read first

[admin]

this board is available to provide access to the SOMRAD group for the purposes of asking a question(s) by those regular members
that are not members of SOMRAD.  the goal is to make the SOMRAD group accessible to every member so that questions can be asked in a place where they do not interfere with the project development flow of the other boards.

it is understood that the SOMRAD members will try to respond to question posted here, but there is no guarantee that they will do so for various reasons, such as... maybe the member doesn't report on a daily basis perhaps only weekly or biweekly, and they have limited time?
or perhaps the info you seek is proprietary? or maybe they just missed it?

every effort is going to be made, to make this work!

the SOMRAD catagory exists to satisfy the requirements of the EPA's annual report and as a repository of information on cogen system development that everyone might gain from.

so lets see what each of us can do to make this a reality, something positive and something that will work.

[Crofter]

Bob, in regard to the post that an opportunity is being missed  ~ time running out ect. I wonder if signing up is somewhat intimidating because of the build up. I am following with interest such posts as yours about criteria for selecting a core engine for an aprovable system and like the targets but see some of them as pretty darned optimistic.
I have some thoughts on what might be game killers for any system from the EPA's perspective. (like how sealed it must be to owner tampering or qualifications for service persons, need for contracted and documented servicing action,etc) I have reservations about the utility of such a setup unless it is dead simple in operation to any would be home owner. Now I know you personally have a lot of tolerance for mechanical frustration but that is like common sense - not all that common.

Because I am not contemplating building a co gen system at the moment, I thought signing up a bit presumptuous, yet short of signing up, input is limited. I dont think the $15 membership fee is a deterrent as much as the suggested credentials for would members.

There are probably members on the broader forum who are familiar with internet strategy of getting the word to potential contributors, but perhaps that is already in action. I think the mechanics of building a system is not near the problem as pre identifying the necessary controls, safeguards, testing, documenting etc. My guess is that the person who is an expert at visualizing the regulatory eyes and tees to dot and cross is going to be crucial to the game plan.

Maybe someone else has some ideas about what notes need to be struck next?

[Crumpite]

Bob, in regard to the post that an opportunity is being missed  ~ time running out ect. I wonder if signing up is somewhat intimidating because of the build up. I am following with interest such posts as yours about criteria for selecting a core engine for an aprovable system and like the targets but see some of them as pretty darned optimistic.

Very true about the optimisim, but we need to set the targets high enough that we don't miss what's really possible.
We'll find out soon enough what the practical limits really are, but at this point we're still blueskying.

I have some thoughts on what might be game killers for any system from the EPA's perspective. (like how sealed it must be to owner tampering or qualifications for service persons, need for contracted and documented servicing action,etc) I have reservations about the utility of such a setup unless it is dead simple in operation to any would be home owner. Now I know you personally have a lot of tolerance for mechanical frustration but that is like common sense - not all that common.

You have to remember that our systems are the first experimental generation of what should become a common system in the future.
Part of the process will be identifying the problem areas and designing in durability and maintanability.
After we come up with what looks like a possible comercial system we can look more deeply at these matters.
I agree we need to keep these points firmly in mind during the design process.

Because I am not contemplating building a co gen system at the moment, I thought signing up a bit presumptuous, yet short of signing up, input is limited. I dont think the $15 membership fee is a deterrent as much as the suggested credentials for would members.

I guess I missed the part about the credentials, could you please point out where it's at?
Any kind of elitism expressed or implied is very bad, I agree !

There are probably members on the broader forum who are familiar with internet strategy of getting the word to potential contributors, but perhaps that is already in action. I think the mechanics of building a system is not near the problem as pre identifying the necessary controls, safeguards, testing, documenting etc. My guess is that the person who is an expert at visualizing the regulatory eyes and tees to dot and cross is going to be crucial to the game plan.

Agreed !

Maybe someone else has some ideas about what notes need to be struck next?

I agree that I don't see enough details as to what's happining/about to happen with with society.
Perhaps a mission statement (shudder, shorn of all corporate BS) might help ?

[cschuerm]

My perspective may differ a little simply due to my profession.  I see the "core" technologies as a bunch of puzzle pieces which already exist but need an organizing architecture and control system before they can come together as a viable system.  The component level parts (prime mover, heat exchangers, alternative fuel filtration systems, power control devices, etc) appear to be largely mature science (though prohibitively expensive currently).  My focus is an overall control system which can seamlessly integrate a variety of energy sources (thermal, electrical, and mechanical) into such a smoothly combined "system" that it's operation is transparent to a casual end user.  This intelligence is where I feel current product offerings and hobby projects lack any significant maturity.
Living in Oklahoma, my energy requirements for comfortable modern living vary greatly throughout the year.  In the winter, my electrical use is very small and my heating needs are met with a combination of wood and propane heat.  Were I generating electricity with heat as a byproduct, the wood/gas need would be almost zero.  In the summer, my electrical needs are substantial, but any heat byproduct would be a waste.  If I could generate electricity with "cold" as a byproduct, my utility needs would be pretty small.  I'm thinking a micro cogen system with a mechanically driven a/c compressor and a DC generator/inverter package with substantial automation could be efficient enough to minimize daily run-time to the point that it's financially interesting.

BTW Bob, I cannot post to any of the member-only groups yet.  I'm guessing you have not received my membership payment yet?

cheers,
Chris

[Crofter]

<Snip>  I see the "core" technologies as a bunch of puzzle pieces which already exist but need an organizing architecture and control system before they can come together as a viable system.  The component level parts  appear to be largely mature science .......My focus......control system ....seamlessly integrate ..... into such a smoothly combined "system" that it's operation is transparent to a casual end user. <snip>
.

cheers,
Chris

Chris, my apology for mutilating your post! You identify some very real problems much more clearly than what I was mumbling about. I have seen some good mechanical engineering come to naught because of the lack of total concept presentation. It has to be user friendly and incorporate flexibility so it doesn't get dead ended when the next tighter regulation comes along. Potential liability and reliability issues must be considered. Engineers and mechanics seem to have the propensity to complicate things sometimes; perhaps it is job security!    They need other disciplines on the team with them in todays market.

Marketing strategy and anticipating regulations is a big part of the picture. I am not sure that a homeowner IC engine cogen is economically doable (marketable) alternative but certainly will be an interesting idea to contemplate. There is probably a fair bit of paid R&D going on in the field. Maybe it is a bit defeatist but I dont think we are about to get the jump on anything big.

Crumpite, not sure there are direct references to creating an atmosphere of elitism or that was just my personal take; some words though about "signal to noise ratio" on an open forum.

[Crumpite]

My perspective may differ a little simply due to my profession.  I see the "core" technologies as a bunch of puzzle pieces which already exist but need an organizing architecture and control system before they can come together as a viable system.  The component level parts (prime mover, heat exchangers, alternative fuel filtration systems, power control devices, etc) appear to be largely mature science (though prohibitively expensive currently).  My focus is an overall control system which can seamlessly integrate a variety of energy sources (thermal, electrical, and mechanical) into such a smoothly combined "system" that it's operation is transparent to a casual end user.  This intelligence is where I feel current product offerings and hobby projects lack any significant maturity.
Living in Oklahoma, my energy requirements for comfortable modern living vary greatly throughout the year.  In the winter, my electrical use is very small and my heating needs are met with a combination of wood and propane heat.  Were I generating electricity with heat as a byproduct, the wood/gas need would be almost zero.  In the summer, my electrical needs are substantial, but any heat byproduct would be a waste.  If I could generate electricity with "cold" as a byproduct, my utility needs would be pretty small.  I'm thinking a micro cogen system with a mechanically driven a/c compressor and a DC generator/inverter package with substantial automation could be efficient enough to minimize daily run-time to the point that it's financially interesting.

BTW Bob, I cannot post to any of the member-only groups yet.  I'm guessing you have not received my membership payment yet?

cheers,
Chris

Interesting !
I see it as quite the opposite.
I really don't see any prime movers of the proper size and efficiency. They are difficult to fuel on alternative fuels and difficult to extract the heat properly.
Diesels still produce too much soot for existing heat exchangers. Life is too short and they are difficult to rebuild.
Generators are primitive, inefficient and difficult to control and interface to the power net.

I visualize a commercial system that tightly integrates the motor, generator, heat extraction and control system into a package a lot like the present hot water boiler systems.
Just like them in fact, except power flows out, not in.
It would mount outside on a pad just like present air conditioning compressor systems.

Power interface technology's are starting to mature with the alternative energy boom, but are still inadequate in the flexibility needed for "seamless integration"
I've done a lot of control system programming and I see the control systems as a mature technology that can cheaply and easily be integrated into a home CHP system.
The problem is that every system is completely different in its needs and thus the design and execution.
That makes it very hard to standardize a control system. A commercial system would be a piece of cake.

As Bob has pointed out, a house sized absorption air conditioning system is really needed for CHP units where air conditioning is needed just as much as heat.
All present systems that I can find are sized for very large buildings.

All of this is technologically possible, but not being researched at the micro CHP level, at least that I'm aware of.
Of course, any company's that were would be keeping their mouths shut to keep their potential competitors at bay.

I fully believe that a commercial home CHP system at a price point that would sell is doable.
Just my 2 cents worth,
Crumpite

[cschuerm]

Sounds to me like we actually agree more than it might appear at first blush Crumpite.  More a matter of detail level.  For example, I certainly agree that there are not good IC engine choices available right now.  Actually, Arrow's slow speed industrial one and two cylinder models are probably an outstanding technical solution, but they are priced for an industrial market.  I see a LOT of them in this area and drool over them every time.  They're really a modern incarnation of what the Lister's were in their day.  I've been contemplating a from scratch engine design, but utilizing as many common parts as possible.  Imagine something lister-like but using standard Cummins (Dodge RAM) cylinder sleeves , pistons, valves, etc.  (and plenty of other readily available items).  I think we could end up with a good final design which would be far less expensive and easily maintainable but built with very high quality components.  The basic castings would be the key, but that's ancient tech.  The soot issues _appear_ be have largely been solved with modern engines.  An exhaust heat-x is still going to have some issues, but I am sure with some good engineering (and a reasonable dev budget) solutions could be found.
I also agree that a highly automated, tightly integrated, user friendly package is the key to any large-scale adoption.  I'm under no delusion that there will ever be a one-size-fits-all box, but I think that a properly engineered hardware platform (with various options) and a very well designed and flexible control system could get a long ways towards that goal.

cheers,
chris

[Crumpite]

Chris,
Well, I guess we do agree a lot then. 

The Arrow and Ajax engines are indeed the US version of the Listers.
I love them too, but from what little I've seen of the prices, Yikes !
When I looked at them years ago they were about four times the price of a listeroid of comparable Hp.
I'd like to see what they run now days.

Are any of the oil field engines diesels ?
All of the modern ones I see are fueled on well head gas or somesuch.
I'm not stuck on diesels, but they seem to have the best efficiency coupled with the ability to use lesser grade fuels.
As I live on a small farm out in farming country, I'm pretty interested in the ability to grow oil crops for fuel.

I'm pretty sure that once a good prime mover design is developed, China or India would be very happy to make them up by the millions !

Well, I'm off for bed. I'm pooped. 
I spent most of the day working on my CHP unit again - there are a lot of little niggling details yet to do.
I hope to be running in a non-heat recovery mode in a week.
Crumpite

[EBI-WPO]

<Imagine something lister-like but using standard Cummins (Dodge RAM) cylinder sleeves , pistons, valves, etc.  (and plenty of other readily available items)>

Cylinder sleeves are a rare bird in Dodge Rams, only used when the block is damaged.The piston design would be happier with Cummins injectors also (then the IP,....) Utilizing large displacement parts is a useful way of "creating" single or two cylinder engines though. I'll bet with Turbo over the blower, a 2 cylinder detroit would handle alternative fuels well. They were too "Dirty" for the EPA, but careful loading/RPM control and loads of boost may make it "clean enough"

Terry

[mobile_bob]

Crofter/Frank

sorry i missed this post, i will try to address your concerns as best i can.

"Bob, in regard to the post that an opportunity is being missed  ~ time running out ect. I wonder if signing up is somewhat intimidating because of the build up."

i have no intention of hyping anything or making things intimidating, if that is how it comes off, my apologies to everyone


"I am following with interest such posts as yours about criteria for selecting a core engine for an approvable system and like the targets but see some of them as pretty darned optimistic."

this on first glance looks very optimistic, until  you consider that the core prime mover is graded differently than it would otherwise be
for use as a single purpose unit, the epa recognizes that the cogen prime mover has much lower emissions by virtue of more work per unit
of fuel or rather per unit of emissions than the same prime mover would have powering a single purpose project like a simple genset.

if we do a good job of harvesting the heat, and get credit for doing so (which we can so long as that heat is put to use to offset heat that would otherwise have to be generated by a furnace or boiler) then we can effectively cut the emissions of a prime mover to anywhere from 25-33% of
what it would be if it was simply powering a generator. that is a dramatic reduction in emissions without doing anything other than using the prime mover in a cogen rather than a simple genset.


"I have some thoughts on what might be game killers for any system from the EPA's perspective. (like how sealed it must be to owner tampering or qualifications for service persons, need for contracted and documented servicing action,etc) I have reservations about the utility of such a setup unless it is dead simple in operation to any would be home owner. Now I know you personally have a lot of tolerance for mechanical frustration but that is like common sense - not all that common."

any commercial offering would have to have a sealed system that would basically shut down and refuse to run should someone tamper with the system, or try and run it outside its approved parameters. what we are allowed within the constraints of the partnership is fairly clear, and so long
as the system is operated in a compliant manner, and provided the annual reports are filed, there should be no issues. non compliance likely would result in a decertification or a letter of non compliance and the unit would have to be either corrected or taken out of service. Bear in mind this would presumably be for any new prime movers to be approved, any existing preban engines are grandfathered in and it is unlikely the epa would waste their time worrying about them.

"Because I am not contemplating building a co gen system at the moment, I thought signing up a bit presumptuous, yet short of signing up, input is limited. I dont think the $15 membership fee is a deterrent as much as the suggested credentials for would members."

again if i made anyone feel inadequate or lacking credentials, that was not my intention at all, quite the contrary.
it is my belief that within this group we have a collection of folks that bring expertise on all sorts of stuff, even if one doesn't think so it is likely
he has experience that would be useful to the group.

as for looking for folks with credentials, such as EE, ME, Thermal Engineers etc., this was my thought

we start with what we have, as we go along it will become apparent that we might be lacking in some specific area of expertise
once we determine what that might be, we can then set out to try and recruit someone that holds that piece of the puzzle.


"There are probably members on the broader forum who are familiar with internet strategy of getting the word to potential contributors, but perhaps that is already in action. I think the mechanics of building a system is not near the problem as pre identifying the necessary controls, safeguards, testing, documenting etc. My guess is that the person who is an expert at visualizing the regulatory eyes and tees to dot and cross is going to be crucial to the game plan."

for the most part i agree, as for control systems we need to have a system that needs control before we can build a system to control it,
testing, documentation, are no problem we can certainly do that, safeguards is certainly something we should all be aware of.

as for an expert in regulatory affairs, the epa partnership materials are all available for anyone to read, perhaps everyone should read them
and we can discuss them in detail. i have read most of there doc's and have found that the epa is very serious about promoting cogeneration
and because they are serious about promoting cogen they have made it very straight forward and non ambiguous, quite unlike the jillions of
pages of legaleze that is typical of epa reg's covering automotive, and stationary engine's for single purpose use.

quite honestly i understand the epa on this matter, a diesel engine that is used for simple electrical generation with no effort to recover and use
the waste heat is just plain not responsible in most cases (outside of emergency back up power), and certainly the case can be made that it is
ridiculous to operate a genset as a primary source of power and not harvest and use the waste heat to its best advantage. otherwise we are
wasting the planets oil resources and just heating the environment.

it is very clear after reading both the epa and the doe position papers on cogeneration they are serious about promoting it anywhere it can be implemented, and it is also obvious that they are going well out of their way to make it as easy as possible to get with the program.

"Maybe someone else has some ideas about what notes need to be struck next?"

i am all ears, and i am serious as a heart attack in that i am convinced we can build a micro cogen that will compete quite favorably
with anything built by the majors at this time, we just need to step up and do it.  there is a place for every single member to do research
and development, we need the following and more

control systems, this covers all sorts of stuff, from sensors, monitoring, programming etc etc. and also basic electrical control
such as relay's, solenoids, linkages, panels, panel labeling and artwork, etc etc.

drive systems, pulleys, belts, direct drive, couplers, mounts etc

fuel systems, alternate fuels testing, plumbing, consumption testing etc.

heat exchangers, pumps, valves, solenoid control valves, etc. etc.

and the list goes on and on, and on.

if you can hold a wrench in your hand, or read a meter, solder a connection, do panel artwork, make calls to engineering dept's, contact other
epa partners for info, mix fuels, filter fuels, read books that are written on power production, cogeneration, etc. basically if you have a heartbeat
and a willingness to learn and help out with and become part of a bigger project, you can be part of a research and development group.

there is nothing written that you have to have a degree in anything, to do valid research and development.

bob g

[mobile_bob]

i would like to also add, we could also always use folks that are good at sourcing parts, bits and pieces,
the sort of folks that monitor places like all the surplus outlets for the stuff we need to build with.

can't do R&D without all sorts of folks doing all sorts of things, and everyone can have an active and important part
to play in my opinion.

we are all links in the chain, none more or less important than any other.

bob g

[Crofter]

<Snip>

Any commercial offering would have to have a sealed system that would basically shut down and refuse to run should someone tamper with the system, or try and run it outside its approved parameters. what we are allowed within the constraints of the partnership is fairly clear, and so long
as the system is operated in a compliant manner, and provided the annual reports are filed, there should be no issues. non compliance likely would result in a decertification or a letter of non compliance and the unit would have to be either corrected or taken out of service. Bear in mind this would presumably be for any new prime movers to be approved, any existing preban engines are grandfathered in and it is unlikely the epa would waste their time worrying about them.

Bob, I guess I was thinking the destination was a turnkey system. If the  partnership however enables people to utilize a presently un certified engine in experimental cogen development projects, then it is indeed a wonderful opportunity.


for the most part i agree, as for control systems we need to have a system that needs control before we can build a system to control it,

I think it is much easier to develop the core mechanical system when you can delegate the control functions but that was taking for granted that many of the parameters are already known. Start with enough channels and throw in a few spares. Again I was considering a joint development of a single system.

the epa partnership materials are all available for anyone to read, perhaps everyone should read them
and we can discuss them in detail. i have read most of there doc's and have found that the epa is very serious about promoting cogeneration
and because they are serious about promoting cogen they have made it very straight forward and non ambiguous, quite unlike the jillions of
pages of legaleze that is typical of epa reg's covering automotive, and stationary engine's for single purpose use.

That is encouraging!

quite honestly i understand the epa on this matter, a diesel engine that is used for simple electrical generation with no effort to recover and use
the waste heat is just plain not responsible in most cases (outside of emergency back up power), and certainly the case can be made that it is
ridiculous to operate a genset as a primary source of power and not harvest and use the waste heat to its best advantage.

There is no question that you waste 2/3 of the fuel if you only collect the electrical output of a diesel gen.

it is very clear after reading both the epa and the doe position papers on cogeneration they are serious about promoting it anywhere it can be implemented, and it is also obvious that they are going well out of their way to make it as easy as possible to get with the program.




bob g