[Stoves] Mis-information

[neiltm at uwclub.net]

On 21 Mar 2018 at 11:59, Paul Anderson wrote:

> I will send a full response very soon.   Believe me, the explaation does
> not justify a new category of micro-gasifier technology, but is only 
> TLUD done poorly.

That's my instinct also.  What I noticed was that the glass outer 
appeared to only have 4 holes from which primary and secondary air would 
be drawn.  I suspect that the combined area of the primary and secondary 
air holes exceeded that of the holes in the glass outer.

If that turned out to be the case does it not raise an interesting 
question as to whether if in the presence of  restricted rather than 
unimpeded air flow serving both primary and secondary air, the air flow 
proportions might thereby be changed between primary and secondary?  With 
unrestricted air flow to the secondary holes assisted by a chimney effect 
and heating from the burn chamber assisting convection, would the 
restricted available air simply prefer the route of least resistance, (as 
with electricity) over the more restricted passage available to it 
through a full burn chamber?  Whereas with no competition between primary 
and secondary for a restricted air supply, both will simply draw, 
unimpeded or assisted by the other.

Additionally if the airflow through the 4 outer holes is acting as a 
restriction starving the stove of air overall then presumably there would 
be a stronger draught across the bottom of the burn chamber and primary 
air holes, causing turbulence, which combined with a weakened (starved) 
flow of primary air into the burn chamber might just explain the 
appearance of some wisps of smoke emanating downwards?

No TLUD I have ever seen or made has had less surface area of outer air 
holes than the combined primary and secondary holes, but where that might 
be the case surely we ought to expect some disturbance to air flows as 
opposed to merely a proportionately reduced air flow through both?

Whether this effect is something that might prove usefully exploitable in 
a design is perhaps an interesting question though.

Neil Taylor