Outside Air Induction?

Arborist Forum

Help Support Arborist Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
An interesting topic for sure about introducing outside air for the stove.
Some say the house stays warmer as a result of not creating a vacuum thus sucking cold air into the house thru cracks and holes, but some say the air within the house becomes stale.
I think I'll try a CAI kit and see if my cabin stays warmer. No chance of the air getting stale, what with the dog needing to go in and out and me running for gopher wood every 10 seconds and answering unsolicited knocks on the door. It's only 5 below F here now.
Any thoughts on this?
BTW, I'm off the grid.
 
I think I'll try a CAI kit and see if my cabin stays warmer. No chance of the air getting stale, what with the dog needing to go in and out and me running for gopher wood every 10 seconds and answering unsolicited knocks on the door. It's only 5 below F here now.
Any thoughts on this?
BTW, I'm off the grid.

I have some neighbors that custom build their home, and it is very tight. They are not in good health, but that maybe due to several other factors. Even though my home is not tight, I do keep an upstairs/loft (which gets quite hot) window slight ajar to allow air to come in, and of course the dog activities also allow fresh air in frequently.

I already have a hole in the wall near the stove, where a fuel stove use to sit. I can unplug the hole and hook up a laundry vent and put the hole very near the stoves inlet. With some creative duct taping maybe even simulate a factory CAI box. I'll probably get into town and pick up a few items and make this test happen sometime later this week. I am of the growing opinion that there will be little difference, but at near zero cost but only a little effort, I would like to see for myself if there is any improvement.
 
So the juries out... I wonder if your having trouble achieving a secondary burn if it would help. My corn stove worked better after I put an outdoor air intake on it.
 
I have been in a good amount of homes where they are to tight and the house is pulling a vacuum down the b vent chimney causing the water heater to not draft. Crack a window and it drafts instantly. People light their fire places and again the water heater or furnace doesn't draft. It's a real thing. Houses need a make up air. As for a 1 piped furnace that's just lazy on the installer. Cold outside dry air burns more efficient. They are quieter when 2 piped also.
 
I have been in a good amount of homes where they are to tight and the house is pulling a vacuum down the b vent chimney causing the water heater to not draft. Crack a window and it drafts instantly. People light their fire places and again the water heater or furnace doesn't draft. It's a real thing. Houses need a make up air. As for a 1 piped furnace that's just lazy on the installer. Cold outside dry air burns more efficient. They are quieter when 2 piped also.

Cold outside air entering a wood stove cools the firebox and can result in reduced combustion efficiency. A house with enough air exchanges per hour to be healthy for the people living in it has more than enough air to feed an efficient wood stove without causing backdrafts down gas water heater chimneys.

A fireplace has nothing to do with this discussion, IMO. Many fireplaces have a negative heating efficiency.
 
Cold outside air entering a wood stove cools the firebox and can result in reduced combustion efficiency. A house with enough air exchanges per hour to be healthy for the people living in it has more than enough air to feed an efficient wood stove without causing backdrafts down gas water heater chimneys.

A fireplace has nothing to do with this discussion, IMO. Many fireplaces have a negative heating efficiency.


Yes a house that has an air exchange would be fine but a tight house with no air exchange or make up air would be different.

Dont they sell stoves that bring in outside air to burn? I recently used a lopi that had one. It had a 4 inch flex pipe that came from a hood outside to the stove. Maybe it pre warms the air?
 
-20* air vs 70* air is like a mosquito fart for a stove that has a 1000* flame.

Cold outside air entering a wood stove cools the firebox and can result in reduced combustion efficiency. A house with enough air exchanges per hour to be healthy for the people living in it has more than enough air to feed an efficient wood stove without causing backdrafts down gas water heater chimneys.

A fireplace has nothing to do with this discussion, IMO. Many fireplaces have a negative heating efficiency.
 
I think I heard that outside air is required for mobile home installations here in KY. It's been a long time ago that I heard that though. Outside combustion air keeping the home warmer makes sense to me because you aren't pulling cold air through your house to feed the stove. It's piped directly to the intake and then up the chimney. Whether it helps or harms secondary burn which would help or harm heat output, I don't know.
When a buddy of mine was building and considering whether to use the spray foam insulation, his insulation contractor advised against it because if he sealed the house that well, he would have to build an outside air exchange into his HVAC system which essentially undoes the sealing of the house, so why bother? Who knows if the insulation guy had other motives against recommending it. On a side note, I've been seeing some horror stories about the spray foam where a bad job applying it resulted in ongoing toxic off gassing and a really labor intensive removal process to correct.
 
The Outdoor Air Myth Exposed
Outdoor combustion air was a good idea . . . until it was studied

Building codes in various jurisdictions in North America require that fireplaces, and in some cases wood stoves, be provided with a source of combustion air from outdoors. This mostly takes the form of a four inch diameter hole in an outside wall with a duct attached running to the stove or fireplace, connected either directly to the firebox or to a location where it can be heated by the fire before entering the room. Sometimes the air is just dumped somewhere in the room.

There seem to be three theories behind this outdoor air supply, depending on who is doing the explaining.

  1. The first is to replace the air sucked out of the house by the wood burner, based on the idea that houses are airtight and the wood burner will use up all the oxygen.
  2. The second is to reduce the risk of smoking into the room, even when the room is depressurized by a big fan like a kitchen range exhaust.
  3. The third is to save energy by using outdoor air rather than indoor air that has already been heated.
But it doesn't matter which theory you pick; none of the three stands up to scientific scrutiny. It turns out that the most consistently reliable place from which to take combustion air is the room where the appliance is installed. Forget about outdoor air supplies as a way to make wood stoves and fireplaces work better or be more efficient. If your local building code forces you to install outdoor air, you will have no choice, but be aware that it will not reliably improve the performance of your wood burning appliance or result in higher efficiency of the system.

The supposed benefits of outdoor air are not supported by research results.

The outdoor combustion air myth got started almost fifty years ago when safety and construction standards were written for mobile homes. Because they were small and factory-built, it was believed that mobile homes were air tight. As a result, all wood, oil and gas furnaces, stoves and fireplaces had to get their air from outdoors. Because these air supplies were invariably routed straight down into the ventilated crawl space under the mobile home, they didn't cause too many problems, so it was assumed that they actually worked.

In the 1980s, when large exhaust systems – like downdraft kitchen range exhausts – began to cause spillage from fireplaces and stoves in reasonably tight houses, a consensus quickly formed around the idea of bringing combustion air from outdoors, just as had been done in mobile homes for decades. Such certainty existed among housing technologists and regulatory authorities on the issue of outdoor combustion air that it was made mandatory in most building codes. Unfortunately, the decision to enforce mandatory outdoor air rules was made before research was done to investigate how they actually work.

The supposed benefits of outdoor air are not supported by research results. Laboratory and field reports have revealed that providing outdoor air is not a simple or effective cure for spillage, and that some designs could create a fire hazard. Two forms of outdoor air supply have been used: passive make-up type air supplies and direct-to-combustion chamber air supplies.

Passive make-up air supplies
passiveair1.gif
Passive air inlets are nothing more than holes in the wall. Wind effects may force air into the house or suck it out of the house, depending on the location of the hole relative to wind direction.A passive make-up type air supply is one that is not connected directly to the fireplace or stove combustion chamber. Since it is connected only to the house environment and not to the appliance, it flows air into a house only when the pressure inside is lower than the pressure outdoors, since air only flows to zones of lower pressure. Passive air supplies don't make wood burners work better, they just make the house leakier.

Wind effects around the house also affect the direction and volume of flow through a passive inlet. If the weatherhood of a passive inlet is on the windward side of a building, wind pressure is likely to force air into the building; if the weatherhood is on the downwind side, the negative pressure zone created by the wind is likely to draw air out of the house, possibly depressurizing it.

passiveair2.gif
Passive air inlets do not supply combustion air, but flow air only in response to pressure differences. Here, the flow direction depends on where in the house the passive hole is located.More importantly, it is misleading to think of the hole in the wall approach as supplying combustion air. In fact, passive air supplies provide air only in response to pressure differences. In cold weather, when temperature difference produces a pressure difference due to stack effect, if a passive make-up air supply is located below the neutral pressure plane of the house (and there is no wind effect and no exhaust systems are operating), air will flow into the house. If, on the other hand, the passive inlet is located above the house neutral pressure plane, air will flow out.

It is useful to keep in mind a key physical principle:
AIR FLOWS TO ZONES OF LOWER PRESSURE through any available opening.

The real problem with the passive make-up air strategy is that it does not reliably supply combustion air, nor does it reliably reduce combustion spillage. Under favorable conditions it may tip the balance of driving and adverse pressures in favor of successful venting. This is why some wood heating specialists have reported performance improvements after the installation of a passive supply. However, it is also possible for a passive supply to cause spillage if air is drawn out of the house into a low pressure zone caused by wind effects. A remedial strategy that only works sometimes, and that may make the problem worse, is not a good strategy. A passive make-up air supply is really nothing more than another uncontrolled leak in the house envelope. A leaky house envelope is no guarantee of successful venting.

Direct-to-combustion chamber outdoor air supplies
Outdoor air supplies connected directly to the stove or fireplace combustion chamber may seem like a good idea and it was once believed that a direct supply would isolate the combustion appliance from room pressure variations. However, two key findings from the research into outdoor air supplies serve as cautions against the widespread use of direct combustion air supplies.

1. Smoke leakage can occur, even when the appliance has tightly sealed doors. If an exhaust fan like a kitchen range hood depressurizes the room to a level greater than the draft produced in the chimney, combustion gases will leak from any available opening, such as gaps in gaskets and the joints between factory-built chimney sections (illustration below). Because air flows to zones of lower pressure, a tightly sealed combustion/venting system will spill a smaller volume of smoke into the room than a leakier system, but it will still leak unless it is perfectly sealed. Perfect sealing is not a realistic goal because it would be difficult to achieve at the time of construction or installation and is unlikely to be permanent.

directair1.gif


2. Direct air supplies can reverse flow direction if the weatherhood is exposed to a negative pressure in excess of chimney draft (illustration below). Hot exhaust gas passing through a combustion air duct constitutes a potential fire hazard. The pressure effects of wind force around buildings can be far more powerful than the pressures produced by chimney draft. Chimney draft ranges from zero to about 50 Pa (0.2 in. water column) in normal residential installations, whereas high wind effects can produce pressures around houses up to 100 Pa.

Continued at: https://woodheat.org/the-outdoor-air-myth-exposed.html
 
I read that. But I still think a cooler denser air piped in could result in a better burn.

My aunt had a Napoleon wood stove installed last year. The existing chimney is on the north face exterior of the house. Its typical masonry chimney block clay liner. They are disgusted with it and are about ready to call it a loss and try something different.

Possible issues I see.
1. Chimney never gets warm enough.
2. Chimney inlet is 6" stove outlet 8". Installer used a cheater collar.
3. Chimneys on North exterior of house. Has always been the weak link. But was 100% new not long ago and is insulated and sided FWIW.
4. This is a basement install.


The last stove before this was a menards purchase and they hated it. Used 1 season replaced with the larger Napoleon 1900/2000 which is rated up to 2,200 sq ft and 77,000 btu I believe.

They tell me the only way it burns decent is when the door is cracked. So it never achieves a proper secondary burn mode. It seems to me like the outside air source could improve the draft. Which would be a lot cheaper then an insulated chimney liner.

She has about $3500 into the Napoleon+ legs and ash pan delivered and installed.

Before all this they ran a later model step style Fisher until it was pretty well burnt out. They were always happy with it.

Honestly I dunno if they'll be happy with anything but another smoke dragon. But in my mind they got this and it should more then meet their needs.

I do think a chimney liner at 8" would be the best. But the cost on top of what she already spent makes it hard to explain and justify. In her mind the old Fisher never needed special anything to work.

I have not got involved but will probably if the installer doesn't resolve the issue. Otherwise I am gonna be first in line at her next garage sale when her Napoleon goes for pennies on the dollar.

Should have started a new topic but seems relevant and is just my rambling thoughts.
 
I read that. But I still think a cooler denser air piped in could result in a better burn.

Why do you suppose that modern high efficiency wood stoves 'preheat' the incoming air before it enters the firebox?

What effect do you suppose 'cooler denser air' has when it enters the firebox via secondary combustion passages?

A wood stove has internal combustion but it is not an internal combustion engine.
 
I read that. But I still think a cooler denser air piped in could result in a better burn.

My aunt had a Napoleon wood stove installed last year. The existing chimney is on the north face exterior of the house. Its typical masonry chimney block clay liner. They are disgusted with it and are about ready to call it a loss and try something different.

Possible issues I see.
1. Chimney never gets warm enough.
2. Chimney inlet is 6" stove outlet 8". Installer used a cheater collar.
3. Chimneys on North exterior of house. Has always been the weak link. But was 100% new not long ago and is insulated and sided FWIW.
4. This is a basement install.


The last stove before this was a menards purchase and they hated it. Used 1 season replaced with the larger Napoleon 1900/2000 which is rated up to 2,200 sq ft and 77,000 btu I believe.

They tell me the only way it burns decent is when the door is cracked. So it never achieves a proper secondary burn mode. It seems to me like the outside air source could improve the draft. Which would be a lot cheaper then an insulated chimney liner.

She has about $3500 into the Napoleon+ legs and ash pan delivered and installed.

Before all this they ran a later model step style Fisher until it was pretty well burnt out. They were always happy with it.

Honestly I dunno if they'll be happy with anything but another smoke dragon. But in my mind they got this and it should more then meet their needs.

I do think a chimney liner at 8" would be the best. But the cost on top of what she already spent makes it hard to explain and justify. In her mind the old Fisher never needed special anything to work.

I have not got involved but will probably if the installer doesn't resolve the issue. Otherwise I am gonna be first in line at her next garage sale when her Napoleon goes for pennies on the dollar.

Should have started a new topic but seems relevant and is just my rambling thoughts.
Sounds like the liner would be a good move regardless.......but you could try cracking a window to see if that helps it draft better. A basement install with that length of pipe should be able to get good lift, IF it can remain warm enough.

Sent from my SM-S320VL using Tapatalk
 
What effect do you suppose 'cooler denser air' has when it enters the firebox via secondary combustion passages?
Bring in more atmosphere. It isn't an internal combustion engine. But there is not enough draft. My question is will the slight change be enough to get enough heat started to warm the stove, pipe and chimney. So it can get into secondary burn.

Like I mentioned I had a corn stove at one time and it did in fact improve burning with an outside air source.

I agree a liner is ultimately the best solution. The cost of even a class A single wall is gonna be $700-ish and insulated will double or triple that.

She is in her mid 80's on a good pension but fixed income all the same.

But yeah I am gonna grab some super dry wood maybe cut up some oak cribbing I have stored in the grainery and go over there one evening this week. Try that and the window test. Just eliminate whatever issues I can. Check the intake who knows might be a mouse nest for all I know.

Thanks
 
I read that. But I still think a cooler denser air piped in could result in a better burn.

My aunt had a Napoleon wood stove installed last year. The existing chimney is on the north face exterior of the house. Its typical masonry chimney block clay liner. They are disgusted with it and are about ready to call it a loss and try something different.

Possible issues I see.
1. Chimney never gets warm enough.
2. Chimney inlet is 6" stove outlet 8". Installer used a cheater collar.
3. Chimneys on North exterior of house. Has always been the weak link. But was 100% new not long ago and is insulated and sided FWIW.
4. This is a basement install.


The last stove before this was a menards purchase and they hated it. Used 1 season replaced with the larger Napoleon 1900/2000 which is rated up to 2,200 sq ft and 77,000 btu I believe.

They tell me the only way it burns decent is when the door is cracked. So it never achieves a proper secondary burn mode. It seems to me like the outside air source could improve the draft. Which would be a lot cheaper then an insulated chimney liner.

She has about $3500 into the Napoleon+ legs and ash pan delivered and installed.

Before all this they ran a later model step style Fisher until it was pretty well burnt out. They were always happy with it.

Honestly I dunno if they'll be happy with anything but another smoke dragon. But in my mind they got this and it should more then meet their needs.

I do think a chimney liner at 8" would be the best. But the cost on top of what she already spent makes it hard to explain and justify. In her mind the old Fisher never needed special anything to work.

I have not got involved but will probably if the installer doesn't resolve the issue. Otherwise I am gonna be first in line at her next garage sale when her Napoleon goes for pennies on the dollar.

Should have started a new topic but seems relevant and is just my rambling thoughts.
The pipe getting hot plays a big role in the draft of my stove, and I imagine most stoves would be the same. Is there some reason why they did not have one installed?
 
Ok so I got over there today. Brought some cribbing with I cut to nice lengths. I get there and see this. You can't see from this angle but the door is open. Grr!

I was glad to see they got the pipe in without a reducer that was just lazy installer.

So I stirred it up and put 4 or 5 3x3 pieces of wood in. It took off immediately so I closed the door and played with the damper. It wasn't long and I added some 5 4x4 chucks. By this time I was getting a great secondary burn.

So anyway wood is the issue. Sorry never even bother trying fresh air. All they need is dryer wood and some education. This isn't the ole Fisher and burning 1-2 chunks of so so wood cross ways in the stove with the door open is never gonna get a secondary burn.

I think this might be the 1500 not the 2000 but... I dunno. The installer didn't even leave the manual. Uhg!

They went through this after having it installed. I recommended dryer wood then. Never heard any more until just now over the holidays. Then they told me about having the door open most of the time I was like that's not how this works!

The place they by wood from was nearly out but brought a load of maple that "should be dry enough to burn in about a month". Grr!

Going back Thursday to look at what wood they have and what I can cut n split nearby. I have some white pine logs the power company cut next door that I might cut n split to make the magic mix... They been sitting for 5 years Should be good to get er rolling.
 
I have a wood furnace and no secondary burn and my dad's friend bought a hunting camp with a new lopi stove and it took me a bit to figure out how to get it to burn great and use the secondary burn. They were running it with the door open like a fireplace. It's pretty cool when it works and I wish I had the cash to switch to a EPA furnace. But I think there's a learning curve with a EPA stove these non EPA ones will burn anything if you give them the air.
 
My buddy has an old Daka smoke dragon in his shop. Feed it anything but put some seasoned oak in there holy crap for heat. -10, -15, -20 we're in shirt sleeves out there tinkering with saws er whatever.
 
My buddy has an old Daka smoke dragon in his shop. Feed it anything but put some seasoned oak in there holy crap for heat. -10, -15, -20 we're in shirt sleeves out there tinkering with saws er whatever.


I have a daka wood furnace load it up and you can bring the house up 5 degrees in an hour but the burn time sucks. I have never had an issue heating the house up no matter what temp it is outside. I run half pallet wood and half hard wood splits and it heats. When it's real cold get it rolling and load it up with hard wood and you get a few hours of real warm heat. The thermometer may say 70 but we are sweating. That's y I say an EPA stove is a completely different animal.
 
Back
Top