<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=""><div class="">Nikhil,</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">A lab test I do is pack a pipe with oven dried biomass. Screw on both end caps and loosen one about 1/2 turn. Place in a temperature controlled furnace and take to 450 deg. C. for an hour. The gases leave leaving the char. The size of the pipe can be any size but large enough to get a representative sample of biomass. The char produced is the maximum of highest quality char the biomass can produce. [this when not concerned with activity]. This weight can be used as the total weight of char that can be produced. Ron then determines the weight of char he produced and calculates the percentage of the total. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">The other side of the coin is the energy released. Total energy of the biomass (calorimeter) - the energy of the char (DAF) in the pipe experiment = energy released. This volatile energy is the primary source of heat for boiling water. I suggest this value used as the Total Energy released from the biomass. You then determine the energy into the water and calculate the percent used. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Both Ron and Water boiling people can use this formula on the same test as they do not overlap. It the water boiling people has a stove that steals energy from the weight of char Ron wants then they may have a stove reporting 110% efficient. Thats ok because its just a value comparing stoves. And that stove is an excellent stove for boiling water but poor at making char. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class="gmail_extra">Why are we so stuck on physics alone? Where is the chemistry and the economics? <br class=""></div></div></blockquote></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I think its because highly educated people have their formulas they must use so they design the experiments around their formula. People like me revert back to grade school lessons and develop methods taught in fifth grade. For many years i thought I was just smarter than everyone else. But now I am sure that can’t be. So now I think the engineers NEED to use their formulas. They should let us grade schoolers design and set up the experiments and then come in with their formulas to try to make sense of what we did. </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><br class=""><div><blockquote type="cite" class=""><div class="">On Jan 13, 2017, at 10:44 AM, Traveller <<a href="mailto:miata98@gmail.com" class="">miata98@gmail.com</a>> wrote:</div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline"><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class="">Frank: <br class=""><div class="gmail_extra"><br class="">Do you mean by "volatiles go off" that they are burnt inside the pipe and generate energy? <br class=""><br class="">I thought that was an important idea behind "Advanced Biomass Stoves" fantasy in India some five years ago. <br class=""><br class="">Ended "Up in Smoke". PAFs and PM2.5 together. <br class=""><br class="">Why are we so stuck on physics alone? Where is the chemistry and the economics? <br class=""><br class="">Nikhil<br clear="all" class=""><div class=""><div class="gmail_signature" data-smartmail="gmail_signature"><div dir="ltr" class=""><div class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><div dir="ltr" class=""><span style="font-family:georgia,serif;font-size:12.8px" class=""><br class="">--------- </span></div><div style="font-size:12.8px" class=""><font face="georgia, serif" class="">(US +1) 202-568-5831<br class=""><i class=""> </i></font></div></div></div></div></div></div></div>
<br class=""><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 9:56 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="">Dear Ron, Crispin and Paul,<div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">I am thinking the biomass should be first heated in a pipe and the volatiles go off. </div><div class="">The energy of the char (DAF) is estimated. That subtracted from the total to get the energy volatilized. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Run the WBT</div><div class="">Now you have the (char made)/(Max char that could be made) X 100 = percentage of total char</div><div class="">Now you have the (energy into the pot) / (Total volatile energy released) X 100 = percent of energy recovered. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If you get more than 100% of the char you have torrefied wood. </div><div class="">If you get less than 100% some char has been oxidized. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">If you get more than 100 % heat efficiency you have used some of the char heat.</div><div class="">Many reasons if you get less than 100%. </div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">This way both interests (char making and water boiling) can be looked at at the same time. </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><div class=""> </div></div></blockquote></div></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br class=""><div class="">
<div class="">Thanks</div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class="">Frank</div><div class="">Frank Shields</div><div class="">Gabilan Laboratory</div><div class="">Keith Day Company, Inc.</div><div class="">1091 Madison Lane</div><div class="">Salinas, CA 93907</div><div class="">(831) 246-0417 cell</div><div class="">(831) 771-0126 office</div><div class=""><a href="mailto:fShields@keithdaycompany.com" class="">fShields@keithdaycompany.com</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><div class=""><a href="mailto:franke@cruzio.com" class="">franke@cruzio.com</a></div><div class=""><br class=""></div><br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
</div>
<br class=""></body></html>