<html><head><meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html charset=utf-8"></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class="">Alex, Stovers,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Definitely more complex than I imagined. Sneakage - I never would have guessed. Hard to correct for that one. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">There are three sources of heat: 1) large volatile organics 2) Solid-C > CO and 3) CO > CO2. </div><div class=""> </div><div class="">1) The first one is only for the secondary</div><div class="">2) Second only for the combustion chamber</div><div class="">3) Third can be for the combustion chamber or the secondary</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">So ignoring sneakage (Ha) it is only (3) that we have any control over. We add more primary air to add heat to the combustion chamber or less air to send it up to add heat to the secondary. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">We can measure the heat energy from all three using the pipe. And I think it might be these three values that we can use to categorize different biomass fuels (perhaps coals?). It could be that simple. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Then to find the right architecture for a combustion chamber that reduces sneakage and cleanly burns.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Regards</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Frank </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""><div apple-content-edited="true" class="">
<div style="color: rgb(0, 0, 0); letter-spacing: normal; orphans: auto; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; widows: auto; word-spacing: 0px; -webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;" class=""><div class="">Frank Shields</div><div class=""><a href="mailto:franke@cruzio.com" class="">franke@cruzio.com</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Sep 20, 2015, at 11:41 AM, alex english <<a href="mailto:aenglish444@gmail.com" class="">aenglish444@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">Frank, <div class="">I have measured between the primary and secondary zones of a TLUD. CO and CO2 were in the 8% to 11% range on a dry volume basis. Oxygen would be near zero. At the same time the stack concentration can be; CO near zero, CO2 ~ 12%, Oxygen ~8%.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">It is difficult to predict what would happen with CO injected at different levels. A secondary burner may be operating near the edge of its operational 'sweet spot' and any change will result in an increase in stack CO. It could also be that it is operating with to much excess air,( excess excess air if you will), and the added CO would be quickly oxidized, reducing excess air and increasing the hot mix temperature, resulting in lower stack CO. In this scenario adding CO helps to better burn the CO that is already present.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Alex</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On Sun, Sep 20, 2015 at 1:22 PM, Frank Shields <span dir="ltr" class=""><<a href="mailto:franke@cruzio.com" target="_blank" class="">franke@cruzio.com</a>></span> wrote:<br class=""><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"><div style="word-wrap:break-word" class=""><div class="">Greetings Stovers,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The question I have is does the CO measured in the stack after the secondary combustion come from Primary Combustion (PC) or Secondary Combustion (SC)? </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">As I understand how it works{</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">We know the primary combustion will produce large organic pyrolysis gases until the internal oxygen and hydrogen is consumed then will switch to releasing heat with added outside oxygen as the solid goes to CO and CO to CO2.</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">So is the CO found in the stack from CO produced in the PC making its way through the SC or from incomplete combustion of large organic structures not properly prepared for the SC? </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If we were to set up a stove operating and measure the CO in the stack, then introduce CO along with the primary air from a compressed CO tank - would we see an increase in CO in the stack? or is it easily and completely combusted in the secondary? If not seeing any and we kept increasing the CO being delivered how high can we go before seeing ‘break through’? And then if we increased primary air will the CO delivered combust in the combustion chamber increase CO2 in the stack and increase combustion chamber temperature?</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Im thinking the CO produced in the PC is very important in controlling combustion chamber temperatures that prepare the complex pyrolysis gases for the SC. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Im sure this simple experiment must have been done somewhere and wondering what the results are. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Regards</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Frank</div><span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888" class=""><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><br class=""><div class="">
<div style="letter-spacing: normal; text-align: start; text-indent: 0px; text-transform: none; white-space: normal; word-spacing: 0px; word-wrap: break-word;" class=""><div class="">Frank Shields</div><div class=""><a href="mailto:franke@cruzio.com" target="_blank" class="">franke@cruzio.com</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div></div><br class=""><br class="">
</div>
<br class=""></font></span></div><br class="">_______________________________________________<br class="">
Stoves mailing list<br class="">
<br class="">
to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br class="">
<a href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org" class="">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br class="">
<br class="">
to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br class="">
<a href="http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br class="">
<br class="">
for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:<br class="">
<a href="http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank" class="">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/</a><br class="">
<br class="">
<br class=""></blockquote></div><br class=""></div>
_______________________________________________<br class="">Stoves mailing list<br class=""><br class="">to Send a Message to the list, use the email address<br class=""><a href="mailto:stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org" class="">stoves@lists.bioenergylists.org</a><br class=""><br class="">to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page<br class="">http://lists.bioenergylists.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_lists.bioenergylists.org<br class=""><br class="">for more Biomass Cooking Stoves, News and Information see our web site:<br class="">http://stoves.bioenergylists.org/<br class=""><br class=""></div></blockquote></div><br class=""></div></body></html>