I know this is for water but maybe something like this? One would need a way to test the amount of nitrogen before and after.
3 Likes
Nice well for 7 bucks its worth a try. Ill have to look and see what a test kit cost. They make them for the Oxy machines to test them
3 Likes
Quick vid of the FPS walk around with 3500 watt load.
2 Likes
Maybe I am missing something here, but Nitrogen, and “NOx” aren’t the same thing.
The air contains about 78% Nitrogen, right? I think most of that makes it through the engine pretty much unchanged.
In “NOx”, the “x” stands for any of the various oxides of nitrogen that may be produced in the engine (due to a host of factors)…
I doubt that the same filter that might soak up one would necessarily work on the other.
And, if you were trying to enrich the woodgas, wouldn’t you have to be storing a LOT of nitrogen?
Pete Stanaitis
3 Likes
My bad, N2?
As far as storing the nitrogen I dont think thats how the concentrators work. I think they have some sort of catalyst and it is converted into something else.
Here is the concentrator I plan to get for testing.
5 lpm oxygen content from the concentrator, would be the equivalent of 22.5 lpm atmospheric air oxygen content. So theoretically I will be able to slow process flows down 4 times, thus allowing for fuller and more reactions to take place. The mass of the carbon bed will be small and easy to manage its core temps.
If flows are too slow, then I may be able to add steam or something else in place of the N2. Might possibly just recycle more gas back to the unit with correct oxygen mix. If getting too hot is an issue, this would be a good thing, this would allow for more steam to be added for more H.
2 Likes
If you really tried it could run a Tata Nano, popular in India. That would all be for jokes though. The engine is very small at 624cc!
4 Likes
There was quite a thread about those medical oxygen concentrators on the smokstak website back in April of this year:
Of course, y’all can draw your own conclusions.
Pete Stanaitis
4 Likes
Lets talk about Nitrogen for a minute here.
There is a reason we have it in the air we breathe.
It is a inert gas. We use this gas in our 500,000 and 240,000 volt breakers in the switch yard at Wanapum Dam. Because the gas can not burn under high eletrical flash temperatures it protects the copper silver metal contacts in the breaker when the breaker is open under high amperage loads. It puts the fire out quickly.
Now in a gasifier fire tube where does this N2 gas go in a hot inviorment when Oxygen is present, it right next and mixed with it.
Does N2 have a purpose of protecting metals? Yes. Because it does not oxidize.
This is why we use bottled Oxygen when we cutting metals with a torch and not a compressed air that has H2 in it. But a Plasma cutter use a air blast to move the molten metals away. Moisture air causes problems so only dry air is used when using a Plasma cutter.
H2O displacement factor. When you introduce the H2O molecules the H2 moves out of the way to make room. This is why we get more power. H2 is increased and Oxygen is used up.
The Carbon dioxide be come Carbon Monoxide, the Oxygen is used up.
The H2 is just getting hot and not changing into anything that why it can protect metals.
So it has a purpose and it is doing that in our gasifiers. Lets call it a protecting shield of gas.
If we can get rid of the N2 gas in our gasifiers we would have the best Wood Gas ever, and we would melt our fire tubes, nozzles, heat shields, restriction plate, down at lower temperatures.
We would have a cutting torch for a fire tube.
Bob
4 Likes
Until we actually build, we can only speculate this. I have already anticipated everything you are relaying. The gas/oxy mix may need to be injected so that the oxygen is consumed fully before touching any metals. I am planning ceramics for the later versions. This will be a 3-D ceramic printed hearth. Same holds true to our fuels; the nitrogen is also shielding it. Removing this is what we want,
If there is a problem melting steel; this is a good problem to have here. Its just a challenge I will over come and this will give us the opportunity to design processes with positive effects. Steam injection could possibly no longer be looked at supplementing the gas. There is the potential where water would be looked at as a fuel feed just as much as the bio fuels themselves.
The hotter this thing gets the more steam I can inject.
The point of the development is to be able to run Fuel Cell technologies. Right now with only 20% or so H2 this can only be done marginal. We need to get our H2 yields much higher closer to 40%. I dont know if we will achieve any efficiency gains in the gasifiaction process,I suspect there will be with added steam reform. But efficiency is not the goal on the gasifier side; getting it reduced in size and the ability to run the fuel cells is the main purpose or goal. The fuel cell efficiency will more than make up for any losses if any. I suspect there will be gains across the entire process.
8 Likes
here is what steve u said about n2 way back when

Steve Unruh
Aug '14
Hi All
A new “good” gases topic to chew on.
Since the DOW is dedicated to “Drive On Wood” and “Power On Wood” then woodgasification is all about making useable shaft power with the woodgas.
From a today practical stand point then you are going to be making this shaft power with one of the today far over existing in-place 10,000,000,000 (10 BILLION +) piston internal combustion engines already on the face of the planet.
NO need for a new woo-woo engine at all.
Expansion gases to push that piston down to make shaft power are not just the commonly accepted combustible gases.
Expansion gases are the uncombusted and un-readably combustable/oxidizable gases of nitrogen primarily; carbon dioxide second; then trace argon, and such. H2O “water” plays parts in-cylinder too.
These “good Witches” gases get a bad rap in the gasification part of it. Well . . . screw that noise says engine guy ME!
In the actual IC piston engine these good Witches gasses get heated. They expand greatly. Pushing onto the face of the engine pistons greatly. (A Stirling cycle engine relies Exclusively on these - piston steam too)
If you have a gases empty cylinder and heat it - NO PRESSURE RISE OCCURES!
A moveable piston on one end of that cylinder will not be usefully moved at all!
You will just be heating the cylinder walls and piston materials for no shaft power making benefits.
So not interested in making complex chemicals but in realistic making shafts go around for a purpose to make useable power . . . Time To Stop Hating Nitrogen and Carbon Dioxide but praise them for combustion heat absorbing and expansion pressure pushing on those pistons!!
Much more on this if there is an interest.
Steve Unruh “the engine guy”

Tuyere-less charcoal gassers

created
Aug '14
last reply
Aug '1433
replies

Steve Unruh
Aug '14
I
6 Likes
Yes correct, Keep in mind this is for the gasification process and not for the engine. For development purposes, I will use a small engine in place of the SOFC until we can afford one plus get this dialed in long before that implementation. The engine is still going to be fed atmospheric air nothing changes here, it will get a healthy dose of N2 for combustion process. The gas will just be much more potent.
I would not call an SOFC a woo woo engine. This technology has been around a long time and is cutting edge. Its nearly 4 times as efficient as the small engines I am using today. The reason its not more main stream is the infrastructure is not there to support it. I may become that infrastructure; at least for this application. This will allow for major size reductions, and will be much quieter in operation. This has the potential of being much more powerful pr size and weight along with the potential of major over all efficiency gains. The fuel cell technologies are getting down in cost and would eliminate a lot of the controls involved required for commercial available units. The challenge for me, is building a machine that is small and compact but yet it has to produce usable power. So off the shelf generators dont work. The engines need to be ramped up to produce a higher power curve to make up for the energy losses. This adds extra cost. All this if eliminated more than justifies swapping the engine out for the fuel cell. There is a ton of labor that would simply go away as the engine generators involve a bit of work to assemble, wire up, tune and control. At the end of the day I think the fuel cell will actually cost less; however, this will require additional processes in filtration as tar must never ever ever be introduced into the cell. So Im up for that challenge as well. Production turn around time should have major improvements as well.
None of this has ever been done before at least not as far as im aware of. Until something is actually built we can only speculate the outcome. Critical thinking and analysis, is great; however, this should not stop one from attempting further development. Just because some says “X” is going to happen? I would ask. How do you know for 100% certainty “X” is going to happen? How do we know that there are not other factors that could come into play. How do we know we can not correct something with a negative impact and replace it with something with a positive impact?
We have come a great distance with current technology. Whether you are a DIYer, developer, builder or manufacture we have all made great strides forward in the last 10 or so years. This has come from innovative thinking and experimentation. This has come with failure and triumph!!. However, we would have never made any of these mile stones if we did not just simply built it and perfect it.
Is current technology perfect? My answer is absolutely not not even close!! We are hardly achieving 25% efficiency to the shaft. The systems are loud, require a ton of automation to make a stand alone system run like a gasoline counter part. The user has to remove char ash daily. clean the fitlers, trouble shoot when things go wrong, operation on less automated system is not for the average Joe. etc.
For a commercial system to be viable, first is we need to get cost down, we need to be able produce faster and do so in a systematic manufacturing process. (no one to date can do this) the machines must be push button operated or at the very least as simple as a gasoline generator. The thing I hear over and over is the clients dont want to deal with the char. Some that compost want it but majority do not. The machines need to be compact for shipment, shipping cost is getting more and more expensive. This list goes on and on.
6 Likes
Matt, Would you think a system using fuel cells would be lower cost in the long run because engine overhauls would be eliminated?
Rindert
3 Likes
Longevity of the cells I dont know yet. Im sure it will depend on what cell we end up with, so I would hate to speculate on that. From what I understand the fuel cells have a cycle life, just like a battery. So this is why the development will focus on a system that will run 24/7. It can not cycle if we never shut it down right? If our gas is clean enough and has no effect to deterioration of the cells, than I would expect the cells to last well beyond these little engines.
Ultimately longevity will be part of the criteria for development.
4 Likes
I assume you looked into TEGs (thermoelectric generators) and they a way more expensive?
Rindert
3 Likes
Yeah If bought and experimented and even made them. They are very inefficient, only 5% conversion rate and yes very expensive.
4 Likes
I just emailed Alfred at Applied Thermoelectric Solutions to get an update on efficiency rates and cost pr watt. We have sort of bumped heads a bit so Im not sure if he will reply. We were going to enter a contest and I was going to supply the stove tech, but I was also supposed to buy the TEG’s. I did not feel that was fair. I supply the stove you supply the tech it was supposed to be a partnership. So anyways they seem to be one of the leaders in TEG tech, so I will await his reply. Otherwise there is a company that is also in Mich in Traverse City I may contact…
3 Likes
Sounds typical of so called leading edge technology. I ran into that kind of thing with Stirling engines and NiTi engines. Somebody wants you to fund their research. I guess they couldn’t get a grant. So now I know what category to put TEGs in. 
Rindert
4 Likes
Did a night run tonight to check out the flare on the FPS. Uploading another one showing a condensed version of the flare auto ignition now.
7 Likes
Hi Matt,
i just received my sensors for NO, NOX, NO2 and SO2 and doing some tests…
i will post some pictures later on, but i have already some interesting baseline to look for.
First picture is exhaust from the test generator running on gasoline, unmodified.
Later i will post test results from gas quality before it goes in the engine and after the exhaustgas under different conditions
it looks that we can achieve cleaner exhaust output, but i have to go deep into this and provide good data to compare.
10 Likes
Would this be the result of lower flame temperature in the combustion chamber?
Rindert
3 Likes