shame that the document is behind a paywall.

Best,

Xavier


De : Ronal W. Larson <rongretlarson at comcast.net> 
Envoyé : jeudi 26 juillet 2018 21:33
À : Discussion of biomass <stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org>; Xavier Brandao <xvr.brandao at gmail.com>; Kirk Harris <kgharris at sonic.net>
Objet : Re: [Stoves] TLUD stoves and tests

List, Xavier and Kirk

                The main item not being discussed below is the recently approved (with a huge majority by a lot of stove experts - after years of debate) new ISO test procedures.  To me this proves conclusively that the WBT is fine.  Giving cites for inadequacy that are very old is no proof of anything.


On Jul 26, 2018, at 12:51 PM, <xav.brandao at gmail.com> <xav.brandao at gmail.com> wrote:

Dear Kirk,
 
“A well designed TLUD type stove will do well, whatever test it is given.”
                RWL1:   Kirk - I have to disagree.  There are tests (especially one used in China) that treat char as waste - and so don't measure the produced char.  I guarantee that TLUDs will look bad on those tests.

Will it for sure? I have not tested nor seen tests of TLUD stoves myself, nor read that much about TLUD testing.
                [RWL2:  I gave a cite yesterday to a paper by Jetter et al, that is on testing.  Clearly the best performing stoves there were TLUDs and fan-powered (also TLUD principles).  To repeat - see
http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.648.7709&rep=rep1&type=pdf
 
“A lesser performing type stove will accordingly do less well, whatever test it is given.”
No.
It might perform great sometimes with the WBT. Then terrible. Then great. Then quite ok.
Then it might perform great or terrible in the field.
There is too much variability and unreliability.
                [RWL3:   Can you give cites on these three sentences?  Maybe from some group that treats char as waste?
Have you read Fabio Riva and Francesco Lombardi papers?
                [RWL4:   I have - and I recall no statements about TLUDs or char-making.  They want to do more testing to get an accuracy that is un-needed and wasteful of time and money.

                I'll stop here - to give time on the above.

Ron


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20180728/8025ab62/attachment.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: image001.png
Type: image/png
Size: 40614 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20180728/8025ab62/attachment.png>


More information about the Stoves mailing list