The answer to the question you ask me is this. The char that is produced in a TLUD stove is removed and is NOT used in any burning that relates to the TLUD stove that made it. The char comes out. Where it goes is not an issue here.
I thank you for your EXCELLENT comments. Informative. Long, but that is a compliment. Something useful was written.
However, your reply still does not address my question about char values (weight or energy) being used in all those other stove testing methods. I await an answer.
Your comments about about big systems was interesting:
As far as I know, in general all tests of thermal performance such as power stations, fixed boilers, heating stoves and cooking stoves in the formal sector treat solid resides with energy content remaining as a ‘mechanical loss’. That is the definition of a mechanical: unburned fuel that could in theory have been burned but was not, and is left at the end.
But, really, in the situation of cookstoves, what the formal sector with billions of dollars does is only of passing interest. “Mechanical loss” is something like the smear of food remaining on a dinner plate after a hearty meal. Just wash it off, dry the plate, and life goes on.
However, in the cookstove world, where char is INTENTIONALLY CREATED AND SAVED, it is not a mechanical loss. It is a purposeful gain, something that is desired. Or at least not to be used as a penalty, as a way to make the stove appear less desirable.
I have been reading Ron’s replies to Xavier and to Crispin. The WBT might be terrible, horrible, worse than no test at all, as judged by some errors. BUT TO GIVE CREDIT FOR CHARCOAL AS “UN-USED ENERGY” IS NOT AN ERROR, especially when the char is in such a significant quantity and is intentionally made and gathered.
Unless better evidence is provided, please do not use the calculations involving charcoal (subtraction in the denominator) as a major arguement against the WBT.
And:
The question remains,
I would greatly appreciate some knowledgeable comments about how THOSE OTHER TESTS handle the issue of charcoal that is left in the stoves. Is there some agreement between those many tests?
Paul
Doc / Dr TLUD / Prof. Paul S. Anderson, PhD
YTOPR01MB023513C73F13725486397A86B1720@YTOPR01MB0235.CANPRD01.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM” type=”cite”>
Dear PaulAs far as I know, in general all tests of thermal performance such as power stations, fixed boilers, heating stoves and cooking stoves in the formal sector treat solid resides with energy content remaining as a ‘mechanical loss’. That is the definition of a mechanical: unburned fuel that could in theory have been burned but was not, and is left at the end. The exceptions to this, in terms of rating the thermal efficiency, are the WBT and it’s derivatives such as the Enhanced Precision Test Protocol and it’s later evolution.