Patent Pending:Pre-Heated, Gravity Fed Stove Coal and Pellet

My name is Wang ZhaoHui from Beijing,China.
A few months ago I said here that I have a patent, gravite fed stove for both coal and pellet.
I have completed all official documents and submitted to China Patent Bureau.
China is sponsoring member of PCT, my patent is under protect in American too.
Any patent pirate is severe crime


Item2:fuel bin
Item8:fuel
Item5: fresh air intake
Item6:flue
Item3: burning cage(s), one layer or more layers.

There are already several patents of gravity fed stove.
But all have fuel flow un-controlled.
There is horizontal distance between fuel bin and buring pot,which creats problem of fuel flow.
Fuel quantity is controlled by opening.
Either too many fuel or no fuel to burning pot.

The highligh of my patent is a burning cage(s).
Size of burning cage and fresh air intake tube define quantity of fuel burning.
An adjustable block inside burning cage can change effective size and in turn change fire.
There are one or more layers of burning cages.Each layer has different grate gap.
Smaller size fuel will fall to next layer to continue burning.
Fuel bin is directly above burning cage, there is no horizontal flow of fuel, no blocking worry.
Pre-heat effect can lower requirement of water content, then lower production cost of wood pellet.
Pre-heat effect also distills the fuel and helps cleanly burning.

I have tested wood pellet, corn, Anthracite and Bituminous Coal,
Wood pellet needs smallest cage. Indeed my idea is firstly for wood pellet.
Corn does not work. Pre-heat simply makes corn a big clinker, no flow down.
If fuel bin is moved to outside but right above of stove body, adding a controlled feeding opening, corn may burn too.If so it falls to traditional corn stove somewhat.
Bituminous Coal is some what like wood pellet, but needs bigger cage and more air intake.
Both wood pellet and Bituminous Coal can burn by simply flue.
Anthracite coal must need a blower and flue in my test. A better engineering optimization may be needed to cancel blower.

I am planning to transfer patent to major stove manufacturers, shall you have any interest, please contact:
Name:Wang ZhaoHui
Email:[email protected]
tel No.(86)13901185127

Congratulations on your design. It certainly is different. It is hard for me to get a clear idea of how the air flow works, and how the ash is handled, from the illustration.

We need new approaches to stove design, both for efficiency and ease of use. The ability to burn pellets as well in fall and spring when a steady fire is too much, is also welcome.

Best wishes in your endeavor, and I look forward to seeing your stove on the market.

Richard

Congratulations! After looking at the design it looks very interesting. I have just one question though. What happens to the ash?

Very clever design, I hope you get the bugs worked out. Perhaps you could try a cone shape to the burning cage?

Looks theoretically intriguing, level of detail and functionality is insufficient for more assessment.

China you write "I have completed all official documents and submitted to China Patent Bureau.
China is sponsoring member of PCT, my patent is under protect in American too"

Search of PCT's website "http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/en/" suggests no patent of critical search words "coal stove", do you have World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) patent identification (WO # designation) that defines your patent ?

I will not make strong technical opinions/comments on public forum of your device without WO# designation that confirms legitimate patent acceptance of your device, otherwise if not submitted you could use our ideas to improve your concept, then submit for patent/patent improvement for competition with valued American companies?

What is WO designation ?

Answer to Question One:
Burning cage is key of patent. It can be used for coal, pellet stove, furnace, boiler by using traditional technique.
You can simply add a gate at bottom to empty ash.
You can vacuum ash from top through fuel bin every week.
You can fill it with water and suck the ash water out.
ect.ect.

Answer to Question Two
I have submitted application to China Patent Bureau.
I have 12 months to decide whether I need PCT protection or not. PCT cost is US$2000 in China.
Also I have 36 months to decide whether I need to apply for American patent or not. American patent cost starts from US$5000.
Right now you can not find it from PCT web site, but you can find from China patent bureau.
If it works, be sure I will apply for PCT and all major countries' patent.
If none had interesting, I would have to give it up.
It would be too costly to applly for PCT and international patent if it was not good

The topic here is gravity fed stoves, let's all see if we can stick to it.

Interesting variation on the "downflow" type burner. the "Style" of burning solid fuels for heat is so VERY different between china and North America, I wouldn't waste money on any US patents with that type of stove. In the US we EXPECT at a minimum basic convenience (long times between fueling and an ash pan for easy ash removal), relatively attractive design (no ugly square box w/ absolutely no attractive features, trim etc.), since it is used primarily for heating in the US and almost not at all for cooking, you must have a high btu/hour capacity (50,000btu/hour+), and durability (unless that basket is some type of amazing unbreakable ceramic, it will burn through in short order). Most importantly, people in the US tend to build a fire in the fall and not extinguish it untill spring. Thus, as I mentioned before, a large firbox, easy ash removal, attractive appearance, easy loading, high capacity, and exceptional durability are needed. Unless you have, for the most part, all of the previously mentioned key points addressed, it will never be successful/profitable in the north american/western european market. with the design I see here, I would concentrate on the chinese/asian market, and perhaps if you are successful, begin investing the neccessary time and money to produce a successful product for the american market; the design I see currently will not be acceptable.

Thanks a lot Berlin.
I suggest a new burning method.
Professionals are needed to develop it to commercial model.
That is why I leave my contact here to looking for partners than I make it in China and sell the stove in American.
In a traditional wood pellet stove, size of burning pot is smaller comparing overall size.
The auger, motor, fan, blower just take up too much space.
In my prototype( I first lighted the spark for my own house), overal diameter is 12" in diameter, overal height is 24".
I do not measure exact data, but the BTU is BIG.
Indeed if I make a heigher burning cage, more fuels will fall in the cage, just changing a bigger air intake tube and flue, the BTU will be big. I may also add a big fuel bin on top of the stove.
Regarding durability, there is high alumium cement lining inside outside wall, inner feul bin and burning cage can be casting iron.
By changing size of cage, air intake tube and flue, you can change BTU, and you can change fuels between wood pellet and Bituminous coal or Anthracite coal.
For ash removal, I can just add an ash pan and a door at lower part.
For visual design, I can add a glass door at position of burning cage. This glass door can also be used to handle clinker.
Also I can add coil for hot water, or just hollow tube or fin for hot air.
All these are well accepted and existing engineering methods. I do not mentioned them in my patent