Kevin Olson

William Bronson wrote:Kevin, I love those stoves!
Home heating that produces charcoal is my jam!
This video introduced me to the product:

Yes, this one "set the hook" for me, but what "reeled me in" was his conversion of a wood burning cook stove to a pellet gasifier:



There are a zillion old cook stoves around my neck of the woods.  Conversion to a cleaner and more efficient combustion method seems worthwhile, if only from the vantage of reduction of fire hazard.

I don't know that Alex's thermal mass heaters are really intended to produce charcoal.  But, since both the primary and secondary draft controls are within the operator's purview (throttle and mixture), tailoring combustion toward residual charcoal should be possible.

It might be possible to construct a 5-channel contraflow insert to fit in the available space.  This sounds like a very tricky proposition, however.

I am currently working through Axel Berberich's online course/tutorial (offered through Bosco di Ogigia) on building a pyrolyzing gasifier stove, using homemade precast refractory parts (and some metal bits, too).  My primary interest in his course is that he discusses somewhat peripherally the conversion of wood cook stoves to gasifier burners.  Old wood burning cook stoves in serviceable (if not pristine) condition are typically available in my area for between 100 and 200 USD, but sometimes can be had free for the hauling (I got a kitchen end heater that way - rolled it away on an appliance dolly!).  Anyway, I would suspect that you could, with care, make up molds for pieces to fit up into the existing fireplace's firebox and smoke chamber to define the contraflow channels.  Axel recommends a mix of high alumina refractory cement and vermiculite for the precast pieces.  One time molds might be made from scraps of wood, sheet metal flashing, cardboard mailing tubes or sonotubes, etc.   He glues the pieces together with a mix of fire clay and sand, similar to how most thermal mass heaters made from bricks are mortared together.  But, is all of this worth it?  I don't know.  It would be a reversible conversion, though, if done with care, so might do minimal if any violence to the architectural integrity of the house.

Another thought would be to make a firebox insert which converts it into more of a radiant fireplace, Rumford style.  That might be easier, and should get more heat out into the room.  There are lots of modern interpretations of Count Rumford's fireplace.  My recommendation is to chase down his book (I have found it on Archive,org in the past), give that a read, then see what some of the modern proponents have to say about it.  At least you'll understand the problem he was trying to solve (not so different from your inefficient fire place) and what he did to improve matters, and you can better assess the modern versions.  You could pre-cast some Rumfordizing parts, too, though fitting the traditional lintel and throat into the Kiva style fireplace might also be tricky.

Thanks for posting this.  I tried to grow early-planted winter Banatka wheat this year (Bonfils), but it failed to germinate - twice.  By reputation, Banatka should be prone to germinating in the head due to an inopportunely timed rain event, so I think this wheat is kaput.  I'll get another sample of heritage long straw wheat to try.  Barley, winter rye and buckwheat can all be grown where I am, as well as winter lentils.  All of which I hope to try within the next year or two.  A threshing machine will be indispensable when the project comes to (literal) fruition.

Thanks again.

Re lubrication of shafts: goose fat, bear grease, lard and bees wax would all be traditional lubricants, and probably beef or mutton tallow, too.  White tail deer fat is quite solid at room temp - high in stearine? - and might tend to stay put fairly well, too, though I've never tried it.  I don't know under what circumstances each of these should best be used, however.  But, I have successfully used bees wax for low speed bearing surfaces - wooden drawer slides, window sash, etc.

This video popped unbidden into my YT feed ("I'm the eye in the sky...I can read your mind"):

I might quibble with, or refine, a few of the details, but for a general overview of rubble trench foundations, it's pretty good.  She references other videos, including a wall structure video, which I'll now have to watch.  One thing leads to another...

She was apparently prompted to chase down these historic vernacular construction methods and details due to mold allergies in a too-tight and too-damp modern structure, if I understood correctly.

If using a fan, then these may basically be an "inside out" version of the T. B. Reed et al "Turbo Wood-gas Stove" TLUDs.

I've tinkered with natural draft TLUD stoves made from soup cans, but combustion wasn't particularly stable - they were either "up on plane" and burning cleanly, or were smokey and drafting poorly.  A small shift in the fuel load as it settled during combustion was enough to upset the apple cart, though I never tried fueling them with pellets, which would have a more consistent particle size and likely a more consistent draft and settling behavior.  The small branches and twigs I was using, cut up into short lengths, also probably had variable moisture content.  The small diameter burn chamber (and especially relative to the characteristic size of the fuel load) really was rather twitchy.

I suspect that a small forced draft fan (as I recall, Reed spec'd a 3 watt model) would probably help to ensure more stable combustion with a less consistent fuel.  I'd think the same would be true of small inside-out TLUD-ish stoves like these reactive stoves.

The bubafonya stoves are another Russian (Siberian) development, though not a gasifier, and so less clean-burning, as best I can tell.  But, they are pretty low tech, and long burning.

I'm currently working through the Alex Berberich online course (through Bosco di Ogigia) for constructing a pyrolyzing gasifier thermal mass heater.  Fancier burners than these reactive stoves, and definitely not a rocket, but still basically a TLUD, though relying on a chimney for draft.

Cristobal -

Thanks for sharing your build.  The in-process photos are a great help to understand what you did.

I have a skid of salvaged red brick from my sister's house reno project, waiting for me to turn them into a bread oven.  I like the two chamber arrangement, somewhat like a Scotch oven, so that the upper chamber could be re-heated by a fire in the lower chamber, if necessary, and could allow for the upper chamber to be a smoker, as well.

Lots to think about...

Thanks again,

Kevin

Here's the pedal (well, more like stirrups, as I recall) powered version of a yuloh I was remembering (note the "h", at the end of "yuloh", and no space - I had apparently misspelled the transliterated term, earlier; thankfully, Google can interpret my errors!):

I think I have a brief verbal description of the mechanics of this arrangement - somewhere...

A more standard yuloh in use, exiting a dock/marina:


I'll see if I can track down the "recipes" I found for sizing the sweep to the vessel, shaping the blade, the angle of the "kink" in the loom, etc.  The apocryphal story of the diminutive South Asian grandmother, perhaps with a grandbaby slung on her back, moving a heavily loaded sampan through a crowded anchorage, bespeak the efficiency of these sculling oars, in well-practiced hands.  Because of the geometry, most of the work can be done by leaning/hanging the operator's body weight on the oar, with the downhaul rope resisting the thrust component of the hydrodynamic lift generated as the blade slices through the water, rocking about the stern pivot to change the angle of attack to match the direction of waggle.

A painting of a (Japanese?...I think so) ship with multiple ro or yuloh sculling oars:


I have no direct experience with these sculls, but it appears to be one of the better human propulsion means for small ( a few tons or less displacement) watercraft.  I don't know how early these originated, but there is, at least, several hundred years of precedent for their use.

Andrew -

Could you post a photo or two of the modified mill?  I think I mostly followed your verbal description, but am a little fuzzy on the details of regrinding the burr plate.  A picture worth a thousand words, etc.

Perhaps we could also explain, for those who are unacquainted, that Prussian blue is a chemical precipitate, blue in color, which has a fairly tight distribution of particle sizes.  It makes a very nice blue oil paint when mixed in an oil carrier, but is used by mechanics and machinists to check fits between parts, to very close tolerances (due to the small particle size) in places where you can't otherwise see or measure.  Practically, one smears a thin layer on one of the parts, places the parts in contact, separates the parts, and then looks for places the blue paint transferred from one piece to the other.  The locations with blue on them are high spots, which can be removed (by grinding, hand scraping or whatever), then it's lather-rinse-repeat.

We just used this process at work a couple of weeks ago to ensure that the telemetry pack we were fitting to a gear (actually, several of them) only touched at the intended mounting locations and nowhere else.  After discussing with the machinist, we decided that this was the surest way of verifying that we had sufficiently cleaned up the rough forged surface of the gear webs.

Using Prussian blue is old fashioned tech, but is still very useful (if a bit messy - the Prussian blue tends to get everywhere if you aren't careful).  There are other "transfer media" (as Prussian blue is classified) as well - compounds of chromium and lead, finely ground - but Prussian blue is a common, non-toxic one.  For very close fitting of parts (to millionths of an inch) I've seen references in old (WWI era) machinist's manuals to using naphtha as the transfer medium (which will evaporate, so quick work is needed).  Surprisingly, with skilled hands (which I personally don't have), a good scraping hand can work to precision tolerances which far exceed the precision for commonly available machine tools, entirely by hand methods.  If anyone is curious about this, I can recommend tracking down a copy of "Foundations of Mechanical Accuracy" by Moore, which will provide more than enough for even most engineers on the process of bootstrapping mechanical precision from nothing.

I don't see a whole lot of traffic on these forums about small watercraft - sailing vessels; oar, scull or sweep powered; current powered river ferries; towpath barges; or even propeller or paddle wheel driven boats.  Admittedly, current ferries and towpath barges require very specific circumstances.

I know Ernie and Erica Wisner have experience with blue water voyaging.  There are probably others who haunt the forums, too, but I just don't see much discussion here about boats.

We have a pair of short (10 foot) kayaks - just for puddling around, not proper sea kayaks, or anything.  I have a ~19 -foot Grumman Sport Boat (a square-sterned wide canoe, rated at 1100 lbs burden) waiting for me to collect it from a friend.  My brother acquired most or all of a sail rig for a Sport Boat in some complicated horse trade, it has a pair of oarlocks, and a transom that can take a motor.  An outrigger or sponsons (or even both) are probably not a bad idea with the sail rig, at least until I get my sea legs!  Some of the folks who run these on rivers in Alaska have been using longtail mud motors to push them upriver for moose hunts, cabin repair supplies, etc.  A set of retractable portage wheels, of the type made popular by a couple of shops on the Minnesota Iron Range (Evelyth, maybe?), for use in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area (where permissible), could be useful under some circumstances.

I have collected some info on sizing and constructing a "ro" or "yu lo" type of sweep oar - traditional auxiliary power for boats in East Asia, from Japan to Vietnam and beyond.  Pedal powered versions of these are possible.  If I can find the video on YT, I'll post a link to just such a setup, in use somewhere in England.  The Grumman Sport Boat could, I think, be easily driven with a ro/yu lo type of stern sweep.

The "chine runner" keel-less small sailboats, originated by Matt Layden, and subsequently developed by others, too, are another technology which is very interesting, making surprisingly small and shoal draft sail boats remarkably capable off shore.

On "the list" is to (eventually) build a John Welsford-designed SCAMP sub-12-foot plywood sailboat.  They are very seaworthy for the size, and absolute tanks, if well constructed.  Howard Rice, a very experienced small boat sailor in blue water, attempted to sail through the Strait of Magellan with a specially outfitted one, got chucked up on a small island in a storm, was rescued by the Chilean Coast Guard, and later returned in better weather to retrieve the largely undamaged boat (which is now in a museum in Sheboygan, Wisconsin, if I recall correctly, though I haven't yet been to see it).  Howard has made a number of sailing canoe voyages between islands in Micronesia, and took a canoe through the Strait of Magellan.  Gnarly.

I also have some stuff on designing and building junk rigs for sail boats, somewhere in the stash of stuff.  Hassler and McLeod's "Practical Junk Rig" is a bit dated, but is still the English language go-to resource, as far as I am aware.

Another interesting sailing technology is the multiple dagger board sailing rafts, historically used along the Pacific coast of South America.  Thor Heyerdahl had some information in his book "Kon Tiki" (whatever you might think of his hypothesis) on how to manipulate the dagger boards to tack and to sail both on and off the wind.  Heyerdahl also highlighted the reed sailing boats of the Nile and lower Euphrates Rivers, and Lake Titicaca in "Ra".  The Nile style of these vessels used a pair of shear legs for a mast, rather than a single "stick".

I am no sailor, though I've done a bit of sailing, and have generally puddled about in small boats, made a couple of 10 day canoe trips, etc.  And, as we know from "The Wind in the Willows", there is nothing half so much worth doing as messing about in boats!

For some tasks, a scythe with a brush blade might do the trick, but I don't think that's a proper replacement for the longknife, in general.  They're different tools, with only some overlap.

As mentioned upthread, I too have a kukri style blade (a Becker Knife and Tool Machax), but as with the scythe, there is only some functional overlap with the longknife.  The kukri blades are short enough that a slip might gash your shin - even knee or thigh.  Paradoxically, as with axes, sometimes the longer tool is actually safer, because it's likely that the end of the tool will contact something else before the blade reaches the user.  The Machax is a passable draw knife, in a pinch, however, and can do some of the things a hatchet can do.

Unfortunately, I don't know of a better source for  the longknife style of tool.  It seems like an Asian tool manufacturer or vendor might be a good bet, but I have no idea what keyword(s) to use.