EFM = Electric Fireman (new project alert)

europachris wrote:

LsFarm wrote:Awesome job Chris.. you have that baby so pretty, you won't want to stoke it up with that nasty dirty bit coal.

Your work and install looks like a showroom model for retail customers to look at .. very nicely done.

Greg L

Thanks, Greg. Maybe I'll start a new revolution around these parts with "modern" coal heating. NEPA never forgot coal, but we sure did out here.

I think the stoker will take care of the soot issue that plagues hand firing bituminous, and having it separate from the house will take care of the rest. It can't be worse than carrying dripping bags of Blaschak through the house.

Just got back from my plumbing run. OMFG!!! 1" copper prices are INSANE!!! It probably would have been cheaper to run parallel 3/4" runs instead! The 1" is twice the cost of 3/4" for the pipe and the fittings are anywhere from 3x to 6x more expensive. It's just STUPID expensive comparing the two sizes. But it was either use 1" copper and a $75 circulator or 3/4" copper and a $225 circulator that uses 3x the electricity....

Could of used 1" black pipe much cheaper the copper also a Taco 007 is set up to run 3/4" water flow 69.95 even if you hook up 1" to it still only running 3/4" water flow volume. Also your ash door is high and small on base not much room for a ash pan or tub to catch ash and clinkers that will fall off pot lower and a bigger door will work better to get a pan or tub in and out of base

coal berner wrote:Could of used 1" black pipe much cheaper the copper also a Taco 007 is set up to run 3/4" water flow 69.95 even if you hook up 1" to it still only running 3/4" water flow volume.

Yeah, iron pipe is a lot cheaper, but I don't have any tools to cut and thread the stuff properly. I guess I'm just familiar with copper and can do a decent job of it. I'm also running a Grundfos 15-58 pump, equivalent to the Taco 008. The extra flow resistance of 3/4" copper (around 140 feet of it) would kill me on head loss compared to the 1", which adds very little at my design flow rate. The 130 feet (each way) of 1" pex in the ground is really my limiting factor, so I'm trying to minimize any additional resistance and avoid going to a bigger pump.

Also your ash door is high and small on base not much room for a ash pan or tub to catch ash and clinkers that will fall off pot lower and a bigger door will work better to get a pan or tub in and out of base

I wasn't sure how big I could make the door until I actually got the base built and stoker installed, so was a little conservative. Also take note that there is no ash pan under the pot. There will be a solid firebrick hearth around the pot, 1 to 2 inches below the lip. The ash will collect and fuse into a clinker "ring" that will be removed every day or two. Any loose ash is pushed up next to the pot and left to fuse into the next clinker.

Using an EFM round door boiler top certainly isn't the most ideal situation, but it was the only option at the time. My first preference would have been a Burnham 4N-63 which is what Will-Burt pairs with the S-30 stoker, but it's a 1500 lb. beast and the best quote I got was $7500.

Hello Chris,

I've been reading this thread with interest, it's always great to see the skills people have, and how they use these skills to bring back an old coal appliance.

I hear you on the price of copper pipe. I've got a much shorter run of 1-1/2" installed almost ten years ago. I though it was expensive then, I couldn't possibly afford at today's prices.

I've looked at your selection of pipe size and circulator and calculated the BTU you can transfer with it. It's not clear what your BTU requirements are but it appears to be under 90K based on the size of your existing furnace. I've assumed a piping one way run of 150 ft. That's total pipe length plus some equivalent lengths for fittings. Ive also assumed the Gundfos 12-58 running on the highest speed setting. The somewhat busy graph below shows the flow rates for three copper pipe sizes 3/4, 1 and 1-1/4 inch sizes. The intersection of the pump and pipe curves gives the flow rate. For 1" pipe the flow rate would be about 8.5 GPM.



Assuming the design criteria on your radiation system temperature drop is 20 degrees the BTU you can transfer with the 1 inch pipe is:

BTU = 500 x 8.5 x 20 = 85,000 BTU

It looks like a good match for your furnace. My analysis assumes all 1" pipe. If you plan to use a water to air heat exchange it will likely have a greater piping head loss than 1" pipe. This will reduce the flow and the possible BTU heat transfer. If the reduction is too great a larger pump would provide a solution. As you point out high head pumps are expensive. A alternate solution is to put two inexpensive pumps in series. I've graphed this as shown by the "green" graph line. This dual series pump configuration raises the flow to about 10.5 GPM or 100,500 BTU transfer. Small pumps are easy to install in series, they are just bolted flange to flange.

If you go the water to air approach be sure to select a low head loss coil. Post the specs on what you plan to use for radiation and I'll do a flow analysis. Good luck with the rest of your project. Looks great so far.

europachris wrote:

coal berner wrote:Could of used 1" black pipe much cheaper the copper also a Taco 007 is set up to run 3/4" water flow 69.95 even if you hook up 1" to it still only running 3/4" water flow volume.

Yeah, iron pipe is a lot cheaper, but I don't have any tools to cut and thread the stuff properly. I guess I'm just familiar with copper and can do a decent job of it. I'm also running a Grundfos 15-58 pump, equivalent to the Taco 008. The extra flow resistance of 3/4" copper (around 140 feet of it) would kill me on head loss compared to the 1", which adds very little at my design flow rate. The 130 feet (each way) of 1" pex in the ground is really my limiting factor, so I'm trying to minimize any additional resistance and avoid going to a bigger pump.

Also your ash door is high and small on base not much room for a ash pan or tub to catch ash and clinkers that will fall off pot lower and a bigger door will work better to get a pan or tub in and out of base

I wasn't sure how big I could make the door until I actually got the base built and stoker installed, so was a little conservative. Also take note that there is no ash pan under the pot. There will be a solid firebrick hearth around the pot, 1 to 2 inches below the lip. The ash will collect and fuse into a clinker "ring" that will be removed every day or two. Any loose ash is pushed up next to the pot and left to fuse into the next clinker.

Tuyeres.gif

Using an EFM round door boiler top certainly isn't the most ideal situation, but it was the only option at the time. My first preference would have been a Burnham 4N-63 which is what Will-Burt pairs with the S-30 stoker, but it's a 1500 lb. beast and the best quote I got was $7500.

Yea forgot about the reflector hearth in the base Still a bigger door would make things a little easier for cleaning out .
Carry on Nice Job .

Yanche wrote:Hello Chris,

Assuming the design criteria on your radiation system temperature drop is 20 degrees the BTU you can transfer with the 1 inch pipe is:

BTU = 500 x 8.5 x 20 = 85,000 BTU

If you go the water to air approach be sure to select a low head loss coil. Post the specs on what you plan to use for radiation and I'll do a flow analysis. Good luck with the rest of your project. Looks great so far.

Great info! Thanks!

Here's my setup: Boiler is located in insulated garage/shop. 1-1/4" iron pipe from top of boiler (since that's the outlet size - keeping it simple) to air eliminator/tank and pump, about 4 feet of pipe and 90. Then transition to 1" copper for less than 10 feet before going into 1" pex (not pex-al-pex). The insulated pex runs 120' to the house where it transitions back to 1" copper for the 50' run to the furnace.

Based upon your analysis (and my reality), we are very close. My furnace is 72k BTU output (80k input). I have a 16x18 fan coil on the way, 1" inlet and outlet. This is the data I have for it: I bought it through an Ebay seller just up the road in Wisconsin, and the seller says it will make 129,000 BTU which either is a typo or optimistic. I estimate I'll be operating in the 1000cfm region at 180 water temp. As you can see, there is very little difference in heat output between 5gpm and 9gpm. I was originally targeting 8 to 10 gpm flow rates which was driving me towards a Taco 011 or Grundfos 26-96. But, upon further analysis and verifying I only have 72k BTU output heating the house just fine, I revised my flow rates required to between 5 and 7 gpm, which can be handled by a Taco 008 or Grundfos 15-58 (which I purchased). I also figure having a delta-T of more than 20 degrees is just fine - there is nothing else on the loop at this time, although I can add DHW or a separate basement zone later very easily.

Essentially, the 1" insulated pex run is THE resistance to the circuit. I added up all the copper and fan coil (which has very low head loss) and the head loss was about 3 feet. The pex had a head loss of about 11 to 12 feet. I'd rather have had 1-1/4" pex or 1" pex-al-pex, but the seller told me that the 1" pex is what he installs for all the OWB projects and it's been enough for everything so far. Granted, it's likely true seeing as I only have 72k BTU heating 2800 sq.ft. of 2 story house, but to get enough BTU transfer for more than just house heating requires 8-10 gpm of flow and that requires a big pump. That just goes against my engineering principals - it's like driving with the parking brake on. But, the 1-1/4" insulated pex is even larger and stiffer than the 1" (which is already a bear to handle) and even more expensive. But, this pex is beautiful stuff - fully foamed inside a seamless polyethylene jacket: http://www.thermopex.com/ I just didn't trust some of the stuff sold on Ebay that's not much more than pex (or pex-al-pex) wrapped in some bubble wrap and stuffed through some cheap plastic flex drain tubing. I wanted to have peace of mind that I'd never have to worry about water inside the jacket.

I have been reading through Siegenthaler's book extensively and it is an excellent reference. Taco has some excellent "how-to" information as well. I will say that the "student" version software included with Siegenthaler's book is not real useful, though, for "real world" installations, but it is useful if you know how to fudge your input values into what it can cope with.

Chris

I see your drawing refers to a cast-able refractory around the business hole

the 100 I have simply used a tight floor of fire brick soldered as a tile pattern set on the dry sand - cut to fit around the hole. As this box is a bit smaller the cut and fit may be more often than not per brick -- but it could save some expense over the cast. A plus is that you can pick a busted brick out of the pattern and replace it during off season cleaning. This vs pulling and recasting the whole floor ????

Just thoughts!

Great job. You will need to put firebrick at least 18" up the sides of the base/boiler from the top of the refractory hearth. This is to reflect heat properly into the fuelbed and prevent production of unburned coke. It will also help to melt down the ash and most importantly give you a cleaner burn with less excess air. If possible, suspend a nice slab of ceramic fiber board high and directly above the firepot to reflect heat into the fire, it will substantially improve the performance and efficiency of the stoker.

Yesterday my main accomplishment was getting the firepot "tucked in" all snug in the base. I've not cemented in the firebrick yet as I want to wait until just before the boiler top goes on just in case I need to change anything. The base dimensions worked out pretty well for the firebrick although I did have to trim about 1/2"-3/4" from the vertical bricks to make them fit under the top angle iron frame. I found the only way to do it was to cut almost all the way through on both sides and then chisel it. If I just scored it the brick would crack somewhere else than where it was supposed to. It was a messy job even with my shop vacuum and some 'dust collection' to catch most of the dust.

My fan coil arrived today as a pleasant surprise, so I'm working on finishing up the plumbing and electrical. Next weekend looks like I might be able to get the chimney up and get the boiler on the base and finished!

I don't know if it was any cheaper to use firebrick rather than castable refractory - I used 6 boxes of Vogelzang bricks from Menards at $10/box. It probably took as long, too. But, I think it will work out well and was easier than slopping wet cement around and trying to make a form to keep it in place while it cures.

18" Berlin? That's an awful lot, twice as high as what I have now. It would seem I'd have more heat radiating through the sides of the base than going into the boiler water. I did think about a heat reflector, though. I'd need to weld on a hook or "U" to the top of the boiler to hang it. Any suggestions as to where I can find ceramic board? McMaster-Carr has some but it's really expensive there. I'd like to use the same board on the back of the door on the base, too, to insulate it from the fire.

yup 18". run kaowool or fiberboard behind the brick if you want to insulate it better. you'll have from 4-8" of loose ash in the boiler at all times, the visible fire and coal bed will be above that, so you need the firebrick to extend enough to reflect heat into the active flame and fuel bed above the ash. you can find ceramic fiberboard at hvac supply houses, online, on ebay for decent prices.

Is the ceramic you are referring too also known as mill board? For example the products made by InterSource USA, Inc

http://www.intersourceusa.com/millboard.htm

If that's it the specs say it's working temperature is 2000 deg F. Melting point 3200 deg F.

Here is some millboard $$$http://www.mcmaster.com/#millboard/=ab3tgz

europachris wrote:Here's my setup: Boiler is located in insulated garage/shop. 1-1/4" iron pipe from top of boiler (since that's the outlet size - keeping it simple) to air eliminator/tank and pump, about 4 feet of pipe and 90. Then transition to 1" copper for less than 10 feet before going into 1" pex (not pex-al-pex). The insulated pex runs 120' to the house where it transitions back to 1" copper for the 50' run to the furnace.
Chris

I've plotted the piping curve for your composite piping. The pex has considerable additional friction which reduces your flow to 6 GPM or about 60,000 BTU. This assumes the water to air heat exchanger has no resistance. In fact it will further reduce the flow. You made need to add a second pump to get the desired BTU transfer. I've included the equation I plotted on the graph. I've added some equivalent lengths for pipe adapter fittings, per suggestions in Seigenthaler's book.

yanche, that's similar to what i'm talking about and may work fine, but what i've used with success is vacuum/wet formed low density ceramic fiber board similar to an oil furnace combustion chamber material. The low densities work well for suspended applications because they tend to achieve higher surface temperatures, and, over time, they tend to deform and sag less.

Yanche wrote:I've plotted the piping curve for your composite piping. The pex has considerable additional friction which reduces your flow to 6 GPM or about 60,000 BTU. This assumes the water to air heat exchanger has no resistance. In fact it will further reduce the flow. You made need to add a second pump to get the desired BTU transfer. I've included the equation I plotted on the graph. I've added some equivalent lengths for pipe adapter fittings, per suggestions in Seigenthaler's book.

Yep, that is almost exactly what I came up with (I think I had 5.8 gpm). The kicker is that depending on the actual CFM of air flowing over the coil when it's installed, I could end up with more (or less) Delta-T in the water and according to the fan coil data, I "should" see 63K to about 73K BTU at 180 deg. water temp.

I am also using "sharkbite" type fittings to transition from the pex to the copper which preserve the already small I.D. of the 1" pex rather than further reduction in the I.D. using a press-in fitting with a crimp or clamp retention. I looked at the fittings that came with the pex and thought no way do I want to go through all this work to try and squirt water through a garden hose nozzle four (4) times per round trip.

Berlin wrote:yanche, that's similar to what i'm talking about and may work fine, but what i've used with success is vacuum/wet formed low density ceramic fiber board similar to an oil furnace combustion chamber material. The low densities work well for suspended applications because they tend to achieve higher surface temperatures, and, over time, they tend to deform and sag less.

I've got to find some of that - I know what you are talking about. Only problem is NOBODY heats with oil out here, so finding it isn't as easy as stopping by the local heating contractor supply.

I do plan to get the boiler up on end and welding on a stout hook to the top center for hanging. I suppose I could even just make up a friction-fit or turn-buckle rod that I could install/remove through the little round door if needed. My clean-out door size limits the diameter of the disc to about 11", which coincidentally is the inside diameter of the fire pot. Otherwise I can't install/replace the disc without pulling the boiler off the base.