I’m back. I’ve edit corrected my post above. Great apologies to those who English second language. I run out of brain in the afternoon anymore.
JeffD is correct: a cone-in-a-can.
Tom C I do not know a Thain-plate separator. One I will have to look up.
This Plan Set cyclone is specified to be made up, “Fabricate from 18 gauge steel"
A round can with flat ends 16” high by 12" diameter. The internal cone is gas tight to be welded inverted to the top can plate. It is speficifed to be 10" top diameter by 3 1/2 bottom OPEN end diameter. Plan calls for, “Use 2 1/2” light pipe (conduit) Inlet pipe to be tangentially to the cyclone" Illistrates this inlet to be welded 2" center down, at a 90 degrees from the long axis, from the top out edge of the can at (of course) flow spin inducing angle.
A sheet 1 note says that ALL gas piping tubing will be 2 1/2" unless other wise specified. So the very Imbert “stick up in the air” cooler piping inlet would have been 2 1/2"
It is the flow pattered within this assebly that I’ve never seen
gas-in induced to spin-flow down around the OUTSIDE of the cone first. Then lower 3 1/2" open end suck UP spinning? Exits out a 2 1/2" pipe in the top center.
Whole assembly specified to have lower outer edge 4" pipe nipple and cap clean-out centered 3" up from the bottom edge. The lower flat bottom specified to have a , “Place draincock where convenient”
Please under stand that I am not putting any of this up as better-idea’s, or idealism’s.
I am a dedicated statioanry-for-power guy.
No need for me to build this books Figure 52 super compact all integrated system.
And for many other reasons I would not even build up this very-true Imbert clone copy system.
Amazinf though this pulished out “15th Aug. 1974” book and plan set.
Amazing it was priced so cheaply then. Advertised in the classifies sections of Mechanical Illustrated and other USofA widely available magazines.
From exslave-labor/needs-must WWII era western Eropean user of all of the wood, charcoal, and fossile coal system donew by DR Tom reed and others the Imbert system was admired for the ease of use. Ease of maintenance. ONLY downside was they needed reliably pre-dryed down,15% or less moisture fuel woods.
Sheet #1 iuse instruction says fuel wood chunks to be,
“Use good ,air dried wood in sizes one-by-two-by-three inches, approximately.”
Thgis sytem would whup-ass over the 10 year later broadcast out Mother-Earth-News too-many tubed, too many gastight welds, system. Really performance wup-ass over the F.E.M.A crappola tar-maker.
Why was this Pesasus Plans Set system overlooked and ignored?
Social dynamics. Not-invneted-by-me. I’m a modern smarty. Of course I can come up with a better way. Pay-for-fo-a plan?! I’ll just do it all myself.
Same as today, eh?