<html><head><style type='text/css'>p { margin: 0; }</style></head><body><div style='font-family: Arial; font-size: 12pt; color: #000000'>Richard cc List and Dan<br><br> Thanks for the "Not" version below. This makes more sense in terms of your following sentences. I would be surprised if the mix I worked with was optimum. But hand-forming pressure came came out better than I expected.<br><br> I did listen to all the videos you mentioned and that I could find on making smallish briquettes suitable for TLUDs. Nothing I saw compared to the success I think being seen for the "holey briquette" (a very nice shape and szie) I will next send a separate note on the charcoal-making potential of that).<br><br> So, I would still appreciate hearing of any experiences by anyone on making smaller units (a size in between pellets and the holey briquette) - either with machines or by hand. Since my first message on hand-making, I now suggest the name of "thumbettes" - as they are the size and shape of that portion of ones' right hand thumb grasped in a left clenched fist (or vice versa).<br><br> I think thumbettes (its making described in last message - a first squeeze in left hand, followed by only one squeeze in the right - done simultaneously). could be the fastest, cheapest way of making a small sufficiently-dense briquette-like fuel for TLUDs. I would rather it turn out more spherical, but I think this size/shape will work well enough. I hope others with a good mix will both try a two-hand/two-squeeze approach and suggest a better (faster, cheaper, etc) way to make a slurry-fed fuel that will densely pack for TLUds.<br><br> Richard (anyone) - any other "thumbette" or "spherette" ideas from your experience? Again - thanks for the correction.<br><br>Ron<br><br><hr id="zwchr"><b>From: </b>"Richard Stanley" <rstanley@legacyfound.org><br><b>To: </b>rongretlarson@comcast.net<br><b>Cc: </b>"Discussion of biomass" <stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org>, "daniel roggema" <droggema@gmail.com><br><b>Sent: </b>Monday, July 29, 2013 10:16:22 AM<br><b>Subject: </b>Re: Hand-makng small roundish briquettes: <br><br>Ron, daniel et al.<div>Apologies for my atrocious spelling. </div><div>Here is what I was trying to say:</div><div> </div><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"><div><i>Ron, </i></div><div><div><i>Often greater squeezing pressure (to achieve greater density) is</i><b><i> NOT</i></b><i> the solution. It </i><i> is most often about blending the right amount of fibrus material and combustible infiller. Its </i><b><i><span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-weight: normal;">about attaining the right</span> </i></b><i>combination of fibers that are conditioned to flex plastically </i><i>with an</i><i> infilling material that is dense yet relatively porous. No amount of force will create a good briquette using the wet process becsue increased pressure results in shearing of the fibers and vaporising the water in the slurry, creating a crude form of steam cannon. </i></div></div><div><div><i>I do not know what blend Approvecho uses as we lost contact with them after they visited here to gather what we were doing, but I would say that it is very likely that if you found paper blends there. </i><i>Relatively dense briquettes can be achieved with paper-based blends by hand </i><i> but paper is far from the ideal in terms of good hot combustion…</i></div></div></blockquote><blockquote class="webkit-indent-blockquote" style="margin: 0 0 0 40px; border: none; padding: 0px;"></blockquote><i><div style="font-style: normal; display: inline !important; ">Thanks for your patience,</div></i><br><div><i><div style="font-style: normal; ">Richard Stanley</div></i></div><div>=====</div><div><br></div><div><br><div><div><br></div></div></div></div></body></html>