r ranson wrote:
Devon Viola wrote:The thumbnail you started with is the best one!
I worried it was too busy as I was sketching in pen and instead of crossing things out, I just added new ideas on top.
For example, it was just one sheep, I just kept putting it in different spots so now it looks like many sheeps.
I'm punishing myself right now for not doing a very important time sensitive task and I'm not allowed to draw or paint again until I finish it.
Once that's done, I'll play with some more ideas and see if I'm getting better or further away from the goal.
thinking about this some more, I am starting to understand why I'm struggling with composition so much.
In photography and filming, it's about exclusion. I remove all the unwanted pieces of reality and keep only the perfect reality inside the frame.
With art, it's about adding. Creating stuff to go inside the frame. That's a lot harder for my brain to understand.
Justin Hadden wrote:
C. Letellier wrote:Actually time is taken into account 2 ways. The thermal mass acts as a battery giving the heat long term to the home. Height of the heat riser generating a sufficient burn time. And it isn't really an oxygen rich flame. The physical structure acts to limit it to just barely oxygen rich flame. Look at the NOx data. On oxygen rich flame generates lots of NOx. A RMH running properly produces very little.
You can't make the thermal mass the T for time. We're talking about combustion only. The thermal mass has nothing to do with the combustion process, only the heat storage process. Granted the heat riser does add time, but it also adds height and takes up space in the home. The thing i was trying to get to was something that could be used by people that can't have an rmh in their home. If you cant have a big thermal mass in your home, than the only other option is slow the burn even more so that it can have more time to radiate into the room before exiting the flue.
By design an rocket uses wide open air, obviously you can't choke this off to try and slow it down otherwise we end up with a smoky and dirty burn. What about somehow controlling the fuel supply? Just as a diesel engine has wide open air at all times by design, it controls its fuel quantity instead to throttle things. What if somehow we could expose less fuel to our wide open air in order to have a slower yet still complete burn, by not throttling our air we would always have ample supply to complete combustion, no idea how it would be done, just thinking out loud.
T Simpson wrote:I've mentioned using Tesla valves in the system to slow exhaust in another post but the consensus was that may restrict air pressure too much; to my knowledge, nobody has actually tried it yet.
Maybe I'll give it a go, I'll be visiting Wheaton Labs this October.