<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=utf-8"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0cm;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0cm;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman",serif;}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}
@page WordSection1
{size:612.0pt 792.0pt;
margin:72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt 72.0pt;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-CA link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Dear Raman<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Many thanks for popping in with those references.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>We do not have to drop simmering from a cooking task – you can have it if you want. Hopefully you are testing according to local conditions where the stove will be used so the rating you are giving the stove has some relevance to the performance in use. If it is rated doing something people do not do, the result has no value or even negative value if people believe it represents what they are getting when the buy the stove.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>My point is that while you can choose any cooking cycle you want, you cannot report the performance using invalid metrics. As explained in the message to Paul, there is no such thing as the efficiency of not accomplishing work. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>What is the ‘thermal efficiency’ of a retained heat cooker which uses no fuel at all? A billion %?? The metric is not appropriate for the desired rating. You could report the energy used, but then you have to consider whether the retained heat from the boiling phase was also making a contribution. That means considering the simmering separately from the rest of what happened renders any result invalid because there is no practical way to determine the heat coming from a cooling stove body, and that quantum of heat will vary according to what happened before – it is not an inherent property of the stove so there is no point comparing stoves on that basis. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>I have seen a stove that accomplished a 45 minute simmer with retain heat only from the stove body – no fire at all. What is that ‘thermal efficiency? A billion%? The concept is silly.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Picking the wrong metric and then rating a stove performance using it is anathema to an engineer or a physicist. Making up justifications doesn’t enhance the prospects for using an invalid metric.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>The consequences of using the wrong metric are clear. If a stove puts 2 MJ into a pot while simmering and another identical stove puts in 1 MJ because it was turned down more, and both stoves generate 1000 mg of PM2.5, the stove that was turned up slightly reports “500 mg PM2.5/useful MJ”. The one that accomplished the turndown to simmer with less water loss gets a rating of “1000 mg/useful MJ”. That is indefensible. They both emitted the same mass of PM and the one that turned down better gets rated with double the ‘emission rate’ according to the IWA. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>No product regulator is going to accept such a thing as a guide to importation and performance targets in their country. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Performance testing needs a ground-up review to establish valid metrics that inform the users about what they can expect. Just because people have been using invalid measurements or metrics for years does not matter one whit. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Regards<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'>Crispin<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D;mso-fareast-language:EN-US'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'>From:</span></b><span lang=EN-US style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif'> Stoves [mailto:stoves-bounces@lists.bioenergylists.org] <b>On Behalf Of </b>Raman P<br><b>Sent:</b> Monday, February 16, 2015 10:31<br><b>To:</b> Discussion of biomass cooking stoves<br><b>Subject:</b> [Stoves] Fwd: Simmering test<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>---------- Forwarded message ----------<br>From: <b>Raman P</b> <<a href="mailto:raman03@gmail.com" target="_blank">raman03@gmail.com</a>><br>Date: Sun, Feb 15, 2015 at 11:50 AM<br>Subject: Simmering test<br>To: Discussion of biomass cooking stoves <<a href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org" target="_blank">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a>><br><br><o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>Dear all,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>It it is interesting to see a lot of discussion on simmering test. This is one of areas of WBT, needs more clarity.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>As per the discussions, at many time simmering test can give a misleading result about the efficiency of the cookstove. During the summering phase the vessel gets the thermal energy from two sources one is from the fuel and another one is from the stored heat, which is released from the cookstove material. Hence when we quote the efficiency of the cookstove, it should be the fraction of the total energy input (sensible heat + latent heat) transferred to the vessel over the total energy input , during the complete WBT. Simmering phase test cannot be dropped from WBT, even though it is not the only parameter used to evaluate the performance of the cookstove. But, simmering phase is an important part of cooking practice. During the actual cooking, the stove is not operated only at high power. For example, boiling milk is a tricky process and control over firepower is very important. When a cook can boil the milk without spillover, it is considered that the stove and cook are good, in controlling the fire power.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>I have discussed a lot about the simmering phase in my two publications. Those who are interested can access the paper through the following links.</span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>1.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> </span><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544214005325" target="_blank">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544214005325</a></span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>2.</span><span style='font-size:7.0pt'> </span><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'><a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544214003417" target="_blank">http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0360544214003417</a></span><o:p></o:p></p><p><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-bottom:0cm;margin-bottom:.0001pt'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>In the second link, you may find a short presentation about the study (next to the highlights)</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'> </span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>With Best Regards,</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='mso-margin-top-alt:auto'><span style='font-family:"Arial",sans-serif'>P Raman, Ph.D</span><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal> <o:p></o:p></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></div></body></html>