The heat riser is nowhere near tall
enough in proportion to the burn tunnel and feed tube. As the standard recommendation is to keep the same system cross section, the riser so much bigger than burn tunnel may be a problem. I don't think the proposed design would work even tolerably well.
You are proposing a truly tiny unit, and the design does not scale down the way you might think. First, a 3" system is not 1/2 of a 6" system, it is 1/4 of the size in terms of area for combustion, and there are surface effects which reduce the effective flow area that do not scale down. Thus, subtracting say 1/2" from all surfaces for friction/drag effects (purely an example, not proven quantities), you have a 5" diameter compared to a 2" diameter, or 19+ square inches vs. 3+ square inches. Given the low insulation values of most trailers, you probably want more than 1/6 of the heat you could get from a 6" system.
I would suggest at least a 4" system, with the caution that a system even that small is considered very tricky to get right. You would probably want to use longer lengths proportional to a large system, as
wood flames take a certain amount of time in the hot part of the combustion zone to finish burning, and a small system scaled directly would have less dwell time and poorer combustion. I would keep the burn tunnel as short as you can make it and maintain functional access, with the feed tube 1/4 of the heat riser height. This
should maximize the positive chimney effect. For a minimal compact 4" system, I would try a 9" feed tube, about 14" burn tunnel, and 36" heat riser (all measured at the outer edges). A taller riser is not going to detract from the space, as you can't use the space directly above it anyway.
I would try a 2" insulation jacket around the riser (8" o.d.), a minimum 1" air space all around (airflow will be slower in this zone so the surface effects will be lessened), and a minimum 10" diameter "barrel". Given the space constraints, I think putting some thermal mass on the barrel sides would reduce the hot surface danger while still allowing radiation. Maybe split firebrick (4 1/2 x 9 x 1 1/4" thick) bedded in
cob around the barrel and wired/banded in place would work.
A small system is more susceptible than a large one to surface conduction and radiation losses, and I think metal, even aside from the fact that it will have a short lifespan in the combustion zone of a well-functioning
RMH, would rob more heat than you want. Weight is also a consideration for a trailer. You want everything but the mass to be as light as possible.
Water heat storage is desirable but can be dangerous, so I wouldn't try that unless you have an engineering background and understand the safety factors thoroughly. I would suggest a castable insulating refractory combustion core, cast inside a metal box for rigidity in traveling. The small quantity needed for a system this size shouldn't be too expensive, probably one bag at around $50. Make an inner form of thin wood that can burn out, and the casting process shouldn't be too hard.
Lots more can be said. What are your thoughts at this point?