Glenwood Magazine Fun.

As some of you know, a few of us have been spit-balling ideas about how to get new magazines cast for the Glenwood Oaks, the Glenwood base heaters #6 and #8, the Glenwood Modern Oaks 116 and 118, over in the," Glenwood #8 long burn" thread here,
Glenwood #8 Long Burn

Well, as a test to see approximately how much coal the mags will hold, I cut a 20 inch length of 8 inch sonotube to simulate the magazine. The sonotube is 7-1/4 inch inside diameter (ID), which is a bit larger than the magazine would be, so I didn't fill it quite to the 19-1/2 inch height that the original mag's are supposed to be.

The first picture shows the tube filled with nut coal to about three inches shy of the top.
The second picture is that same amount of nut coal poured into a 5 gal bucket. Looks lower in the picture but it's almost 3/4 full.
The third picture is that same amount of coal in a #16 coal bucket.
The fourth shows a 2 gal bucket filled, sitting on my 20 pound scale. The scale was zeroed out for the empty bucket then filled. So that's 20 pounds of coal.
The fifth picture is the same bucket with the remained of the coal from the tube. Sorry it's blurred - it reads 6-1/2 pounds.

So that's 26-1/2 pounds total. Knock off a pound and a half for the amount that the coal mound in the firepot would extend up to a peak without the mag and it's 25 pounds. So the mag would add roughly 50% more coal capacity to a # 6 base heater and a 116 Modern Oak.

Just for comparison, that 25 pounds of nut coal would fill the firebox of my small-ish range and burn for 10-11 hours, at least.

There was no tendency that I could see for the nut coal to bridge in the tube, even being as gentle as possible while slowly lifting the tube. The coal moved easily down inside it.

Next test is to pick up some stove coal and see how much it will hold. ... and will it have a tendency to bridge in a tube that size.

Paul

I might be able to come up with an original magazine. I will check this weekend.

25# in your mag. estimate seems very reasonable to me. the hopper in my DSM 1400 holds exactly 27#'s.

Emery - Put me on the board for 2 if anything turns up.

It's moot now but, for the record, I have 23-1/2" from the sealing face of my top plate to the top of my fire pot.

How does that compare to the #6 Paul?.

sunny,
Assuming the stove coal doesn't bridge, the magazine for stove coal needs to be a shorter length than a magazine used for nut coal...the angle of repose will be different.
Perhaps a "happy medium" could be struck, but the mound will be a little off.

Have 2 magazines, one of each correct length and swap them when needed.

Pancho wrote:It's moot now but, for the record, I have 23-1/2" from the sealing face of my top plate to the top of my fire pot.

How does that compare to the #6 Paul?.

Pancho,

The #6 and the 118 are 22-1/2 inch. So, using the #6 & #8 basic stove dimensions that coalnewbie posted, with the one inch deeper firepot of the #8, there's the other inch of the two inch difference in stove heights. Both put to use.

Looks like that if the #8 used the same length mag, that one inch more barrel height would be how they compensated to fill the wider firepot of the #8 to the same level as that mag would when used with the #6 .

Paul

McGiever wrote:sunny,
Assuming the stove coal doesn't bridge, the magazine for stove coal needs to be a shorter length than a magazine used for nut coal...the angle of repose will be different.
Perhaps a "happy medium" could be struck, but the mound will be a little off.

Have 2 magazines, one of each correct length and swap them when needed.

Maybe after figuring out which size works best for my stove, hack-saw customize the length ? Or, the make-one-size-fit-all tool - use a fire poker to move the coal around ?

Paul

Sunny Boy wrote:

McGiever wrote:
Maybe after figuring out which size works best for my stove, hack-saw customize the length ? Or, the make-one-size-fit-all tool - use a fire poker to move the coal around ?

Paul

Let's see....we'll need a charcoal mag and a lump charcoal mag for the summer Polar Vortexes....then we'll need a stove coal mag, a nut coal mag and then a 50/50 nut/stove coal mag.

....we need to come up with a gatling gun type setup.

Here's part two of the magazine coal size test.

I picked up three bags of Blaschak stove coal on my errand run this morning.

Here's pictures of how much fits in the same 20 inch length of 8 inch sonotube (7-1/4 inch id).
The first picture is the tube filled with what I guesstimate how much the Glenwood magazine would hold. Even though it may not look it, it's filled to the same height as it was when I used nut coal in part one above.

The second picture is the same white bucket with the scale zeroed out for the bucket's weight, then 20 pounds of stove coal from the tube.

The third pictures is the remainder of what was in the tube.

So, 24 pounds total of stove coal.

The difference between the two sizes is that the same "test magazine " space holds roughly 2-1/2 pounds more nut coal than it can of stove coal. Or, another way to look at it is, you can put about 10% more nut coal in the same space.

When I slowly lifted the tube, the stove coal moved easily down the tube with no hesitation to indicate that it might want to bridge. Interestingly enough, when I used stove coal in the 7 inch wide firebox of my range, it showed LESS tendency to bridge than nut coal does. I'm guessing it has something to do with the heavier chunks of stove coal with larger air spaces around them ?

Paul

Now, this is unlike the Glenwood magazines, but does illustrates how other shaped magazines could bridge larger or mixed coal sizes... This one likes Nut... mixed size or Stove size might take a few pokes now and then to keep it moving.

Wow. It almost looks like the mag has more capacity than the fire pot.

Is that cast iron and about how thick is it???.

Well, even though I haven't finish fitted it to the stove, I had to see just how much coal the recast Glenwood magazines hold.

I temporarily packing-taped two mag halves together, put it in a 5 gal pail and filled it with nut coal.

While lifting the mag out, the coal moved easily down the mag with no tendency to bridge that I could notice.

Same scale - zeroed out for the empty 2.5 gal bucket weight - then I poured in the coal that had filled the mag. That filled the bucket at 20 pounds, with a little more than 2 pounds left over.

The mags add just under 22 pounds of nut coal capacity.

Then, same thing using Blaschak stove coal. And, again, no tendency to bridge that I could notice. And like I found out in the Fuel Density thread, the stove coal is about 10% less weight for the same volume as nut coal.

First picture shows the mag filled with nut coal.
Second shows the almost 2 pounds that it was over 20 pounds by.
The third is the mag filled with Blaschak stove coal.
Forth shows the 20 pounds of stove that filled the mag.
Fifth shows just the mag weighing 18-1/4 pounds without the 6 fasteners that would hold the two halves together.

Just in case anyone was curious what this all adds to a Glenwood stove.

Paul

Paul, do you bolt the 2 parts together before or after sliding them in the stove?
Is the fitting job doable for about everybody or not very easy to do? Just curious!

nortcan,

It would be tough to reach inside the stove to get all six machine screws in place. If the screws used are not too long, yes the mag can be bolted together then slid down into the stove.

As far as can anyone fit them togther ? That depends on the person and the castings they receive. There's some variation in the castings that will need grinding/filing, some need more fitting together than others. I work on antique machinery for a living and I've had to finishing rough castings before, so what would seem easy to me may not be for others who don't work with tools everyday.

Paul