Would You Just Go Out Please!

wsherrick wrote:

joeq wrote:William, would its long windedness (?) be contributed to a little primary air leakage? I know people have said these stoves weren't all made super tight. Even with the MPDs made the way they are, there's still a flow available, even when totally closed. But if the stove was built airtight, wouldn't the fire die sooner? Not that it's a bad thing. I know if you "really" wanted it out, you could make it so.
PS. Why are you posting so early in the AM. Couldn't sleep? Still digesting after Turkey day?

I was up late because I was being a bad boy. I should have been on the dialysis machine two hours before hand.

Yes, there is a tiny bit of air leakage where the grate shaker bar extends out through its little slot. The primary door, the dampers and the clinker door are all air tight with absolutely no leaks. It probably is the little bit of air leaking around the grate shaker that the fire is using. But I also had the dampers open just a little bit.

Not coal anything and first I her of the med issues I have mine though not the ones you do. they all suck in different ways so no sense grading the jut sorry to hear it and hope all works well for a good long life. Be well hang tough !!!
Dave

Does anyone know what model Crawford, William is using? A suspended pot, "and" a full BB. Wonder how much coal the pot holds?

joeq wrote:Does anyone know what model Crawford, William is using? A suspended pot, "and" a full BB. Wonder how much coal the pot holds?

Halfway down page two, Joe - Scalabro describes William's stove.

Paul

lobsterman wrote:Well there is no argument that the base-heater's efficiency increases due to that mode but that is due to the longer path. Every stove will be warm below the grate. My Chubby right now is purring along at 300 on the heart of the barrel and is 150 in the region below the grate. I am preheating input air very well. The front of my ashpan is also at 150.

WADR,

there is a diff. between even a Chubby , which I hold in very high esteem, and a suspended pot base burner.

my stove is somewhere in between them and there is a world of diff. in the primary preheating on it presently and that which you describe.

currently the skin of my base chamber is anywhere from 112 to 175 F ( IR ) the ash pit skin is from 175 to 300 F and the barrel is anywhere from 255 to 386 F.

best,
steve

wsherrick wrote:

Rob R. wrote:Impressive.

What are you burning for coal?

I am burning stove sized coal that came straight from the breaker at Reading. This is a very good batch of coal. It has that glassy sheen to it and it sounded like glass when it was unloaded.

Nice. Good coal certainly helps.

'Tis always a Good Feeling when the "Sherrick of Anthracite" returns for a long Winter's burn ! Hello William ! I think You'll make the Christmas polish with plenty of time to spare ! Hope All is Well !

KingCoal wrote:

lobsterman wrote:Well there is no argument that the base-heater's efficiency increases due to that mode but that is due to the longer path. Every stove will be warm below the grate. My Chubby right now is purring along at 300 on the heart of the barrel and is 150 in the region below the grate. I am preheating input air very well. The front of my ashpan is also at 150.

WADR,

there is a diff. between even a Chubby , which I hold in very high esteem, and a suspended pot base burner.

my stove is somewhere in between them and there is a world of diff. in the primary preheating on it presently and that which you describe.

currently the skin of my base chamber is anywhere from 112 to 175 F ( IR ) the ash pit skin is from 175 to 300 F and the barrel is anywhere from 255 to 386 F.

best,
steve

Steve, respectfully, yes there is a big difference but it is not in "pre-heating" input air. Somebody started that rumor and 100 repeated it. My Chubby right now is at 360 on the barrel and 300 in the ash pit.

So, if there is no gain from preheating primary air, then why do they go to the trouble of building expensive primary air preheating systems in coal-fired commercial boilers that use the waste heat in flue gases ? Systems that are said to be used just to raise efficiency.

http://www.brighthubengineering.com/power-plants/34240-economizer-and-air-pre-heaters-are-provided-for-heat-recovery/

Sounds a lot like what a base heater is also doing by ducting hot flue gases under the ash drawer to add even more heat to the primary air than just relying on what the firebed radiates downward.

Paul

Maybe it does help combustion efficiency. But I think the bigger benefit is that it reclaims heat that would be lost to the stack and puts it back into the heat exchanger.

For example, normally combustion air is at room temperature. Since most of it is nitrogen, that part of the combustion air is only cooling the fire. If it's heated first with waste heat, it's already that much further ahead. It's like adding BTU's to the stove before any combustion even happens.

I think this is a nice description of the Glenwood base-heater. No
mention of pre-heating input air which is total made up BS.

http://206.123.105.157/stove-articles/342-glenwood-base-heater-wood-coal-antique-stove-for-home-heating

I agree with Lee, but also think the benefit is two-fold.

So I guess the guys who design and build commercial coal coal-fired boilers are just using, "total made up BS" when they include primary air preheater systems ?

So, if it's only length that matters, then back pipe oaks, or longer stove pipes should be all we need. Yeah, ok.

Paul

There is combustion efficiency and boiler efficiency and not the same thing. You have to burn fuel to raise the temp of fuel and intake air to get to the temp you need to drive the load on the boiler. If you steal waste heat to warm intake air and fuel you don't have to burn fuel to do that. If it makes combustion better fine if not still ok but does make the total system efficiency go up and that is what is important to the boiler operator. It is all about net gain. 70F in for air and fuel an 1000 needed have to burn enough fuel for a net gain of 930. If 140 fuel and air in needing the same 1000 need to burn enough fuel for 860net gain so a large savings without discussing combustion. Even if it hurts combustion 5% still a large net gain.

Steve, respectfully, yes there is a big difference but it is not in "pre-heating" input air. [/quote]

LM, my only comment further is that there are several zones, actions and paths incorporated in the BB designs that add up to a pretty neat package. there are variants of them in all of that type of stove. my conclusion is that as production and use advanced the makers found that just one didn't fully meet the need and added further refinements. in the end it's the combined result of all of them together that makes the diff.

surely no single manufacturer would have pursued this otherwise, much less all the main builders in the nation ?

i also see that you had a barrel and ash pit temp very close to the same. impressive indeed. must have been part of the reason that design was copied and used to good success by several companies thru the yrs.

happy heating,
steve