Woody, rest assured it's not a money issue, not suffering either.
Call me strange, but I enjoy working out the bugs, once conquered, it is something "I" can be proud of.
People get too wound up over this hobby. Surely you can't say there is only one style gasifier with a couple year life expectancy?
"Surely you can't say there is only one style gasifier with a couple year life expectancy?" No I can't. U are right. I look at your hearth and I look at mine and I can't believe they are both gasifiers doing the same thing on the same size truck both with 4 cyl. engines with radically different results.
How thick of steel did you make that out of. I was sure you had made it out of stainless correct? I made mine an hourglass hearth also out of 1/8in stainless. I figuered if it don't pan out I could easily switch it to just a lower hearth tube with a flat plate restriction on top of that and let the char form the cone. It is working it alot of other guys units.
I am curious Woody, How different of results are they? I keep up with traffic, haven't had a need to go over 65mph(I think that's about tops though).
Anything from a match all the way to Wayne's system, it's all gasification. Pretty cool!
David, I believe mine is 1/16". It is stainless. My nozzles just poke past the cone. I was curious if it could take it. It did for a couple hundred miles. I'm not sure how long it has been like this. Right now I'm planning on slitting the cone under the nozzles about 2" and pound it back as far as I can get it. It should be farther away from the intense heat. If this doesn't work then I'll pull the whole top cone off and put a thick ring around the restriction to give it strength. Similar to what you have mentioned.
Hi Terry, a couple of years ago when I was investigating gasification whole house wood stoves, the Garn furnace representative told me that the reason their units were made with ¼ inch plain steel is that they will give a 20 year warranty with that simple material. They had tried a heavy thickness stainless steel, but they could not escape stress cracks which formed around joints over time. Wayne has an excellent tip for fighting the intense heat below the nozzles as told to me last year. You’ll have to ask him. You have a professional looking truck. See you soon, Doug
I actually brought my cone to just under the nozzles, so I wonder how I will fair there.
Thanks for letting me know.
Thanks for the compliment Doug, I also look forward to seeing you again.
For less intense heat I like Larry Dobson's designs. Slow flow, large reaction area. I think he mentioned it could have engine grade gas but I haven't seen any examples.
David, you might want to plan on maybe 1"of char between nozzle and cone???
David S, I ended up cutting the top cone off. You can tell by the picture It gets very toasty. I left a 3/4" flange from it on the reduction cone for strength. I'll report back on performance since there is more combustion area now.
Just wanted to coment on your truck. I had a 93 that I stuffed an SBC 283 into. Advanced Adaptors makes everthing needed for an SBC conversion and it can be done in a weekend or two. When I did my conversion I actually got better fuel mileage believe it or not. It went from 18 mpg's to 24 mpgs. So if your going to run syngas in this puppy the larger engine will help make up for the power loss. With that little 283 I could light the tires on fire!!!
I havent gotten into producer gas in a vehical yet. But I will soon, as soon as I have time I will be developing a unit specific for vehicles and farm equipment.
Here is a Honda I shoe horned a 350 in a while back.
Good progressive development you are reporting. Keep it up. Ha! Ha! Good proof that the restriction entrance will show you where it wants to be. Could you repeat again your fuel type you've been using? Screened chips? Chunks? Or pellets?
Nice conversion on the Izuzu SUV. If this had one of the earlier "clackty-clacker" double rocker arm SOHC V-6's engines originally, than yes, a vast improvement. I only once saw a small block Chevy in a Ranger - unfortunately an ugly hack job. Any pictures of yours? You do clean work.
Your pictured avatar gasifier system appears to be small engine size.
If you have actually small engine ran with this Please do post up some of your results in the Small Engine Corner Section.
Steve, that would be chunks. Roughly 1.25" square by about 2.25"
I took it on a ride last night, power is about the same. I'm sure the hearth still has to burn in some more.
Hi Terry ;I dont know as much as some of the other members here,I cant tell by the pics what your whole hearth and reduction look like. maybe if you leave the oxidation area straight and not bell shaped, and use a stainless flat plate for the restriction let it fill in with ash for insulating, it would work better staying cooler from my reading and experience, the ideal angle from the nozzles to the restriction is 60*.
You have already have good success with your design it just needs some insulating at the lower hearth.
Good Luck!! I hope you can drive it to the meeting in May,, Ron L
Yes Ron, with the cone pulled out it will now develop a natural cone. I'm leaving the reduction cone alone though. I still have the 60*.
Down the road if I don't get my chunker going, I'll play with raising my nozzles. With more combustion area I should be able to run larger fuel.
I'm definitely bringing her. But pulling a trailer with lawnmower and supplies, I'll have to make the journey on petrol. :(
How's your ride coming along?
Terry, Take it easy on it so we can check it out in Argos. I'm counting on you being there with a truck. Make a funnel insert to stick in there over that thin stainless with a little bit of a lip at the restriction to hold back ash and tack it in there. make sure you tack it between the nozzles so the blasts don't cut through it. Maybe 1/8" steel or thicker if you can cut and bend it ?? If it is tacked below the nozzles some it will accumulate some ash at the upper edge as well and divert the blast a bit. Just a thought .. How is it holding together at the restriction ?? I will call Jim Mason tonight and leave a message in regards to this as he has many units out there that could do similar. It has been a concern of mine. The only thing I have seen my rotors do is get minor cracks over the holes I drill through the drum part .. They accumulate too much ash to warp or the such .. Mike LaRosa
OOPs, I guess I should have checked page 2 to get the latest .. too late ... Mike L
Yes Mike, I remember your concern about these stainless hearths. I built this one to be a larger version of the lawn mower(which is holding up great). I am constantly suprised on the differences between the two.
I updated a couple of my threads at GEK HQ about 3 wks back. It's kinda quiet over there.
Making it to Argos is my main goal. I built the Ranger to use, and I can't say no to her if the weather is dry. Otherwise it's mudbogging out to the main road and I want to try to preserve car&producer. We go through brakes quickly in this household from the grit that coats our undercarrages.
Take care Mike,
(p.s. I'm anxious to show a paticular aspect of this producer at Argos)
Matt Ryder, Terry, Mike L.
Matt, the Toyota will keep its 4 cyl. Naturally if you could drop a v-8 in there she would haul, but you wouldn't have room for much else. I looked at one prior to this one that had a v-6 and there was next to zero room under the hood for anything else let alone pipe work and mixing valve. There were alot of specific reasons I went with the 22re 4 cyl. Durability, resale value, and the condition of this paticular one to name a few. Terry, thanks for the advice. I think the way I have mine might allow for the 1in of char like you mention. Like I said my 60deg cone comes just under the nozzles. My cone is insulated on the back side with perlite. So who knows. It will be a learning thing. Keep yours together, I can't wait to see it in Indy. Mike L , sounds like your making good progress getting ready for Argos. I hope all goes well for your trip, and everyone else.
John Stout--You are a Hoot!!! Love the song and what a cool dude you are!! Keep it up bud. I will watch and read what ever you, or probably any other woodgas lover, prints or vid's. I REALLY want to get my project started!!! Thanks for the laughs and smiles!
Dang, It's been a full year since this link was updated!
Well, I decided to take a look down the throat of the beast before gas-fest to trim down the reduction cone to 4". Yikes, the temp is still hot enough to warp. This explains why I've been only getting 57mph.
I had to take it completely down to take out the cone.
Grrr. I don't need this 1 week from gas-fest!
Good Morning Terry G,
WOW time does fly.
Hope you will get all repaired or replaced and be looking at ya a week from today. Enjoyed meeting you last year.
Thanks for posting
Hey there Terry! Good to hear from ya.
While you got the cone out, I'd take it down to a 5" circle myself. You could use the extra char depth. Probably wouldn't hurt to reinforce that lip too.
Thanks for the good wishes Wayne/Chris, I'm a little frazzled right now as to what to do. I'm thinking of doing away with the cone and just having a restriction and a grate.
Chris, are you talking a 5" restriction? You are a brave man!(with my producer! LOL!) That lip was reinforced!
p.s. I'm looking forward to picking up the book next week!
Terry, I said that based on the distortion (too much heat) and slow top speed. Bigger size should put you back into usable range and less heat.
5" IIRC is the Imbert recommended size for most V8s. You're on a 4cyl but you're pulling much harder than they with a similar load. If you're putting in a choke plate type restriction, then you'll be able to play around and see what works best for your setup.
Engine size is not always a good indicator of the gas required. An oversimplified example: If a V8 runs 1500 RPMs and a 4cyl runs 3,000 RPMs for a given load, you'll use *roughly* the same amount of gas.
Chris, you are correct about the engine. I designed it on hp needed. Engine size is irrelevant.
This truck gets about 27mpg on petrol. I have smaller requirements than the Dakotas/full size trucks.
I've operated some actual GEK's that you based this on and maybe can add some feedback that would help you decide which way to jump.
1) You are in a time crunch so gonna have to leave the nozzle heights and spacing just as is. Period. So you will have to make up/modify something to drop in back into place. Period. On this design like the original Imberts ALL reduction takes place below the restiction edge. Means this edge gets the absolute highest internal temperatures at the lower oxidiztion zone
2) On this design (hope Mr Pepe is reading) a significant % of the reduction zone volumn is going to be in this drop-in cone or tube. With the balace of reduction zone volumn stacked up in the the grate pile of char.
3) The edge of this tube/cone, since one of the design features of this design ash insulates this peice for its full length is going to be heat hammered with climbing temperatures with NO effective way to controlled bleed off this metals destroing heat out as in the later plate restiction designs like the Sweeds, Finns in the 50's, 60's and 70's eveolved into, Mr Wayne and others now use, and even MikeL heats effectivly uses with his cast double brake rotor designs.
So just as Doug Williams found with his protuding tube Fluidynes with these charateristics you can only make this heat/temperature lip live is with higher heat resistant metals.
I'd suggest a straight 5" or even 6" stainless steel tube welded to your bottom plate if you can find one. 316 be the best common weldable. 304 would do for awhile.
On the bottom plate make the center hole a bit smaller to leave an inside ledge. Now down through this straight walled tube you could drop in min 1/2' thick cast, plate cut out restictors as needed to get you back down to 4". This will also be relaceable to save your ledge lip.
This is actually starght out of the FEMA design papers and on a much larger scale what MR Wayne retained in his design evolution.
Later after reading his book you could decide whether or not to rejigger your air jetting, grate hieght and the important choker (restriction) ledge to rebalace your NOW above and below restiction reduction sections to turn your's into his larger "char bucket" gasifer with his advanced metals cooling allowing back to common carbon steels and incorperated his more advanced thermal re-cycling ideas.
ChrisKY/Mr Wayne I trust I have not let too many cats out of the bag describing this.
Ha! Just a little more book interest teasing out bleed, eh?
THICK SS tube in this area works for a long tome see in my photo album. No speculation here.
Dakota only weighs 4,000 lbs to the Ranger's 3,500, and gets 21 MPG gasoline to the Ranger's 27. Its smaller but not by a lot.
One more cat to let out of this bag. (This should make Terry want to read the book even more........)
Wayne's Dakotas are running 7-8" restrictions, and 12-15" deep char. This setup will idle the truck just fine for hours, with no tar.
Steve U, Do you think the tube is even needed? The flow is going to find the path of least resistance, which should be a fairly straight path to the grate. The rest of the char should become insulative to the rest of the body. Grate is the size of the restriction to allow enough velocity to keep clear without a shaker(Thanks max gasman).
Chris, I'm running 12" char below the nozzles now, and I think 5" would be about right with a WK
Hi back TerryG
IF you are able to also drop your grate down enough to re-establish a similar char reduction zone VOLUMN pile below your NOW then low down restriction shelf it would work siimilar to what you had previously. You may then need a grate edge fence to keep the grate stacked char pile from spilling off to remain active. Gets trcicky here depending on your actual fuel wood ashing content to keep this reduction zone char stack gasses flowable.
The evoled modern Europeans even with thier natural forming slope walls do very little reduction above the restriction plate. Mostly HOT oxidization going on there. Thier less hot now temerature falling reduction convertsion is done below the restiction plate.
Many (not all) "American Method" gasifiers have now split the active reduction zone action at the restirction with some done above the restriction and some done below the restiction. This moves the highest temperature oxidization zone edge up off off and away from the metals and actually this zone trasitioning edge IS a gasifer drawn floating edge transition much like in a charcoaled fueled gasifier.
With all respect - most EU gasifier guys expect for DJ now have not yet grasped or accepted this difference.
They cannot accept as of yet the change from thier decades evolved relitivly small internal volumn demanding high gases velosity systems to a much larger flexibly active internal volumns with quasi-floating zones operating at much lower internal gases velocities.
Well the speeds, power and fuel consumptions are very telling now as more in North America convert to this evolved newer, frankly hated FEMA based concept with air jets now and on huge char bed steroids.
Other features of what will be labled the "Americam Method" I predict will be very LONG path ash settlement separation, LONG path cooling and SOOTS collection passage systems. HUGE condensated removal capabilities. An an attitude to just let the engines eat soots as a fuel. Engine that can't do this last?? Woosie's!!. Get a better soot eating engine system.
Ha! maybe we should instead of letting it evolve quickly into a generalized lumped togather "American Method" strike out and call ourseved the Sooteaters.
Once you read thoer book you will see the WK will be a distinctly separate system with its internal thermal regulation and heat recycling within this overall American Method that folds in the modern MENS fellows here, MikeL's double rotors, The Florida boys and few others I cannot name due to proprietory knowledge.
The NA "Sooteaters".
"Push, Pull, or Get the Hell Out of the Way" The Future is that-a-way - > -> -> ^ ^ ^
You could do this in your envelope packge also I think.
You will not have the time to make ot, and tune it on this go-around though.
Ah! Post edit add. Esasiest way to handle an ash "problem" on a narrow restictive design is to just use a very low ashing wood fuel like most pines and my Doug Fir wood. Fludiynes and GEK's relly hum on these. Origninal Imberts this was the spec factory fuel.
THIS is what will get you there and back on this go-around.
YES FOLKS I AM SAYING THAT A GASIFIER MUST BE SPECIFICALLY DESIGED TO WORK BEST WITH THE VOLATILES VERSUS CHAR VERSUS ASHING OF YOUR PREDOMINENT TO BE USED FUEL WOODS. #1 reason why most designs and advice does NOT seem to trasfer well. The WK is proving to one of the most flexible for these primary gasification factors. S.U.
Steve U. Yes, I always thought the restriction was where oxidation ended. Maybe at idle cfm's.
I believe Imberts were designed for idling without being too restrictive for hp requirements.
With warping along 3/4's of my reduction tube, you can't say there hasn't been any oxidation in there. I believe the oxidation zone moves up and down according to cfm's .
So I took what you and Chris recommended and came up with some middle ground. By cutting my cone down to 5" restriction I am increasing my "oxidation zone" while keeping 3/4 of the reduction the same.
With more of a vertical drop to the restriction(+2"), I may get more of a funnel shape hearth instead of a bowl shape I have now.
Grate is also dropped 1.5"
CFM's at the restriction will be 56% of what I had.
I am confident that it will burn clean while driving. Idling though? We'll find out.
Hi Terry, Steve and All, This is a good informative post. Terry what would the nozzle hearth separation be after cutting down the cone? 5" seems to be a large restriction for a 4 cy engine , that is what my 300 has but I think I may be able to open it up a little also. My truck gets about 12 mpg, but it tops out at 55-62 mph.
I think my 300 is a soot eater I took the air cleaner off and there was about a cup of soot sitting on the back two barrels but it still runs good on wood.
Steve I wish you could make it to the WG meeting in Argos it would be great to meet you.
Thanks Ron L
Ron, looking forward to seeing you again.
Yes, 5" restriction is crazy if you go to the old school methods.
My nozzle circle hasn't changed and I think this is what matters. The oxygen intensity is the same at the circle.
I now have a 5" drop to the restriction.
I'm trying to reduce my diet of soot. I now have twice the surface area in my filter.
Sound great TerryG
You got the point to do whatever you must timely inside your existing envelope to get to Argo's able to run on wood. Ha! After your wheelie tratcor stuff you now have Rep to maintain man. Be sure and take your cut off damage as a boast piece that you do run good 'n hot and hard. Real Hotrodders aways have a separated piston, broken rod, or holed clutch scatter shield saved back for I'm a DOer cred. Woodgasing it is heat destoyed metal damage.
Yes you are correct in the European design thinking the restiction IS THE Rigid demarkation between the oxidization zone and the reduction zone on wood fueled gasifers. But . . . review the Kalle paper and even they conceed that in charcoal gasifer these zones edges float around with system gas demanded draws. FEMA/Stratified/evolved WK acknowledges and uses this floating in a raw fuel wood gasifier. MENS gasifer 40's Baltic marine Eurpean based is Rigid zone thinking based.
Charcoal man Gary Gillmore is doing/has done a lot of woodsaw dust, used motor oil into his air nozzle fuel suppleemening into his two different Gillmore and Simlifier charcoal gasifiers IN ADDITION to his base engine exhaust feed in to force more H and H2 and CH4 fuel gas production for a more balnced, powerfull IC engine frindly composite fuel gasses mix. The two approches are now evoling closer to closer to each other. Look here at Francios Pal's excellant illistrations and pictures of his now made up Brandt gasifier and you can see the Brandt developement team also accept and used floating zone edges With Control. Eg: the air nozzles in the WK system.
What I visualize you are doing now "seems" to almost be approching what StephenA. ans ArvidO are doing with the double row downward air jet nozzle hearth. You might start up some direct correspondences there.
Now is old retired man buisest time of the year with 4-5 acres of weeds, grasses to keep mowed continuos tight at least through the July 4th burn-down-the-Town exuberance passes through. Only place in the County allowing any more personal aerial rocket displays. The Town actually sells these and as a Revenue generating souce and people come from miles around buying and using. Only way my insurance complany woulds ever payoff for our adjacent 15 acre timber lot or my cedar shingle sided house and the old wooden farm outbuildings is if I show the "Due Dilligence" in active "fire hazard mangement". I keep harvesting trees back from ever edge falling accross our property lines to nieghbors stuctures for the same liabilty reasons. 100-135 foot tall trees that then means a wider graases/weeds strips to have to maintain.
Then . . . my wife's Gardens . . .she'd beat me man off "woodgas playing around" not here helping.
Then . . . now dry, dry, dry and Hot (low to mid-80'sF - FIRST time in 5 years! Hurrah!) now like we've been the last 2 weeks solid I can get a whole months jump on cutting, splitting and ricking up next winters firewoods to be able to dry/season good and long in the actual Hot six weeks spanning August. Too fire dangerous with low humidty then to be chainsawing and metal on metal wedging.
It's like you're in my head Steve! I thought about bringing in my "trophy" as soon as I lobbed it off.
Sorry, I don't have staggering jets such as StephenA's design. If I had 9 nozzles I could drop every third one.
With the new configuration I have about 27% more oxidation volume and 23% more reduction.
I got her put together about 2 days before the meet. It flared ok. Took it for a drive and she seemed to plug up quicker than I liked. So, that night (before leaving for Argos) after work I pulled the char and put in a less restrictive grate. On the way to Argos I tried it out in the new configuration. I thought I had it, 5 more mph(72 easy) and reduction stayed clear. While at Argos it started to plug twice. I'm messing with the grate now to get her to burn clear like it did with the old setup. I think I may have to go back to a "stock" reduction.
Good to hear it got you there and back.
Yes. Now to work in that relatively small envelope in comparision to the much larger char tub WK's.
I've been working all winter on a theory of Free Volatiles versus Char versus Ash in different fuel wood bases to explain some of the varing reported results everyone is getting. Waynes released Auburn reports been very helpful.
I do not know what different fuel wood stocks you have, or are using.
Best to always design and build around your own available wood fuels.
Anyhow for your current set up before you would change it my theory would say use a higher volatiles to char making wood fuel. So the relaesed voletiles will "use up" more of the char. Defiantly want to use a lower inherent ash fuel wood to avoid ash clogging and needing more grate shaking.
Big, big differences in these from most hardwoods with a low voltile to high char ratios and high 3-7% mineral ash bases as compared to most softwoods with high voletile to low char ratios with less than 1% ash remaining to have to handle.
The faster pyrolisis, higher voletile woods do tend to be much more sooty though. Ha! Ha! Why I think the Finns complain so much about this. Fast velosity hearths also much more sooty then slower velocity hearths also.
SteveU, Intriguing V/C/A theory. Are people reporting different grate shaking usage? I haven’t noticed that ash (high mineral content) makes much difference. Granted, I don’t run exclusively on bark.
I run a mix of what I have available. Cordwood(some about 1/3 rotten), pallets and branches down to about ½”. Of this, some of the cordwood can have quite a bit of bark.
All hearths, with equal power ratings, fast or slow, should have equal amounts of soot. The slow one will clog up and require shaking which will release the soot at once.
As always, thanks for your insight.
I forgot to mention, Wes Kuehl hooked up his scanner to my ob2 got a P1131. I found out it is because the brain doesn't see the rich/lean cycle of the injector impulses. Strangely enough, we couldn't get higher than 30deg. advance even with gasoline and no code.
Good Morning TerryG
I went back and carefully reread this whole thread before even thinking about commenting.
A P1131 code means the controller system was unble to see a change in the O2 senor output when it intentionally with fuel injector pulse width forced what should have been a too lean to a too rich of mixture to verify everything was working correctly and it was able to control the system. It could NOT so it was telling you it was out of control - it cannot tell you why. This will probably be a common OBD II code when running on woodgas fuel. What a system will do about this will vary from manufacturer to manufacturer and even model to model within each manufactureres chosen control system strategys. I would expect to see a limited "safe" igntion timing limit responce with this code on a Ford.
Once you clear codes, you reset back to pre-programed in "safe" starting point values. Theses system have to relearn then from running feedback to advance to greater "learned" values. GM's do this fast. Fords and Dodges do this slowly. IF you stayed on gasoline, AND IF your O2 snesors were still active functional, after 50 or so miles it would learn itself step by step back up into an actual 40+ degree timing range. You are a very smart fellow and can now see some of the dilemma this will force you into some of the same OBD II woodgasing Fords problems that SeanF ran into.
Ha! Ha! My V/C/A remains yet just a theory to be used by any now as a try-me on their own systems. Again you are smart enough to grasp it. And have that knawing dogged like intelligence waking you at 4:00 AM with why? why? why? also.
Here PNW wetside we are "blessed" with 95% Only Douglas Fir's hemlocks and spuces for fuel woods. DF is an Excellent structureal wood. Very mediocre woodstoveing heating wood. This was the prefered steamer used fuel wood up here for the logging donkey winches and river paddle boats.
What this has forced is a standardized wood fuel to run in all types of gasifer hearths. Then the hearth differnces can really shine through. Not tying to convince you but too many first hand experinces here say "fast" velocity hearths do make more soots inherantly than medium velocity hearths, with LarryD's slow, slow velolsty hearths making the least of all. Eg: an oil lamp turned up too high not allowing enough time for the carbons to completly oxidize converted.
I've puzzled much over the modern European "must blow hard to clear the ash" prefernce. I was able to duplicate this need on cotton wood, aspen and such types of woods. These are all high volatiles versus low char versus very HIGH ash fuel woods. I think they need to do this. Greg Manning seems to do this differently using the high ash from his aspen woodchips as a movement conveyor at medium? slow? velocity. IISc/Mukunda, slow velocity, grateless; intentionally augure out 11-13% of bottom char/ash versus raw fuel put in at each and every re-fueling.
High ash, high char but low volatile balanced wood fuels I've used here in diffent hearths repeatedly have proven to respond best to have much active grate management and the accepace (groan) of much slipped char to clear the char used up exposed ash. I speculate this fuel is the one that could benifit the most with its surplus of char from voletiles fuel supplementing like waste motor oil. The more char consumed then the more exposed mineral ash you have to learn to handle.
You can even see this in Mr Waynes most recent comparisions of RonL's clean low ash pine fuel wood chunks to Waynes own mill produced bark included slab wood chunks he has now made up a more active grate shaker to get to flow the higher ash and fines better.
Point for you with your stated fuel woods used is I think you need to think in terms of a more active grate with the acceptance of more slipped char to keep your reduction bed loose and gasses exhange flowing.
Repectfully, Best Regards
"I think you need to think in terms of a more active grate"
HA!HA! This grate is fixed!
The only activity it sees is at teardown!
As far as grate shaking goes, one should try to look at it as more than 2 dimensional. If one could also lift it maybe 1/2" during the cycle It should purge easier. I built the grate on my lawnmower with 2 ramps so as it spun it pushed up the char.
Here is the hopper lid picture I promised. You can see the lower right picture has tar droppings on the fuel wood. Also see how clean the inside surface of the outermost shell is. This was taken about one year after it was built. This was my first stab at separating the tar.
I can't find a picture of my hopper condensate. It ran pretty clean for a while, until the walls got coated.
Burn that tar! Don't drain it!
I'm a little slow today... can you describe how the tar is being separated from the moisture? Looks like it's all going to drip back onto the wood.
Does that mesh get clogged?
Awesome Terry! Thanks
So I see how the tar drips back in. What is keeping the water from following?
The only way I see that this can work is that the tar is heavier than the liquid condensate water which uses surface tension on the steeper lid to follow its way down to the outside gutter.Does the mesh fit tight on the hopper lid or does it act like a heat shield to keep the lid cooler? It looks like it works good Thanks for sharing Terry. That should solve a lot of sticky problems and at the same time add fuel to the fire. Is this your idea?
Chris, Bill, group,
Yes Don, you have the basic idea. The heat shield on the bottom of the lid funnels the tar back into the hopper. It's a compact still. Separating a mixture into it's components.
I won't go into how I know about such things(wink, wink).
To answer your question. The mesh does get clogged if I run low on fuel. The extra radiation bakes it.
If it's not to bad I can just bang/shake it loose. If it's bad then I burn then bang and shake.
It's better just not to run out of fuel.
Looking for Recent Posts?
Check out What's New!
What's BBB? How do I SWEM? Learn the acronyms here!
There are currently 7 users online.
Terms of Service