|
Post by satamax on Dec 18, 2018 13:11:10 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by matthewwalker on Dec 19, 2018 7:25:33 GMT -8
Nothing special to note Max. Keep your lengths about the same and it should work fine in my experience. This is what led to my riserless core, it's just a continuation of the broken riser experiment.
|
|
|
Post by satamax on Dec 19, 2018 12:53:21 GMT -8
Thanks a lot Matt.
|
|
|
Post by satamax on Jan 20, 2019 3:19:53 GMT -8
Hi everybody.
Well, i think this is more a question for Peter. But anybody is welcome to reply.
I'm hesitant to do a broken riser.
The other option would be to make an horizontal tunnel, a third up the riser, the bottom stub would enter at the left, ans dhe top of the riser would continue at the right. Or i would even do a bigger insulated chamber.
I would have to move the riser's top 60/70 cm to the right.
Whatcha all think?
|
|
|
Post by DCish on Jan 20, 2019 6:57:08 GMT -8
My thought is that we know from Peter's experience that even small deviations can throw off Testo numbers. On the other hand, I have done a bunch of variations in the afterburner path, and I have found most of them relatively easy to persuade to run smokeless. I think it just depends on how much perfection you want in your burn. If the sniff that is good enough for you, I think you would be able to meet that standard with these changes. Only one way to really know, though...
|
|
|
Post by satamax on Jan 20, 2019 7:15:09 GMT -8
Yup, i know.
|
|
|
Post by satamax on Jan 22, 2019 9:55:45 GMT -8
|
|
lsch
New Member
Posts: 18
|
Post by lsch on Jan 23, 2019 3:13:40 GMT -8
hello Please can you do a skp 8 thank you
|
|
|
Post by DCish on Jan 24, 2019 8:07:14 GMT -8
Here's a screen shot of it if that helps...
|
|
lsch
New Member
Posts: 18
|
Post by lsch on Jan 24, 2019 11:23:01 GMT -8
thanks DCish It looks like a dsr2. so the vertical part after the "box" doesn't seem necessary, I guess?
|
|
|
Post by hof on Feb 18, 2019 13:19:20 GMT -8
thanks DCish It looks like a dsr2. so the vertical part after the "box" doesn't seem necessary, I guess? This part is need for proper draft.
|
|
|
Post by DCish on Feb 19, 2019 7:01:44 GMT -8
thanks DCish It looks like a dsr2. Yes, it does look quite similar to a DSR2. Early rocket stoves focused on creating some draft through the temperature differential between a short, super-hot, internal "chimney"-style afterburner, followed immediately by a large radiating surface (55 gallon drum) to quickly cool the gases as they flowed downward (see www.rocketstoves.com/). Experiments have been done to try to run stoves on this source of draft alone, and while some have had a bit of success, generally what I have read is that slight changes in variables such as temperature, wind, etc. have made them difficult or impossible to run. I can't find the post now, but Donkey once posted numbers showing that adding just a few feet of height to a cooler-running chimney produces far more draft than a very high-temperature, short chimney. Consensus has been for some time that a well-insulated chimney at the end of a system with enough heat left over to run it (140-180F, I think the low-end number is) is the source of draft to rely on. So you can have spectacularly clean, efficient, reliable stoves like the Walker Riserless Core, where the afterburner is entirely horizontal with the only internal "riser" being the pass-through to the cooktop on the upper level. Even if you could create draft at the front end of the system and "push" the gases through, that would not be desirable. Any imperfect seal in the system would result in the internal over-pressure forcing flue gasses into the living space. Having a chimney at the end that draws gasses through the system means that the entire system operates at an under-pressure condition. This means that any imperfect seal in the system instead will allow air from the living space to be sucked into the system and exhausted out the chimney -- reducing efficiency, but creating no hazard to the occupants. Consider the intense temperature differentials involved in burning wood, and the inevitable need to mate materials with different expansion rates (a metal door mated to a masonry core, for example), and you will realize that cracks are a likely inevitability.
|
|
|
Post by peterberg on Feb 19, 2019 7:57:23 GMT -8
thanks DCish It looks like a dsr2. so the vertical part after the "box" doesn't seem necessary, I guess? This part is need for proper draft. I'll second DCish in this, that vertical part downstream of the box isn't needed for draft. In my case, the DSR2 is functioning without.
|
|
lsch
New Member
Posts: 18
|
Post by lsch on Feb 19, 2019 9:30:29 GMT -8
Thank you, peter. that's how I understood it.
|
|
|
Post by Orange on Feb 19, 2019 11:39:58 GMT -8
adding just a few feet of height to a cooler-running chimney produces far more draft than a very high-temperature, short chimney. Consensus has been for some time that a well-insulated chimney at the end of a system with enough heat left over to run it (140-180F, I think the low-end number is) is the source of draft to rely on. makes sense, but a longer chimney requires more heat to stay warm so less heat harvest. So what would be the optimum clay chinemy length to have good draft and low heat requirement?
|
|