<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Crispin,<br>
<br>
Thanks for that report about Royal Ocean. It is good info even if
it has not progressed into a product of sequential burning of two or
more TLUDs.<br>
<br>
Because we know that height increases length of burn time, in theory
a very tall TLUD would give many hours of operation. But TLUDs do
have (thus far) some physical size limits. A 200 L (55 gallon)
drum/barrel is about the largest size that has reported success by
various developers. <br>
<br>
Back to 2 or more TLUDs in sequential burning. I like your idea of
using a paper (or other such biomass material) to get a fire from
the bottom to go to the top of a different unit. Could be used in
conjunction with the gas-channel method that i suggested. Whatever
way works, the fire needs to get to the top of the second unit.
This is a "mechanical" or physical or analog way of igniting, which
is what we desire because of low cost. [Elaborate electronic
system with heat sensors and timers and ignition devices could
ignite TLUDs that are physically remote, by a foot or mile. But we
are not discussing those expensive options until someone with
sufficient funding and need steps forward.]<br>
<br>
I am convinced by the discussion that shared single-walls
(essentially the baffles concept) will not work well. <br>
<br>
Therefore, I am now thinking in terms of cylindrical TLUDs, and
maybe with double walls, but not required. <br>
<br>
And each unit can be handled separately for loading biomass fuel,
unloading char, and placement into the sequence of serial
ignition. <br>
<br>
To economically justify the initial efforts, we should be thinking
of heat for greenhouses, and that means barrel-size (maybe 10 inch
-- 25 cm -- diameter or larger) units and the ability to have small
blowers (12 volt is fine) and even a few sensors. Forexample, when
a thermocouple registers a high temperature (maybe 300 C), a
fan/blower for primary and secondary air turns on and stays on until
the temperature drops to below 100 C because the batch has been
pyrolyzed.<br>
<br>
Plan to have plenty of ignition material on the top of the
sequential units. When the flame arrives, the ignition should be
easy and spreads across the entire top of the fuel bed. <br>
<br>
If we think of a circle of TLUDs, each one can have a combustor that
has an elbow to the center where all of the heat is directed as each
TLUD operates in the series. Could go to a water heater that gives
hydronic heat to the greenhouse (already a common feature in many
greenhouses, complete already with its own pump and pipes and
thermostats). <br>
<br>
The user would decide to release or retain the CO2 inside the
greenhouse.<br>
<br>
Who want to be among the first five to build and test this? D.H.
or D.D or who? I am in, but not alone.<br>
<br>
Paul<br>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
Email: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu">psanders@ilstu.edu</a>
Skype: paultlud Phone: +1-309-452-7072
Website: <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="http://www.drtlud.com">www.drtlud.com</a></pre>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 12/5/2015 10:36 AM, Crispin
Pemberton-Pigott wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:COL401-EAS489D85CC0FA73247C08A3E5B10B0@phx.gbl"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
<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]-->
<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"><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 moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:psanders@ilstu.edu"><psanders@ilstu.edu></a>
and Frank Shields <a moz-do-not-send="true"
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><br>
</p>
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>