[Stoves] Burning charcoal

[Lanny Henson]

Kobus,
Thank you for your useful comments,
see mine below.


-----Original Message-----
From: stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org
[mailto:stoves-bounces at listserv.repp.org]On Behalf Of Kobus
Sent: Sunday, May 14, 2006 7:38 AM
To: STOVES at LISTSERV.REPP.ORG
Subject: [Stoves] Burning charcoal


Lanny,

The fact that you get two different results even though you did not
significantly change the stacked formation of the briquettes probably means
that you inadvertently did something else that could have caused the
improved flame height on the one test.  I also take it you removed the pipe
before ignition?  Do the tests again.  You carefully need replicate the
amount of ignition paper and the way it is crumpled etc. Did you measure
when exactly the flame appeared for each experiment?  Getting charcoal to
ignite quickly and consistently will have a bearing on the result and future
results.

LH- I will do the test again and carefully maintain the same diameter
central hole with and without the 4 wire frame. I could be wrong it is just
a theory that the wire frame created the effect, because I never achieved
the effect before using the wire frame.

You probably know this, but without properly insulating the
combustion chamber and supplying ample air through the bed you will not see
spectacular results no matter how much you tinker with it in other areas.

LH- when burning up or down a central path way the outer charcoal/other fuel
insulates the combustion zone and the burner. Charcoal is a good insulator
the finer the better. When mixed with ash to stop combustion char makes
loose fill insulation. I am not sure how good it is, but it is something
simple.

I would also experiment with top lighting charcoal

LH- will do

and interestingly enough if
you keep the central funnel idea and top light, it might actually
significantly speed up ignition times as the flames burning at the top will
not be so much dependent on receiving air conventionally through the bed of
coals.  I noticed that you are only supplying primary air which is fine if
you want to make a gas generator and have flame at the top of the
briquettes, but if you want to have a clean (low CO) burning stove injecting
secondary air just below the exit point will further ignite excess CO
without cooling the reaction too much.  Good luck with your testing.

LH- The gap between the burner and the inner shell (UMC-CH1) would be a good
place to get hot secondary air but to get secondary air you need another
penetration through the outer and inner shell from the outside and
penetrations through the burner at the top.
It would be nice to do all this some how through one air intake.
The stove prototype in the photos had two intakes because the recycled
shells had two.

As you know, one is sometimes half the trouble of two!
Lanny Henson


Kobus

Lanny wrote:

I have been testing the simple two can stove http://www.lanny.us/twocan.html
<http://www.lanny.us/twocan.html> , and I noticed that if I stacked charcoal
around a pipe to retain a hole in the center, that there was a small flame
above the hole. http://www.lanny.us/charf3.jpg
<http://www.lanny.us/charf3.jpg> . But when I used a steel wire frame made
from bucket handles http://www.lanny.us/charf1.jpg
<http://www.lanny.us/charf1.jpg>  to maintain approximately the same
diameter hole that I got a larger, continuous flame through out the burn.
http://www.lanny.us/charf2.jpg <http://www.lanny.us/charf2.jpg>
http://www.lanny.us/charf4.jpg <http://www.lanny.us/charf4.jpg> .

I wonder why.




_______________________________________________
Stoves mailing list
Stoves at listserv.repp.org
http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves
http://www.bioenergylists.org