[Stoves] Organic Solid Fuel Classification System

[Kevin Chisholm]

Dear Jeff

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Jeff Davis" <jeff0124 at velocity.net>
To: <stoves at listserv.repp.org>
Sent: Sunday, September 24, 2006 2:06 PM
Subject: Re: [Stoves] Organic Solid Fuel Classification System


> Dear List,
>
> If we use a standard fuel to test stoves, why not use a standard stove to 
> test
> fuels?
>
That is similar to saying: "Lets use a standard engine to test fuels." If I 
give you a diesel engine and ask you to test #6 oil, you may or may not get 
good results. Or, if I give you a spark ignition engine set up for high 
octane gasoline, you will get very different results when you use hydrogen, 
low octane gasoline, CO, propane, Natural gas, biogas or kerosene.

More specifically, a "Standard Fuel" is an excellent idea for comparing 
stoves designed to burn this standard fuel. Similarly, a "Standard Stove" 
would be an excellent way to test fuels which were said to be within a 
standard property and performance range. I would suggest that it is not 
possible to build one stove to test all fuels, but you could have a range of 
"Standard Test Stoves" for a range of "Standard Fuels."

For example, if there was a pellet stove optimized for burning 1/4"x1/2" 
long pellets to deliver say 10 kW to warm air, then you could easily 
determine how well your fireballs burned in a stove designed for wood 
pellets. However, this test may, or may not, be a meaningful evaluation of 
your fireballs as a fuel. It may show that you need a different stove design 
to burn your fireballs optimally. For example, your fireballs could have 
different density, different moisture content, different% volatiles, 
different surface area per gram of fuel, different size, different gas flow 
characteristics, different feeding characteristics, and different 
requirements for primary and secondary air.

Science is about standardization and repeatability. If we start with an 
identical stove and an identical fuel, then science says we should get 
identical results. If you get better results than I, that would be because 
you were more proficient in the art of running a stove. If you can document 
the procedures you employed, and if I am then able to repeat the run using 
your procedure, you have converted art into science.

Frank sought to simply define relevant properties of various fuels. His 
proposed work had nothing directly to do with stove design, but rather 
simply to describe the fuels. The Stove Designer would take over from there 
and design a stove in a manner that was optimal for that specific fuel.

Best wishes,

Kevin