Secondary Burn

[Whitespider]

So you are saying the firebox of the stove you had before the Spectrum held up to 13 splits? And you could put that much in the Spectrum too?

Why are you asking me what I'm saying... when what I'm saying is in black 'n' white.
I said, "(10-12, maybe 13 splits depending)"
Sort'a depends on the size and shape of the splits... don't it??

Most of the secondary combustion stoves are not intended to have the firebox filled to the air manifold. Mine recommends only loading wood up to the top of the bricks - I fill it higher but not to the top.

And now you're arguing I fill it too full?? C'mon‼ This is getting way out there.
The instructions for mine... nothing about how full except in reference to safety.

Lighting a Fire
1. Adjust air control to position H (maximum firing rate) and open door.
2. Place crumpled newspaper in the center of the heater and criss-cross with several pieces of dry kindling. Add a few small pieces of dry wood on top.
3. Ignite the paper and close the door.
4. After the fire has established itself, open the door and add a few small logs. Close door.
5. Begin normal operation after a good coal base exists and wood has charred.

Normal Operation
1. Set air control to a desired setting. If smoke pours down across the glass (waterfall effect) this indicates you have shut the control down too soon or you are using too low a setting. The wide range control panel makes finding the desired setting for your application easy. As every home's heating needs vary (ie. insulation, windows, climate, etc.) the proper setting can only be found by trial and error and should be noted
for future burns.
2. To refuel, adjust air control to high, and give the fire time to brighten. Open the door slowly, this will prevent backpuffing.
3. Use wood of different shape, diameter and length (up to 18"). Load your wood endwise and try to place the logs so that the air can flow between them. Always use dry wood.
4. Do not load fuel to a height or in such a manner that would be hazardous when opening the door.
5. For extended or overnight burns, unsplit logs are preferred. Remember to char the wood completely on maximum setting before adjusting air control for overnight burn.

513yj was correct, time to give up...
Yep... your right... I'm an idiot...
*
*

 

[Whitespider]

...I vote to refer to the "feminist elitist communist stove" as simply FECS from here on...

Although I really liked the post... or the shortening of the label... I still don't see where feminism and communism relate to stoves.
(And yeah... I'm aware you didn't label them that way.)
Personally I like feces (feminist elitist communist EPA stove)... but I'm sort'a in a mood
*

 

[Chris-PA]

Yep... your right... I'm an idiot...

Just for the record, I have not called anyone any names.

And now you're arguing I fill it too full?? C'mon‼ This is getting way out there.
The instructions for mine... nothing about how full except in reference to safety.

You are correct; there is nothing about load height in the Spectrum manual. There is in mine.

I think here we get to the core of the problem. The Spectrum appears to have a similarly sized firebox to my Magnolia - mine is listed as 3.2 cu in while the Spectrum is only 2.1, but it looks like it is really pretty close to the same size. The Magnolia is 18.25" X 20.25". I can put 6 typical sized splits in there, sometimes a couple more thin ones on top.

I can see if you packed it full to the top, without leaving gaps between the splits for air to move through as instructed, then the top of the logs up by the air manifold would incinerate while the bottom will smother. This is simply another indication that the stove was too small, as I have said many times before, and over filling it did not make it work better.

From the Spectrum manual:

3. Use wood of different shape, diameter and length (up to 18"(457mm)). Load your wood endwise and try to place the logs so that the air can flow between them.

I always select and arrange the wood I put in carefully, even though it might take an extra minute. I make sure air can flow through from the bottom front and up through the splits. If I don't it would be next to impossible to light and the fire will not be hot enough, and not cook out the volatile compounds of the logs above.

No wonder you have to light it with belly button lint and lighter fluid rather than a couple of pieces of junk mail.

 

[Cerran]

I have a Quadrafire 3100i and it heats 2/3 of my 2300 square foot house to in the mid-high 70's by itself until the weather gets single digits or below which which point I fire up the Englander.

WS, your entire argument has been that the newer staged combustion stoves aren't good fits in many cases but you haven't made a good argument as to why and provided solid evidence as to what those situations are. You have made a claim that you have seen several of the newer stoves not work properly but no reference to the stove models, combustion types, firewood used or any other relevant factors. It would make sense to try and understand why these installs don't work while many other installs that are similar do.

I still haven't heard the reasoning why a stove that brings air under the coals is better than a stove designed for staged combustion.

 

[NSMaple1]

I'm rather curious why moving air through coals is a bad idea. Seems to be a principle that some adhere to but don't think I've read the reasoning behind it.

 

[Oxford]

No, WS, you're not "sorta in a mood." You're the way those of us who pay attention have seen you before, which is to say that you've painted yourself into a corner with your smug, superior, nonsensical prattling- or as it was once memorably put: "pseudoscientific twaddle"- and people who pay attention, in this case Chris and Cerran, have called you on it. In spite of the fact that your kids have evidently shown you how to use memes, your comebacks to their reasonable comments have gotten further and further out, and now you're so ornery that you're about ready to bite yourself, as my grandmother would have said.

Everybody gets it, man. You can't get your stove to work- at least not the way you think it should-, and you're a compulsive blow-hole who is also a legend in your own mind, driven to completely take over any conversation about any topic, but especially about these stoves. Every time you go on one of these runs, you find a guy or two, usually members of the "I have a stove that's too small for my house" club to join in, which in your mind completely validates your position that the stoves don't work. You don't like the EPA, either, so it's a twofer for you: you're predisposed to hate the stove and now you have an amen chorus, however small, to hum along while you bloviate and bluster and pretend like you're not saying that all of the EPA stoves are junk when any fool can see that is exactly what you're saying, no matter how many people are warm because of one. As a Lucky Strike extra, in this current cycle one of your pack actually makes you look smart when he posts.

The mods evidently won't say it but I will (again): give it a rest, why don't you?

 

[wndwlkr]

Secondary Burn :: Sounds like an X WIFE:: If ya burn it right the first time ya don't need to burn it again! This Tread ROCKS ! That spider guy is a Hoot.

 

[Whitespider]

...give it a rest, why don't you?

NO‼ naa, naa, naaa, naa, naa
*

 

[Whitespider]

WS, your entire argument has been that the newer staged combustion stoves aren't good fits in many cases but you haven't made a good argument as to why and provided solid evidence as to what those situations are.

Sure I have... over and over.
Why?? Because they don't work worth sour owl crap in those cases. What more needs sayin'??
What situations?? When a relatively constant and steady heat output is required (or even desired) during the entire burn cycle.

You have made a claim that you have seen several of the newer stoves not work properly but no reference to the stove models, combustion types, firewood used or any other relevant factors.

Stove models?? Heck, I don't know... 'cause it ain't important to me, it's not something I would even think to ask. I know one was purchased at a dealer in Waterloo and one at a "big-box" store (Menards I think)... don't know 'bout the others.
Combustion types?? Huh?? What do you mean?? They are elitist stoves... secondary combustion types.
Firewood used?? You're kiddin'?? Well, the firewood came from trees I believe. B'sides, an up-draft box ain't picky.

I still haven't heard the reasoning why a stove that brings air under the coals is better than a stove designed for staged combustion.

Sure you have... you just ain't listening.
Because of a more constant and steady heat output over the entire burn cycle... which... is... "better"... in... certain... situations.
*

 

[olyman]

No, WS, you're not "sorta in a mood." You're the way those of us who pay attention have seen you before, which is to say that you've painted yourself into a corner with your smug, superior, nonsensical prattling- or as it was once memorably put: "pseudoscientific twaddle"- and people who pay attention, in this case Chris and Cerran, have called you on it. In spite of the fact that your kids have evidently shown you how to use memes, your comebacks to their reasonable comments have gotten further and further out, and now you're so ornery that you're about ready to bite yourself, as my grandmother would have said.

Everybody gets it, man. You can't get your stove to work- at least not the way you think it should-, and you're a compulsive blow-hole who is also a legend in your own mind, driven to completely take over any conversation about any topic, but especially about these stoves. Every time you go on one of these runs, you find a guy or two, usually members of the "I have a stove that's too small for my house" club to join in, which in your mind completely validates your position that the stoves don't work. You don't like the EPA, either, so it's a twofer for you: you're predisposed to hate the stove and now you have an amen chorus, however small, to hum along while you bloviate and bluster and pretend like you're not saying that all of the EPA stoves are junk when any fool can see that is exactly what you're saying, no matter how many people are warm because of one. As a Lucky Strike extra, in this current cycle one of your pack actually makes you look smart when he posts.

The mods evidently won't say it but I will (again): give it a rest, why don't you?

100 posts, compared to 6,000 plus posts,, yeah................standing on top of the podium, are yah???

 

[Whitespider]

I'm rather curious why moving air through coals is a bad idea. Seems to be a principle that some adhere to but don't think I've read the reasoning behind it.

Well... at least from what I've experienced...
In a box with air comin' in from the top, a deep coal bed is a detriment as both box capacity and heat output is reduced.
In a box with air comin' in from under a grate and flowing up through the coals, a deep coal bed is an attribute. Although it also reduces box capacity, it increases heat output. Losing the coal bed, lettin' it burn out, means you'll have less heat until you build it back up. In my up-draft boxes I never let the coal bed burn completely out... but I "adjust" the depth of it, depending on heat demand, by how much I load, what I load, and how often I load. The entire coal bed runs screamin' hot because air hits the lower coals first and passes up through all of them (like a forge). The lighter "fly ash" is blown away and carried out the flue, the heavier ash falls through the grate... once a day, usually first thing in the morning I will give the coal bed a quick rake or shake, but that's about it. During extreme cold I'll run them with deep coal beds, several inches deep... in milder temps I'll run them with maybe only a couple inches of coals. And... keeping, or maintaining, a coal bed has another advantage; it pre-heats the air before it gets to added fuel, which is ignited and chard much faster (i.e., very little smoke from your smoke dragon).
*

 

[Whitespider]

OH‼ By-the-way...



And not sayin' it hasn't ('cause I can't say as fact), but I ain't heard the draft blower kick in since Friday morning (although there was evidence it did once yesterday). Ya' know?? The "adjustment" thing??

 

[Whitespider]

Ya' know what?? Now that I think 'bout it, I'm doubting the draft blower did kick on yesterday... the programmed weekend set points...

5:30 AM - 70°
8:30 AM - 68°
5:30 PM - 70°
9:30 PM - 66°

The only difference with the week day set points is 72° at 5:30 AM (so it's a bit warmer in here for the kids getting up and ready for school), and 68° a bit earlier at 7:30 AM ('cause their all out'a the house by then).
We maintain 70° during the day by loading technique (the wife does it more than me, I'm at work 5 days a week)... no "adjustments" of any sort, not even "automatic draft blower" adjustment. The 68° set point is just back-up in case no one is home.
*

 

[Whitespider]

Just for the record, I have not called anyone any names.

That's absolutely true...
My bad for suggesting you had.
My apologies.
(I would have posted this in the beginning, but, for some reason, it passed over my head first glance.)
*

 

[Whitespider]

OK... well... I can't think of anything else to post right now, so Oxford will just have to be happy with what I've given him

(Shhhhhhh... don't tell him... little does he know, but I was done with this thread until he asked me to give it a rest.)
*

 

[1project2many]

#189 - "...takes about 20-30 minutes before it's making good heat and the secondary is crankin'.

The Englander in the house has a ceramic plate to store heat for secondary. When I first start the stove I can arrange wood so secondary begins in about 10 minutes. When I refill the stove between 12:00 and 2:00 am, stacking splits on the existing coals, it can take up to 20 minutes to build enough heat for secondary. I know it seems backward but that's the way it is. The Century in the barn heats steel to trigger the secondary burn. Starting the stove at 30 deg, secondary usually begins in 10-12 minutes. Wood quality and dryness varies in the barn and this can affect secondary time dramatically.

So basically, the only epa stoves worth much in seriously cold temps are conventional design, with the cat in the top?

Those stoves seem to be the #1 choice in Alaska. One of the stovemakers that used to participate on this forum said his non-cat stoves couldn't even break into that market.

I can see if you packed it full to the top, without leaving gaps between the splits for air to move through as instructed, then the top of the logs up by the air manifold would incinerate while the bottom will smother. This is simply another indication that the stove was too small, as I have said many times before, and over filling it did not make it work better.

I wondered about overfilling also. I can't think of many reasons to find unburned wood in the middle of a hot fire. Lack of oxygen to the center of the fire is all I can really imagine. It seems like overfilling or a major problem in the box itself so it's not working as intended.

What situations?? When a relatively constant and steady heat output is required (or even desired) during the entire burn cycle.

Well... both of my stoves can maintain relatively constant and steady temperatures in the building while we're up. I do the same thing as you to regulate temp... vary wood size and species.



The thermometer in the kitchen reads 73 which is a bit warm so I'm letting the coals die back some before adding something from the left side of the wood box.



In a bit I'll put some of those small pieces on. I'll use just a piece or two of the small sticks until the temp in the front room drops to about 70. Then I'll throw some larger pieces in. There will always be some variation in the front of the house because the stove is sized for the whole house, not just the front, and it's wide open in this half. But we see the largest variation between the last refill of the night and when we get up in the morning. In order to get the most sleep time I put the heaviest, densest wood on the fire. That causes a temperature spike that can get pretty warm in the front. But it's usually cooled back to a reasonable temp by the time we get up.

And the barn? Well, it's 35 degrees in the barn now. If I start the stove and run it for 3 hours the temp will be 35 when I'm done. I'd say that's extremely consistent.

 

[Whitespider]

And the barn? Well, it's 35 degrees in the barn now. If I start the stove and run it for 3 hours the temp will be 35 when I'm done. I'd say that's extremely consistent.

 

[Whitespider]

Those stoves seem to be the #1 choice in Alaska. One of the stovemakers that used to participate on this forum said his non-cat stoves couldn't even break into that market.

I've never even seen a cat stove (that I'm aware of). If they feed air under a coal grate for conventional primary combustion, plus burn the flue gasses via the cat... I'm thinkin' there's a possibility of having the best of both worlds. And if that is the case... I can believe the non-cat elitist stoves are unable to "break into that market".

One thing bothers me about cat fireboxes... the expense of replacing the cat when required. Likely I'd just toss it when the time came. Sort'a like the heat exchangers on fancy furnaces... I just don't wanna' screw around cleaning them (yeah, after all the work makin' firewood, I like the burnin' part to be easy).
Still, I'd like to see a cat box in operation... ya' just never know, do ya'??
*

 

[Whitespider]

I just went to Vermont Castings and found this. I've never really looked into cat fireboxes... but I do need something else for the shop. And their description of longer, more even heat output pretty much echos what I'm lookin' for. I may just have to research them a bit... still, I'd like to see one running though. I also couldn't help but notice they describe a non-cat as be for "less heating demands."

Catalytic
Offering higher efficiency heating, catalytic wood stoves are ideal for those who wish to replace a major portion of their heating needs with their wood stove. Note: A catalyst needs to be cleaned and maintained and generally needs to be replaced every 5 years or so.

• Higher efficiency lowers fuel costs to heat your home.
• Longer, more even heat output with thermostatic air control
• Reduced particulates for a cleaner, more eco-friendly burn

Non-Catalytic
Non-catalytic wood stoves are slightly more affordable and require less maintenance. Easy to start and operate, a non-catalytic stove is ideal for those with less heating demands.

• Lively flame picture
• Easy to use and maintain - no catalytic combustor
• Hassle-free operation

 

[1project2many]

I was really concerned about cat replacement cost in '07 when I bought the Englander. I thought that would give secondary burn a real advantage. Blaze King warrants the converter for ten years but the initial price for the stove is so high that imo you're essentially buying the first replacement converter with the stove. Still, the investment may be worthwhile.

Wood burns on the brick floor. No grate.

This is the stove that would replace my house model:
http://www.blazeking.com/EN/wood-princess.html

The manual has some clues about construction:
http://www.blazeking.com/PDF/manuals/en/wood/OM-PE E V1.05.pdf

A video, for anyone interested:


To me it's a different way to think about burning wood. There are some clues that it can have clear advantages over secondary burn.

I also couldn't help but notice they describe a non-cat as be for "less heating demands."

Interesting. These stoves have been out for what, ten years? In '07 all the reviews I found said the two types were pretty much equal.