|
|
Post by peterberg on Sept 2, 2014 10:44:22 GMT -8
So a clean burning core, a second barrel on top of the first,a lengthened riser,an empty space/gap above the riser , an empty space below the core that leads to the chimney. Correct, you grasped the idea. The empty space above the riser would be to allow the burn to complete and to boost the gas speed before the gas enters the area filled with stones, is this correct? The empty space below the rocks and core boosts gas speed before the gasses leave via the chimney? The top gap is there to allow the gases to spread like an umbrella over the complete area before the stream goes down. The empty space at the bottom serves as a funnel to collect all the downstreaming gases. This and the top gap will ensure the stream is led through all the crevices between the rocks, not just a few via the shortest trajectory. I would think it is good to realize this is not a bell construction, rather a contraflow implementation. About the re-burn in the top of the barrel: I haven't see that happening more than twice with a j-tube. During the development of the optimized rocket core more and more of the burn took place in the tunnel and less in the riser. |
|
|
|
Post by peterberg on Sept 2, 2014 10:58:33 GMT -8
The thing is, i a bit worried that the gases might bypass from intake to exhaust. The main question, is how do i avoid this? Rise the pipe from the heat riser a bit inside of the barrel? How much? In my opinion, you have to assure the barrel is fed at the top and exhaust at the bottom, it isn't a bell construction. Top gap and bottom gap are required, see my post before this one. So you could place an elbow on your riser, place the barrel beside it and cut out the top and bottom holes. A couple of bricks on their side or even straight up and one of those grids you have there on top of the bricks, load the rocks in the barrel, close the lid and bob's your uncle. When the combustion unit is housed in a stacked barrel, one has to lengthen the riser all the way up to the top gap. |
|
|
|
Post by ronyon on Sept 2, 2014 18:38:11 GMT -8
Thank you Peter.
|
|
|
|
Post by satamax on Sept 3, 2014 10:00:21 GMT -8
As Ronyon says!
Thanksalot Peter.
|
|
|
|
Post by bubba. on Oct 23, 2014 18:26:14 GMT -8
It's not a rocket. No insulation, smokes etc. Tho, i like the idea of getting the gases through pebbles. I had theorized that about two years back, in a more complicated maner. Gases would pass through the pebbles, then flaps would be closed and air would be allowed to pass through the pebbles, with a thermostat and a fan. I think you can find that description somewhere here or on permies. |
|
