[Gasification] Sawdust in Fan TLUD

Tom Miles tmiles at trmiles.com
Sun Jun 5 08:56:06 CDT 2011

I am sure that I have documentation on the Silisoe machine and would agree
with Andrew. 

We're really discussing the cost and benefit of different classes of
equipment. Farm equipment is rarely used more than 400 hours per year.
Balers and other compression equipment used in high volume straw harvesting
usually require substantial maintenance each year even after 10,000 tons. In
four years you buy a new baler. 

My observation and experience with Chinese supplied briquetters, sawmill and
boiler equipment has been that it is usually low cost but for that you get
light weight, low production, low efficiency, and short life. The "fuzzy"
origins of Chinese have been noted. There is no support and there are no
guarantees. If that is what your application calls for then buy the $2,000
pto driven chipper, or whatever. Last week a local supplier
(www.value-leader.com) of Chinese implements - chippers, mulchers, backhoes
- told me that he tests and modifies imported equipment for to years before
he will put it on the market. He provides direct support. But all the
equipment is intended for light duty and low annual use. He has been in
business since 1995.   

North American and European equipment is built to two standards. There are
implements as described about that are not expected to operate more than
about 400 hours per year. When we run them 6000-8000 hours per year they
break down. Equipment designed for high production (4-6 tph or more) and
continuous operation (85% capacity factor or 6800 hours per year) is more
expensive. We use a German (Ruf) fuel brick machine that is very expensive
but has run for moore than 3 years with very little maintenance. You have to
work these machines to realize the economy. I have experience with low cost
firelog machines that require substantial maintenance, and therefore have
limited production.

The Osborn cuber was a farm implement. When we used it in a production
facility we had already used it for three years and we knew what to provide
to compensate for its limitations. The total cost at that time was probably
similar to what we would have spent for a machine from Warren & Bearg or
others if they had been available.  


-----Original Message-----
From: gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org
[mailto:gasification-bounces at lists.bioenergylists.org] On Behalf Of
stoveslist at gmail.com
Sent: Sunday, June 05, 2011 6:21 AM
To: Discussion of biomass pyrolysis and gasification
Subject: Re: [Gasification] Sawdust in Fan TLUD

On Sunday 05 June 2011 09:06:34 Thomas Koch wrote:
> The other was from Silsoe in UK - i only saw pictures - it produced
> balls like for barbecue - there was some discussion about this machine
> for some years in 1990-1995 but it was never possible for me to see it.

Was this the straw puck machine? I see there are documents in .gov.uk 
archives from 1988. If this is the same machine I believe if failed in 
field trials because the forces were too great.

My mate Dannny did some interesting work on forcing whole wood through 
dies to densify it and basically the wood had to be less than 10% mc wwb 
to avoid hydraulic locking.


Gasification mailing list

to Send a Message to the list, use the email address
Gasification at bioenergylists.org

to UNSUBSCRIBE or Change your List Settings use the web page

for more Gasifiers,  News and Information see our web site:

More information about the Gasification mailing list