[Stoves] Fuel Testing

[psanders at ilstu.edu]

Dear David, Steve, and all,

I am not fully informed about all available tests, and that is why I asked for
further comments.

I think the tests at the bioenergylist website are focused on the 
stoves.  I am
focusing on the fuels.  And trying to be extremely simple.  For example, I do
not have a target upper temperature, and I certainly do not intend to go all
the way to boiling.

Does anyone know of a specific test that accomplishes what I am after?

AND, is what I am after about the fuels worthy of the efforts?

For me, personally, I want to know how each of the fuels perform in my 
specific
stove.  I intend to make a list of acceptable fuels, with documentation about
how each performs in the Juntos B+ gasifier.  Such information will assist me
to improve upon my stove, so there could be additional models that are 
specific
to distinctive fuels such as rice husks and coarse sawdust.

Each test run requires about 30 minutes including getting a fresh pot 
of water,
setting things in place, weighting, and conducting the test while I write down
the data numbers by hand.

I expect to have at least 10 sufficiently different fuels recorded and 
compared.
wood pellets, switchgrass pellets, coconut shells, wood chips, cherry pits,
corn kernels, fireballs (3? types), bamboo, Stanley-style briquettes,
miscanthus stems, rice husks, coarse sawdust, and more that are 
available to me
now..

And another 10 when I can get my hands on sufficient quantities, including
fragments of nut types, waste seeds like lapsi of Nepal, dung tablets, 
jatropha
press-cake, and mixtures and briquettes of many types.

Because the specific testing is so simple and requires only a clock 
with second
hand plus a digital thermometer for the water temperatures, I hope that some
others might join in.  We want the results to be replicable by others in their
diverse locations (or we will note important exceptions such as with high
elevations or whatever we encounter.)

Paul

Quoting CEDESOL Foundation lists <lists.cedesol at gmail.com>:

> Steve,
> Strangely enough just such standards exist.  Some contributers to the 
> lists seem to overlook that tool which can be found at 
> http://bioenergylists.org/en/performance
>
> Maybe they don't go to the website and maybe they do not know of the 
> existence of these tools. There have been discussions about using the 
> tests with pot lids on or off.  For comparative purposes shouldn't 
> the internationally recognized testing methods  always be used and 
> report if it is done with pot lids on or off?
>
> If different methods are used, shouldn't they be used in addition to 
> the international methods and offered as a comparison!

>> Steve wrote:
>> How about adopting standard test methods like yours by all
>> members ? It seems that there is rather a lot of ad-hoc-ness
>>  in the approach taken, with grave difficulty in
>> reproducibility.

> Steve this link will take you to the internationally recognized 
> testing protocols.  Basically there are 3 types of test.  Water 
> boiling Test, Kitchen Performance Tests, Controlled Cooking  Test
> http://ceihd.berkeley.edu/heh.stove_perf_eval.htm
>
> Perhaps some do not agree with these protocols, and if they can be 
> approved that would be great, but until those improvements are 
> adopted it just makes all reporting confusing as you have observed.
>
> warm regards
> David Whitfield
> Developing, Testing and Disseminating stoves in Bolivia
>> _______________________________________________
>> Stoves mailing list
>> Stoves at listserv.repp.org
>> http://listserv.repp.org/mailman/listinfo/stoves_listserv.repp.org
>>
>>
>
>



----------------------------------------------------------------
This message was sent using Illinois State University Webmail.