Re: Lanny's Simple Camp Fire Stove

["Lanny Henson" <lanny@roman.net>]

Ron, You always ask great questions. This stove is the first prototype and
it cooks but it needs improvements to increase its efficiency. I have ideas
for #2.
See my response below. Lanny
----- Original Message -----
From: Ron Larson <ronallarson@qwest.net>
To: Kevin Chisholm <kchisholm@ca.inter.net>; Lanny Henson <lanny@roman.net>
Cc: <stoves@crest.org>
Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 8:08 AM
Subject: RE: Lanny's Simple Camp Fire Stove


>
> Lanny - like Kevin,  I like what you have done.  A few questions:
>
> 1.  Your flange to accept the pot looks very clean.  Did you do that with
> the pliers or do you have some of a flanging tool?  (anyone know where to
> get flanging tools?)
WITH A LITTLE PRACTICE THE FLANGE CAN BE FORMED WITH PLIERS AND A HAMMERING
TYPE TOOL (ROCK, STICK, OR HEAVY PLIERS LIKE VICE GRIPS)
> 2.  One (maybe two) thin layers of metal inside or out will cut down the
> thermal losses. If you get a chance to see the difference in performance,
> please let us know.  (maybe also letting us know also about the outermost
> wall temperatures)  Also maybe a wrap of fiberglass blanket?  It will be
> interesting to hear whether these are worth the extra cost.
 I WILL TRY A FIBERGLASS BLANKET SKIRT BUT THEN WE ARE UP TO 3 PARTS.
> 3.  I believe the rocket stove group sees a good deal of value in a grate.
> If you can try yours with and without a simple grate, that information
would
THE FUEL SLOT IS HIGHER THAN THE AIR SLOT. THE FLOW ROTATES FROM THE AIR
SLOT TO UNDER THE FUEL AND THEN THERE IS  ANOTHER AIR SLOT. SO AIR ENTERS
BELOW AND ABOVE THE FUEL.
> be valuable.  Your starting without the stove on just an outisde small
fire
> with coals also seems novel and definitely saves some time and probably
> allows efficient use of scrap fuel materials in advance of starting an
> actual cooking.
>
> 4.  You probably are getting a good bit of value out of the hot coals at
the
> bottom of the unit. Some good radiation up to the pan bottom and they dry
> out your wood.  It would be interesting to hear what happens in terms of
> time to boil, with and without the prior coals.
A FEW COALS HELPED THE DAMP STICKS TO BURN.
> 5.  Can you tell us more on the dimensions - especially the radial
> separations from pot to outer wall and the height of the pot bottom over
the
> burning wood and the coals.
SORRY ABOUT THE AMERICAN DIMENSIONS.
THE BUCKET IS 10.75 INCHES DIAMETER THE POT IS 8.5 INCHES. THE POT SITS
6.5" DOWN IN TO THE 13.5" BUCKET AND IS ABOUT 5" ABOVE THE 2" DEEP ASH
/COALS.
> 6.  Yours is one of the very few stoves we hear about with a chimney
pipe -
> so it will be very interesting  to hear more about the performance of that
> pipe.  Are there two sections?  (in the US often 2 feet = 60 cm each)
What
> would happen with 1 or 3 sections?  Are these 6 inch = 15 cm diameter?
THE 4" CHIMNEY IS 4FT LONG. iT SHOULD BE IN SECTIONS FOR EASY TRANSPORT.
> 7. You said you controlled air flow - but none of the descriptions or
> pictures show whether you have a flapper valve in the chimney itself.  If
> you do, or could, it would be nice to hear what sort of power ratios
> (turn-down ratios) you can achieve.  (This could be measured by the rate
of
> fuel consumption).  Maybe measuring exit temperatures would tell us
> something interesting.  Maybe just covering part of the top of the stove
> pipe would be enough like a flapper valve for a first test.
I WAS TRYING TO CONTROL THE AIRFLOW BY RESTRICTING THE INTAKE AIR. i WAS
TRYING TO GET ENOUGH VELOCITY THROUGH THE AIR SLOTS TO ROTATE THE FLOW UNDER
THE POT.
I ALSO BLOCK PART OF THE EXHAUST  PIPE TO CONTROL THE FLOW.
> 8.  You seem to have quite a lot of air possible to enter through the wood
> entry port (like the rocket stove - which only has the one port).  What
> would happen if you closed off all the other ports?  Could you balance the
> loss of air by adding one more pipe section?
I KEPT THE FUEL HOLE MOSTLY BLOCKED WITH STICKS AND THEN ADJUSTED THE TABS
ON THE AIR INTAKES
> 9. The hole between the stove and the chimney pipe - could you give us
those
> dimensions?   It would seem that a good bit of the
7" TALL AND 1.5" WIDE
flame would exit into the
> stove pipe without doing much heating of the pot  (that is - you would
> mostly like the exhaust gases to all go past the cook pot first.  Yours is
a
> nice elegant solution - but I wonder if you see some other
> (not-too-difficult) way to get all the gases going up before going out.  I
> don't see it myself.
I KEPT THE FIRE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE EXHAUST BUT WAS WASTING A LOT OF
HEAT UP THE CHIMNEY. I BELIEVE THAT I CAN IMPROVE THAT PART.
LANNY
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Kevin Chisholm [mailto:kchisholm@ca.inter.net]
> Sent: Tuesday, October 22, 2002 8:02 AM
> To: Lanny Henson
> Cc: stoves@crest.org
> Subject: Re: Lanny's Simple Camp Fire Stove
>
>



-
Stoves List Archives and Website:
http://www.crest.org/discussion/stoves/200209/
http://crest.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/
>
Stoves List Moderators:
Ron Larson, ronallarson@qwest.net
Elsen L. Karstad, elk@wananchi.com www.chardust.com

Other Biomass Stoves Events and Information:
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1010424940_7.html Bioenergy
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975339_7.html Gasification
http://www.crest.org/articles/static/1/1011975672_7.html Carbon

List-Post: <mailto:stoves@crest.org>
List-Help: <mailto:stoves-help@crest.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:stoves-unsubscribe@crest.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:stoves-subscribe@crest.org>
>
For information about CHAMBERS STOVES
>http://www.repp.org/discussiongroups/resources/stoves/Chambers/Chambers.htm