Nice links .
Hello and welcome to the DOW Ms AprilW.
As an addendum to your castable refractories links I would encourge any intersted to dig in this site down to the replacement parts section:
They use cast floating combustion/reduction zone drop-in replaceable, sacrificial thermal/ceramic pieces. For good complete full wood fuels HC long chain break down reactions we are all having to work at the same metals killing temeratures levels. Refactories cast into metals housing are a PITA to erosion replace out later. Always having then different metals to refectory casting heat/cooling expansion separation issues. Perfectly good still useable cast refectories can and do cast crack and gasses leak. Cast refractories hard to edge gas tight keep sealed after thermal cycling causing more gasses leaks. These last two expereinced knowlege passed on forward by Larry Dobson.
These at least are easily solve by old school gas plant producers style using the metal housing as just the gastight “drum” membrane and the refactories as the internal sacrificial wear and even outer insulation layers on a stationary gasifier.
Thick heavy dense massive refratories while good for durabilty and steady state system thermal flywheeling; on smaller start and stop batch cycle systems will give you downstream soots/tars deposites hell on each now l-o-n-g-e-r streched out still too cool starting-up/warming-up cycle.
Different refectory castables have different erosion rates depending on whether in primarly in the oxidization zones or the no oxegen but now super hot free energized hydrogen and carbons reduction zones. Most woodgas system these zone edges float back and forth. Sorry all. Proprietary. Can’t quote the hard learning source(S) on these last two bits of experences. See my members photo album here for one on-hands, many hours, experience source on ceramic refractories.
Bottom line is castabe refractories are good but not a one-size-for-all majic solution either. ANOTHER whole experiences area to have to learn to design for.
Ha! Anyhow as a life long woodstover and now professed rocket stove hater my Garn system link is another in-your-face proven many installed better way illistration to Safely skin the wood fuel heating cat that IS insurance registered, EPA certified and people proven safe.
I see now you have a Premium asterisk star by your name. Once you do get the WK vehicle system book would you please share it with a particular mustached fellow you may still have running around there. Thanks.
Again. welcome here. And thanks for the imputs and participation.
Washington State Steve Unruh
Thanks for the warm welcome, Steve. Bigotes says Hi. He’s the best soot monkey I’ve met… yet. Don’t call him a tar monkey, though. He gets upset.
My dad has been on this project for 4 1/2 years now, and we are finally at last seeing the light of success. We will have a fully automated system, fully computerized hopefully by 2014.
Bigotes told me to get on this page so we can try Wayne’s design with our feed-stock. He thinks we should find some way to have some good ol’ dirt track racing going on. The community is large enough now.
I will try not to razmataz about our product and mainly just share what information we can. But I do ask that others not ask for too much specific information about the system right now, or at least until we go to market.
General gasification information I am really game for. Daddy taught me well.
Forgive me, i re-read your post several times, do you approve of the GARN? I just couldn’t tell ( compound sentences never were my strong point ).
Good Morning Carson
What I approve of is for complete wood fuel conversion into combustible gases it getting the system TEMPERTURE mondo UP, and keeping it mondo Up allowing then a lower more moderate TURBULANCE (velosity) and a longer TIME in residence for all of the thermal-chemical reactions to take place.
The classic always needed combustion triad is Temperture,Time and Turbulance. Skew one high then the others can be lower. I favor skewing the Temp up. Rocket stove guys go for super high “sonic” Turbulence skewing. A very few like wood gasifier develper Larry Dobson intentionally want a very long Time residences and a very low Turbulances so to TTT balance has to go with a much longer internal pathways with it ALL glowing hot. He designes for 40-60% squeeze wet woodchips.
On ANY systems for the needed high complete combustion sustained temeratures you will be at metals killing levels. ANY and ALL direct contact metals will heat warp, buckle, oxidize spawl and free hydrogen and carbons absorb hardening, cracking and en-brittle spawling even farther. Period.
Most wood heater people settle old-school for air choked down, much lower temperature BIG stuffed fire boxes for a long between refuel loading buring. My oldest brother-in-law, my own father-in-law. Their soots and creasote tars and ash chimneys build ups needing sweeping 2-3 time a season are evidence of this. Visible smoke out the wood heater chimney, especially blue is incomplete combusted wasted wood fuel H’s and C’c going up, out and by-by. $$$'s up in smoke if your buying fuelwood. Wasted sweat and saw gas wear, tear and fuel if you are making up your own fuel wood.
So on your question specifically about the GARN close coupled “direct gasification” heating system I am using them as an example of how this sustained very High wood combustion/reduction tempertures problem has been challenged and solved for systems in use daily/annually, installed, inspected and insurance covered. I have search out, traveled and seen three of these installed and in service. Very delighted owners. Then we have one friend who thinks she wants one but is working through in her area State certified Alt Energy Installer for her PV Solar and wells systems who says this GARN company “is impossible to deal with” So??? I also know all too well she is one of those people that makes you justifiy everything down to the Nth degree. They “Garn” may just feel they do not have time for all of the hands holding.? That their product speak for itself.?
I also know many “certified” Installers who work much with manufacturers kick-back $$$ incentive systems. Maybe it is GARN not willing to play this game.?
Me personally I would NEVER, ever go putting my home wood heating source outside hidden away. I, the wife, the oldest dog and cat love basking by the rich, old bones warming glow of an in room GOOD woodstove. I’ve found over the course of the years to make these live they MUST have drop in thermal insulative sacrificial bricks. The brand I DO recommend highly for in-room woodstoves is Quadrafire. Other good ones out there like Regal and a few others also. The THREE things to look for are:
#1. The most important for actual user performance - does it actually have these thermal insulative sacrificial cast refractory bricks as a firebox lining??
#2. Does it have and upper firebox pre-heated secondary SS air tube supply system??
#3 Has the actual manufacturer paid to have it UL or CL and EPA certified? These will be on a riveted on metal specification plate.
So listening to me it will even seem that I get a Quadrfire kick back for selling. No. Just personal user experiences with my “sooty” Doug Fir soft woods versus TWO earlier PITA exprences with NOT brick lined all cast iron Jotul’s.