<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=us-ascii"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered medium)"><!--[if !mso]><style>v\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
o\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
w\:* {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
.shape {behavior:url(#default#VML);}
</style><![endif]--><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;}
@font-face
{font-family:Consolas;
panose-1:2 11 6 9 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;
color:black;}
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;}
pre
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted Char";
margin:0cm;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:"Courier New";
color:black;}
span.HTMLPreformattedChar
{mso-style-name:"HTML Preformatted Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"HTML Preformatted";
font-family:Consolas;
color:black;}
span.EmailStyle19
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-size:10.0pt;}
@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 bgcolor=white 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 Paul<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 idea was tried on a stove called Royal Ocean which is made in Ulaanbaatar. Briefly the history of the company is that a Mongolian guy went to Japan and learned how to make TLUD coal stoves there. When he got back to Ulaanbaatar he reproduced their two cylinder, one chimney stove. He also used the same name. <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'>It was brought for testing sometime in early 2011, in the final, or more final version. As constructed it was two separate ignitions but we (Lodoysamba and the guy and I) discussed at that time how to make one light the other when it burned to the bottom. It was to use paper where you have proposed gas. At that time, the TLUD approach was not fully accepted. The reason for this was the intermittent nature (which was bound to lead to problems) and the inevitable refuelling that would happen with a hot stove (which did and does).<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'>As to the merit of having it automatically ignite, I want to point to something. This does not address your idea of a continuous operation with dead cells being swapped when they are not in use, that is still possible. I am referring the division of the available fuel space into separate zones.<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'>Why do it? What does it offer that is an advantage over a single charge that is either a side draft or a TLUD? One should answer that and be convincing before complicating the process. What the Royal Ocean stove did was to provide two separate TLUD chambers with a damper system that allowed the chimney to be connected to one or the other. It was a space heating and cooking 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'>Having one light the other when it burned down allows the two to work in series, no doubt about that. It saves the operator removing a cassette and replacing it with a new one so it can burn longer. It was a good idea from that point of view. It was a bit complicated in that it had to have two sets of controls to get a good burn from two separate combustion ports. <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'>If I have a ‘given size’ of fuel loading space, I can’t see a good reason to divide it into smaller sections. One reason could be dropping the power to a low level for a longer time, right? Can that not be achieved without the complication? That is what I am wondering.<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'>In the end the Royal Ocean product had a single chamber. I suspect the power level was inadequate for the physical size, and the cost would have been substantially higher to make and manage two separate stoves inside a single housing. It was impressive to look at and nicely made, but all things considered, a larger single chamber worked better.<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'>A separate question: would the wall temperature of one chamber not overheat/pyrolyse the fuel in the adjacent chamber? Royal had a gap to prevent that, and they had the two separate with no gas connection between them because that would have changed the control over the air flow (over and under air).<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 looked around for a photo and only came up with this which is the single chamber version.<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><img width=472 height=474 id="Picture_x0020_1" src="cid:image001.png@01D12FA3.C576B180"><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'><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 cannot prove anything about why he changed his approach from two chambers in series into one. Likely reasons are heating power and complexity.<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><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal>Frank and all,<br><br>Separate from the coal topic of Dushambe, so I changed the Subject line. <br><br>About a Baffle stove: On 12/4/2015 12:42 PM, Frank Shields wrote: [with my additions in [... ] brackets]<br><br><o:p></o:p></p><blockquote style='margin-top:5.0pt;margin-bottom:5.0pt'><div><p class=MsoNormal>One idea [to attain a longer burn time] might be to add a night time insert. That would [from the side] look like a <u>IIIIIIII</u><o:p></o:p></p></div><div><p class=MsoNormal>with baffles that go almost to the base. The base has fuel [coal is being discussed, but could be other fuel types] spread across the bottom. You lite [at the bottom] the one close to the door and that burns up quickly but it takes longer to ignite the second baffle and even longer for the third and so on……<o:p></o:p></p></div></blockquote><p class=MsoNormal>Frank, I like the idea of baffles of some type. Probably done in some ways somewhere maybe long ago, but baffles are certainly not evident in currently discussed stoves and therefore your idea is a new innovation for us 21st Century stovers.<br><br>I want to add a further variation for consideration. It is based on TLUD principles.<br><br>Consider a rectangular fuel chamber with several vertical baffles running across between the long side walls (3 or 4 are sufficient for the concept, but could be more.) First thought was to have square vertical boxes that are in a row, basically with one side shared by two squares. (cylinders with obvious spaces is a variation to discuss later). Call them B1, B2, etc for Box 1, Box 2......<br><br>Ignite B1 at the top and let the MPF (Migratory Pyrolytic Front) do its job downward through that fuel, with burning of the created gases at the combustor level. When the MPF reaches near the bottom, it encounters a hole on one side. That hole is attached to a vertical pipe that is able to receive some (maybe 20%??) of the pyrolytic gases. (the percentage could increase if the side hole is actually a vertical slit / hole that receives more gases as more of the slit is in the zone of the MPF.)<br><br>The gases in the vertical pipe (call it an "ignition pipe") reach the top and are ignited by the existing flame in the combustor. But those combusting gases are able to move upward into the combustor area of the adjoining box B2. In that way flame is into the area of B2, and within a few minutes of time B2 has become Top Lit and begins to operate as a TLUD. The process continues with B1 essentially shutting down (very little draft) and several ways of extinguishing the created charcoal by an operator or even "automatically". <br><br>B2 ends and transitions to B3 in the same way. If the burn-time of each Box is approximately one hour (easy to accomplish with height and with reasonable fuel like pellets), 8 boxes would operate the heater through the night.<br><br>Quite literally, the boxes could be in a snake form or in a "6-pack" or 12 pack or spiral arrangement and continue for 12 hours or even longer. If the boxes were of different cross-sectional areas (different diameters), there could be different intensities of heat at different times. That is, the five boxes B4 through B8 could have smaller X-section areas and give less heat in the hours from midnight to 5 AM, when B9 could have a larger fire. <br><br>BTW, that B9 fire could be under a pot with bath water to be heated and ready at 6 AM when needed.<br><br>What is described above is a system for CONTINUAL TLUD operation, as in a serial continual sequence. <br><br>This system should work also for larger (such as barrel-size) TLUDs for making biochar AND with heat generation through a long cold night inside a greenhouse. <br><br>Of course it can be improved. And it can have electronic monitoring and the use of fans and blowers that can make the TLUDs respond in many ways. Such a system can have bells and whistles (figuratively and literally) such as alarms if temperatures go beyond user-specified highs and lows, or digital CO sensors with alarms about the ambient air inside a greenhouse.<br><br>Should it be cylinders instead of square boxes? One advantage of the cylinders is that the vertical ignition pipe can be placed in the natural area where the edges of cylinders are not touching 00000. But shared walls cost less in materials, and the heat through the walls help pre-warm (and pre-dry) the fuel in the next box to be ignited. But too much heat could cause premature ignition. These are considerations for experimentation. <br><br>So, as of 9:30 AM CST on Saturday 5 December 2015, with the presentation of this message to the publicly accessed Stoves and Biochar listservs, the above ideas are made public. I believe that I and Frank have some intellectual property (IP) rights for one year after public disclosure. So if you want to try for patents, etc, you should include Frank and me. But instead, if your work is in the public domain, please feel free to get started. We want you to be successful. But we do want to be kept informed of activities and to encourage collaborative efforts. <br><br>To move this concept / idea forward, we need some time and funding. We hope that it is YOUR time and YOUR funds, or that you help us find outside funds that can pay for the time and materials. Frank and I are both retired. And we do not have the metalwork shops that should be involved with this work. So we encourage your participation, and please keep us informed of your initial interest (which means tell us SOON), your initial activities, progress, results, and plans for taking it further. Our email addresses are: Paul Anderson <a href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu"><psanders@ilstu.edu></a> and Frank Shields <a href="mailto:franke@cruzio.com"><franke@cruzio.com></a><br><br>We look forward to the discussion and to any activities. This might all blow over and become nothing. Or it might be a major step forward. <br><br>Paul<br><br><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p></div></body></html>