When I close the air intake, the coal burns slower and produces less heat, as it should... The baro only holds draft pressure steady, (but you know that part and much more). I agree that as the coal bed cools, and less heat is generated to create negative draft pressure in the chimney, the baro door would start to close in an attempt to maintain the pressure its set at.franco b wrote:I wonder how much they could be compared? If you close down the air intake to simulate ashing of the coal bed, the baro should close somewhat to maintain the same draft through that bed. Will it be as effective as the bi-metallic increasing the air opening as stove temp. falls?
Would it be as effective as a bi-metallic keeping the stove temperature steady?
It would until ashing and/or available fuel become an issue later in the burn..
What I'm meaning in the end result being the same is that - the bi metallic keeps the stove temperature from falling below its set point, or going above its set point as draft pressure fluctuates.. The baro, by keeping pressure steady, keeps combustion air rate steady which has the side effect of the stove temp keeping steady. But yes, ashing will eventually cause the baro controlled stove to loose temp where the bimetallic controlled stove will combat the ashing side effects by giving it more combustion air to work with..
Which one is better? I dunno lol. I really like my baro
It stands to reason that the flattest heat output would be from a stove with both devices..
The baro is like a passive stove temp regulator (by keeping pressure flat) where the bi metallic is an active stove temp regulator (by directly increasing or decreasing primary combustion air). Overall they both achieve what we're looking for, a steady heat output..
Edit - At least until ashing and/or available fuel cause them to loose temp..
