[Stoves] Designs

Mon Aug 7 11:50:49 CDT 2006

I wouldn't take the comment about "serious scientists" too seriously. Dr.
Mukunda has been out of the discussion for a while. It takes time to
discover the depth of the ICS community. A unique aspect of the stoves
discussion is that it includes a wide range of interests and capabilities,
from "gropers" to "gurus". The binding energy is the sincere interest in
improving health, combustion, emissions and resource use.   

We hopefully improve performance with the guidance of science, which itself
is exploratory. We are all interested in ways that we can improve the tools
and methods we use to design and test stoves - for acceptability,
performance and emissions. Improvement can be both leading to more efficient
(reduce fuel consumption and emissions) stoves and simply practical
manufacturing to disseminate a large number of improved stoves. Suggestions
are always welcome.

Tom

-----Original Message-----
From: stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org
[mailto:stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Roger Samson
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 8:56 AM
To: tmiles at trmiles.com; stoves at listserv.repp.org
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Designs

In reading Dr Mukunda's e-mail regretting we don't have serious scientists
involved in stove testing, maybe we should just set categories for stove
scientists, we could follow the Indian caste system
http://adaniel.tripod.com/modernindia.htm

I think most of us fall into the category of backward class scientists,
people who may be good at sympathetically appropriating information but
unfortunately have not had years of higher training in combustion science. 

The stoves could then be separated by the class of their scientific
developers, perhaps we could separate the stove list serve and categorize
stoves as 1) serious or elite stoves and their makers then 2) backward class
stoves and their makers ;o)

Roger Samson

-----Original Message-----
From: stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org
[mailto:stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Mukunda
Sent: Monday, August 07, 2006 10:44 AM
To: stoves at listserv.repp.org
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Designs

Dear Dr. Tom Miles,

Thanks for the e-mail intending to get in touch with me. My own interests in
stove designs is at least 24 years old. I was spending time intensely on
stoves till about 1990 and shifted to looking at gasification for thermal
and electrical applications. This has occupied (in the midst of aerospace
activities and teaching) most of the time till recently. It has got
rekindled with the invitation of ARECOP for the training program at Kunming.
I had occasion to seriously examine the stove developments through the Bio
Energy Lists website operated and maintained by all of you. I must express
my appreciation for this effort on maintaining the website.

Regarding the Swosthee stove about which you have specific questions - About
a thousand were built during 1990 - 1884 and field tested. The key problem
has been the life of the stove. Because the inner metal walls experience
temperatures of 750 to 1000 C, the hardware lasts only a few months. One of
the key things that we uncovered in this period was that we cannot get
higher effioiencies unless the air-to-fuel ratio is close to stoichiometric
value. It was also clear that any of the stoves that utilized free
convection process for delivering the air won;t be able to maintain the
correct air-to-fuel ratio for the duration of the operation of the stove.
This is the reason that further development in this direction was not
pursued, We examined the possibility of using a fan to deliver the air, some
thing that we did in laboratory experiments to determine the role of
air-to-fuel ratio. Unfprtunately, during 1990 to 1994, there was no cheap
harware for delivering the air at a fixed flow rate. And even after we saw
the fixed fuel stove with Dr. thomas Reed in
1996 or so, we could not identify for a long time a reasonable source of
fans. It is only in the last three years that computer fans that are really
cheap have arrived in the market. This as given life to the reverse
downdraft stoves all over the place. We have done some serious scientific
study over the last four years and uncovered features of the stove that will
give high efficiencies. We have been able to get up to 55 % thermal
efficiency through various optimization strategies. We are still exploring
how to get up to values in excess of 60 % particularly because the kerosene
and gas stoves promise 70 to 75 % efficiency. This has ben our aim over the
last twentyfour years.

The meeting at Kunming was very interesting. I met with three stove people
from US working on stoves for long time. What became clear to me at the end
of the workshop is that very few have clue to the science and technology.
They are genuine enthusiasts and other people. As soon as they see something
working, they want to ruch and adopt. For instance, at a factory in Kunming,
every body saw a beautiful concept on steam injection to obtain clean
combustion. Almost the next day some wanted to introduce it into their
designs without (a) really understanding how things work or(b)care or
sensitivity to intellectual property protection aspects. This is a tragedy
that stove enthusiasts have to face.

I was told in addition, that a stove performance test protocol was being
developed at Berkeley with the support of many people. After some
conversation I learnt that serious sceintists are not involved in this
activity. A set of data that were presented that showed the amount of fuel
required to heat 5 L to boil and associated emissions, in my view is very
faulty as the power level is not a subject of consideration. Th epower level
makes a seroius differnce to every thing. I also explained in a strong way
that neither candle nr a furnace can be used for deriving cooking heat and I
do not know if it went across.

In summary I have concerns on less-than-scientifically correct input going
into the stove design aspects. I have just expressed it to you here.

We will continue our efforts to produce a high efficiency clean burning
continuous feed biomass stove in coming times.

I will be happy to interact with you or others on any scientific aspects.
The paper that you enquired is available on a web site for downloading. i
shall intimate you the address on Monday/Tuesday.

I am sorry for the long mail and Thanks for the inspiration to express my
thoughts. - H S` Mukunda

> Paul,
>
> If you have a current email address for Dr. Mukunda could you invite 
> him to discuss the Swothsee stove? We have been asking what the actual 
> use of the stove has been and whether it would be a good candidate for 
> a FAN. We have also been discussing vortex combustion in stoves 
> (Vesto, Maputo, V-Sidewinder, Woodgas) which should still be a topic 
> of interest to him.
> We have many questions.
> See
>
http://listserv.repp.org/pipermail/stoves_listserv.repp.org/2006-August/date
> .html
>
> We are also looking for a copy of his paper:
> H.S. Mukunda, U. Shrinivasa, S. Dasappa, S.B. Sunil Kumar, SWOSTHEE - 
> Portable Single Pan Wood Stoves of High Efficiency for Domestic use, 
> Sadhana, J.I.A.Sc, 13, pp. 237-270, 1988.
>
> So far we have only some photos from Auke Koopmans (1998) and a 
> BUN-India report:
> http://bioenergylists.org/en/swosthee
>
> Thanks,
>
> Tom Miles
> tmiles at trmiles.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org 
> [mailto:stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org] On Behalf Of Paul S. 
> Anderson
> Sent: Saturday, August 05, 2006 6:45 AM
> To: Kevin Chisholm
> Cc: stoves at listserv.repp.org
> Subject: Re: [Stoves] Designs
>
> Ian, Steve, Kevin and all,
>
> The steps that Kevin has enumerated below are basicially the same 
> approach that Dr. Makunda used at the ARECOP workshop in China last 
> week.  I will post more about it soon, but I want to reinforce what 
> Kevin wrote.  Analyze the application, then find the solution(s), then 
> make the stoves/heaters. Sort of like computer programming:  
> application defines the system-analysis which defines the steps of 
> programming to accomplish the task.
>
> It certainly helps if you have an already operational application and 
> are seeking an alternative source of heat.  That was the case in 7 of 
> the 8 projects proposed at the ARECOP meeting.
>
> Paul
> --
> Paul S. Anderson, Ph.D., Geography professor - Emeritus
> Telephone:  USA-309-452-7072 (residence and office) Internet site:
> www.ilstu.edu/~psanders For my gasifier stoves info, go to:
> http://bioenergylists.org/contributors#Paul_Anderson
>
> Quoting Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm at ca.inter.net>:
>
>> Dear Ian
>>
>> ...del...
>>
>> Rather than starting with a search for stoves designs and evaluating 
>> whether or not they are appropriate, may I suggest that you "start at 
>> the
> other end"
>> and define the problem and opportunity? Once you have the problem 
>> described, it is much easier to recognize or design a solution.
>>
>> 1: What production rate do you require, in terms of kG of dried Kava 
>> product per hour?
>>
>> 2: What is the moisture content range of the raw kava?
>>
>> 3: What is the desired moisture content range of the finished kava?
> ....snipped....
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> This message was sent using Illinois State University Webmail.
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Stoves mailing list
> Stoves at listserv.repp.org
> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_listserv.repp.org

_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
Stoves at listserv.repp.org
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_listserv.repp.org

_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
Stoves at listserv.repp.org
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_listserv.repp.org