ernie
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by ernie on Dec 20, 2007 10:02:40 GMT -8
not by my finding; the initial burn does not use all the O2 and what happens in the barrel is a second burn.
that I think; is where you want the pyrolitic gasses to dwell for a moment longer. I have accomplished this with a large space at the top of my heat riser and a narrow space going into the exhaust ducting.
Ernie
|
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Dec 20, 2007 12:15:04 GMT -8
Veeerry Iiieennteresting.... Are you certain of a re-burn? As we found, there are volume/pressure tricks that create various --- effects... You sure its not a side effect of the passive pressure pump trick that you discovered?? Perhaps concentrating heat at unexpected places? That sort of points at a direction for further examination... Not like there arent enough of those already. Dammit Ernie, the folks playing with this stuff are just too seperated from each other!! Its not like I can just casually saunter over to your place to play with fire for a day!!  |
|
ernie
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by ernie on Dec 20, 2007 15:03:43 GMT -8
I know what you mean.
I miss having you and Les around so we can do some of these experiments together.
However i should be back down your way soon and by or crook would like to visit or be visited by the two of you.
as well as finally meet your kith and kin. got a few things to share as well (you know me i cant tell you this stuff but i can show you).
Currently setting up a new test bed and getting set for another iteration of the water heater.
Love you
E
|
|
|
|
Post by joselb on Apr 22, 2008 8:44:35 GMT -8
Hi, John, I'm new to this forum, just purchased the book and I'm reading it, but follows some theoretical conjectures on your explanations: - vortexer- seems that happens exactly what was expected. The vortex is like a coil, in the same vertical space you can put much more "wire". It's like to have a higher riser. Also, the turbulence make their particles (distinct weight gases and oxygen) to mix better (mainly if you have a duple vortex as the first picture, so the collide/mix at the center). The expected result is a better burn. On other hand, the gases drag, due to vortex curves, particle crashing, etc., make the gases to go slowly, that has a positive effect= more time 'burning", but has another effect that is making the pressure a bit bigger at the riser, so a bit intake air "clogging" is the other expected result.
- tapered riser- I like to push things to a theoretical limit to understand better how they work. So, suppose as the riser, a wide bottle with a very tin neck:
- The gases expands as they burn in the bottle
- The burning/burned gas, in the bottle, has 2 aspects: its lighter than cold external air (it tends to go up) and its pressure is higher.
- the higher pressure tends to "explode" the bottle, if there is no way to escape.
- if the neck is so thin, most part of the heated gases would flow in the undesired intake air direction.
- as we wider up the neck, gas start to go more thru it, generating less pressure in the bottle. Seems to me that a little pressure is desirable, as with that burning point of the gases will be higher (PVT of gases) and they will slow down, taking more time in the bottle burning.
- when neck=bottle width(standard riser) , the generated pressure is very little (drag on wall, spinning, etc.), the gases go in an uncontroled manner out of the riser.
- continuing, inverting the bottle and cutting its bottom, almost no pressure will be generated in neck (the first part of the riser now), and almost no drag will be generated, as the gas expand to much in the bottle. So we can expect a negative pressure in the neck.
- so, seems to me that a experimental (or mathematical simulation) equilibrium for the riser (between bottle and neck) is the point, as you stated. Maybe a dumper at the end of the riser to test?
I hope to not made things more confused with these newbie thinkings....sorry if yes...  Jose |
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Apr 22, 2008 20:45:21 GMT -8
HEY!! This is great!! Welcome to the board!
The tapered riser will also tend to concentrate heat towards the narrower top, hopefully dumping to a hotter, more controlled and focused use.. ??
|
|
|
|
Post by joselb on Apr 23, 2008 5:29:41 GMT -8
Thanks for the welcome! The tapered riser will also tend to concentrate heat towards the narrower top, hopefully dumping to a hotter, more controlled and focused use Well, is expected that the hottest gases stay at the top, as they are lighter, and probably this extra temperature will help to burn the still not burned gases, besides the hot gases will stay more time in the riser, as they will go slower. I think there is 2 ways to test it. 1- Put a manually adjustable dumper at the top, 2- or to do concentric rings, in a way that the largest one is so that it's external diameter is larger than riser diamenter and internal diameter sightly smaller. The 2nd. ring external diamenter a bit larger than 1st ring internal diam. and its internal diameter is a bit smaller ,and so on for the 3rd., 4th, etc. So you can go in controlled steps for the measurements. |
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Apr 23, 2008 9:24:15 GMT -8
Well, I have already built a form for molding a tapered heat riser in one piece. It's designed for a six inch system. The plan is to test it side by side with a standard or straight one.
I kinda like your suggestion. It seems a bit complicated, though the method would answer a whole lot more questions than mine. Perhaps I will try it sometime in the future, when I've got more time. (along with all 10,000 other projects I've saved for a rainy day!)
|
|
|
|
Post by joselb on Apr 24, 2008 19:09:03 GMT -8
...It seems a bit complicated...Perhaps I will try it sometime in the future, when I've got more time. (along with all 10,000 other projects I've saved for a rainy day!) That's my problem too, so many projects in mind... so when the wish to do something is irresistible, I seat, relax and waits the desire to go out... ;D In relation to rocket, I intend sometime in the future to try to introduce microcontrolers (like PIC) to check temperatures, open this or that,....even something to feed rocket. But for now I'm just seated waitind the desire to go out on those things!  My wife complains that I have a lot of unfinished projects and that I have other things to do, besides them...  Regards Jose |
|
|
|
Post by chronictom on Sept 10, 2008 19:18:35 GMT -8
In terms of the 'turbulator', why not just put a piece of metal sheet 2 inches high at the bottom that has a twist to it to start the flow circulating?
|
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Sept 10, 2008 19:37:59 GMT -8
Yep.. Why not? Try it.  I've tried the two shown before and I've attempted several arrangements of stacked re-bar pieces. I've done a couple expansion/turbulence chambers with varying results.  In my travels thus far, I've liked the heart shaped one the most. I've thought about (but not tried) various wing sections, riffles, spiralled fins, cones facing one way, the other way and both ways.. I've considered strategically projecting bricks.. Just gotta try 'em, find what's appropriate where and chronicle the results.. |
|
ernie
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by ernie on Jan 21, 2009 22:51:04 GMT -8
Donkey do you remember the heat torus we observed? we could get the heat to move up or down the barrel.
I think that it is important. when we spun the gases in the heat riser the torus dropped a bit. these gasses are still burning I think we need to put something to break up the column on the underside of the barrel bottom. I think we have a lack of turbulence at this critical point. some of my recent experiments keep pointing to this.
|
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Jan 22, 2009 5:31:25 GMT -8
Hello Ernie!!  Yep, I remember.. Huh.. I need more info. Input, give me input! I always saw it as a natural focusing of the heat produced.. Like smoke rings, with no smoke.. Heat rings, if you will.. I thought it was significant that we could tune that toroidal heat wave to a particular place and make it pretty well stay there.. Though how we did that is currently eluding me.. Been a long sleepless night and I'm a bit fuzzy at the moment.. Anyhow.. So you think that there are unburned fuels malingering about?? Hrmm.. How?? I need more data.. You gotta tell me what you've been up to, man. |
|
ernie
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by ernie on Jan 22, 2009 13:48:41 GMT -8
that controll of the heat ring is important for special purpose stoves. but i will do one better than tell you what i have been doing. go to your test bed and weld a half inch by one quarter piece of bar stock to the inside bottom of a barrel all the way across. just a quick tack job will do. set the stove up with something to organize the stream like the in riser vortex thing we made then seal it up and fire it. if you have two stoves use one as a control look at the smoke signature and the barrel temps on both stoves. I think you will be pleased. let me know what you get. oh and the spacing between the riser and barrel should sill be about 11/2 to 2 inches.
|
|
|
|
Post by Donkey on Jan 22, 2009 18:52:59 GMT -8
Ok.. So, to follow that thought-form through.. I'll try to rash it out here 'fore I go get practical with it.. Building standard model rocket stove, place our vortexer inside the heat riser, etc.. The stream would pass through the vortexer and spin up (as per our mutual observations) and create a certain amount of turbulence, though we've seen, that turbulence is in fact fairly organized in nature.. Flow speeds up, heats up, flames lengthen and spin, usually into two intertwined tails (as per our gizmo's topology). Stream rises to the top and strikes the barrel and the cross-bar. The stationary bar (now my imagination takes over) would tend to smash apart and possibly to some degree separate into two flows.. I imagine that any laminar conditions within the turbularized (new word) flow would then be broken apart, possibly mixing further any remaining un-combined molecules (unburned fuel), which would then (in the presence of enough heat) complete the burn.. Ok.. I see it.... Brother man, yer brilliant! Well, it ain't gonna happen soon, but now I've gotta build it and see if they come. Thanks! So, what got you off in this direction? Have you tried different sized horizontal bars? Different barrel gaps? Differnet shapes, nurnies, greeblies and whatnot? How many runs have you done?? Is is now yer standard procedure, or do you still consider it experimental?? 'Nuff Q's fer now.. |
|
ernie
New Member
Posts: 32
|
Post by ernie on Jan 23, 2009 16:42:21 GMT -8
actually it was a sauna. the stove inside the sauna would not get hot enough to provide steam. as a dry sauna it works great. so i got to thinking and poking around and the water vapor absorbed most of the heat. well that led to why am i not getting more heat, then to taking the barrel off and looking at the carbon and seeing that it and tar where together and the tar had a streamlined shape. and thet got me thinking of how we had an organized heat stream and how to break up the heat stream to get even more of a burn and that led to a clean barrel. so far i have only added the bar and gotten better performance. i have played a bit with the gap but nothing definative.
|
|
My wife complains that I have a lot of unfinished projects and that I have other things to do, besides them... 
In my travels thus far, I've liked the heart shaped one the most.