[Stoves] Energy requirements

[Crispin Pemberton-Pigott]

Dear Paul Ar

There is of course no such thing as a standard mean and that is why a standard test with a standard fuel is functionally useless for regulatory purposes.

The Great Failure of the ISO stove standard group is the failure to recognise this, and active opposition to the creation of the contextual test portion (which would have been ISO 19867-2).

You can pick any meal you like from the area where the stove might be used and establish various performance metrics as you like. For example, "learnability" might be one. How much of the state's potential to perform at a high level is achieved by users within four months of acquiring one.

That is a metric thought up by Cecil Cook. It is important that low users are able to get the most performance possible from their stove.

So you can observe a standard meal in a standard home then replicate it in a lab setting to rate the performance. Easy.

So far the students at CAU have come with 14 dimensions of acceptance by the users.

Regards
Crispin
From: outlook_32A675455D056F09 at outlook.com
Sent: October 18, 2019 3:56 PM
To: stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
Reply to: stoves at lists.bioenergylists.org
Subject: [Stoves] Energy requirements

Dear experts:

You all know too much.  I am trying to separate the problem into parts.  For this part I don't care about what happens outside the pot.  I am only interested in the energy required to raise the temperature in the pot, and how long it needs to simmer to cook the food.   Crispin, the info about endothermic effects in some foods was relevant; thank you for this.

I worked on the ISO standards, but I don't believe we ever defined something like a "standard meal" for the purpose of comparisons.  Any ideas on this?

Paul Arveson

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.bioenergylists.org/pipermail/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org/attachments/20191018/8cbf0eff/attachment.html>