Diary of a 600 degree burn

I enjoyed the information either way.

I also open up the air on the 30 as the cycle ends to keep temps up and coal beds down. When I load it up right, I can get peak temps in about 30 minutes. With a big, full load, temps over 600 will be maintained for 2-3 hours. Then it slowly drops over the next several hours.

 

Help me out here. The thermometer is really fuzzy. What were the peak temps on the 16 hour burn?

 

Almost 900 on the magnetic thermometer which is about 770 on the IR and about 650 IR on the stove top. It settles in at the top of the yellow (550, probably 400 stove top) for hours then slowly descends till it hits the bottom of the yellow (300) at about 45 seconds in the video (10-11 hour point in the burn).

This magnetic thermometer goes way high at higher temps. Its not off as much in the yellow zone.

 

Okay. I like that and that makes more sense, but why such a drastic drop of of less than four and a half hours with 600 degrees? I get more than that with pine (5-7 hours). I'm missing something, and it is probably obvious, I'm just not seeing it, though.

 

It hits "900" at 4 seconds. 4 seconds on this time lapse rate equals one hour of burn. I was burning it on a high air setting then cut the air back, which you can see if you watch the air control lever at the bottom left of the video at about 3 seconds into the video. After cutting the air back it settles down to the top of the yellow at the 12 second mark (3 hours into the burn). It stays there till about the 25 second mark, which is a about 6:15 hours into the burn. It then slowly descends to the bottom of the yellow (300) at about 45 seconds (10-11 hours) in the video. At that point stove top is down to around 250.

 

Its the secondaries -- the heat coming off the glass. When the firebox is black you can leave your hand right in front of the glass. Not so when secondaries are in full swing. The stovetop temp is not telling the complete story. I think total heat output at 500 stovetop cat burn versus 600 stovetop secondaries burn is a 40% difference, not the 20% suggested by the stovetop alone.

{edit: right now, 20 minutes into a new load, I turned the air down, firebox nearly all black, stovetop climbing past 450, and I can brush the glass with the hair on the back of my fingers. No way I would get closer than a foot when the secondaries are really rolling.}

 

Completely agree Flamestead. Heat off the top front of this stove on a full bore secondary burn is just incredible. When the air is cut back to primarily a cat burn its a completely different type of heat output.

(And sorry to hijack your thread )

 

Not at all - it is fun to discuss, and I'm getting more clarity from everyone's thoughts.

 

I wouldn't call it a hijacking at all. Flame posted this thread as a response to my question in a previous thread. Your posts were directly related to my questions on this topic.

 

Cabot Butter, Salted. 38 degree F starting temp, 24" from glass.
Ideal Steel black firebox,
Time Stovetop Flue
00 475 300
11 475 300
20 475 290
25 470 290

"After" photo. Able to pick up and re-wrap butter; wife will not know if you do not tell...



Different stick of Cabot Butter, Salted, 38 degrees, 24" from glass
Ideal Steel secondaries in firebox,
Time Stovetop Flue
00 550 525
10 575 500
15 575 500
17 Puddles of butter starting to form in bowl
20 580 500
25 580 500 Pronounced lean, followed by loss of balance at 25:04. Front half of stick is as soft as, ummm, melted butter.

I was expecting more dramatic results in my first effort to document the difference between the heat output from the secondaries versus a cat-only burn.

 

Really. We need an official scientific (sounding) name for this test method.

Then we can use Grizzly Adams wood stove top popcorn method and put the two together to watch Firewood Hoarders TV.

 

Concrete is tested using a "slump" test.

Butter slump?

 

*EAFEAMG Softening Test

(*Emulsion of animal fat extracted from animal's mammary glands, AKA; butter)

 

It would be interesting to get a manometer reading before a light off to see what your stacks are running at. It's kind of hard to compare with so many variables?

Everyones results are so mixed when comparing stoves, even stove to stove.

(Wood species, moisture, split size, wind direction, stove location, single, double, triple wall, stack probe vs magnetic, bypass engagement time, when air is cut and on and on).

Is Wood Stock providing you guys with a set of guidelines, parameters, questionaire or reporting back such as a case study?

Maybe in the future, it would be advantageous that the Wood Hoarders Club to generate some kind of generic template form to document new or beta test stoves out there? It could be a first for a Wood Stove First.

Maybe there could have specific fields on that form that have to be filled out like, location of the stove, species of wood, moisture content, Chimney Design, Weather Report, Ect.

The old adage, "Hey I got 23 MPG with my Chevy" to some people with out the "How, When, Why" It could be possible be a help to new stove owners as well, seeing the variables and conditions that exist out there.

Not that I am taking any shots at anyone, not my intent. I am just thinking outside the box a little bit here.

I applaud everyones efforts on documenting burn times and scenarios that are out there with the IS.

Final note, I am bit bitter that I am in Minnesota and not able to get on the band wagon field testing a stove. Oh well, I will be content on field testing fishing gear =)

 

When I met Tom from Woodstock at the DC stove challenge he gave me some very explicit instructions. And I quote:

"Use it, abuse it, try to break it."
​

My threads here have pretty much become my way of reporting back to the good folks at Woodstock.

I exchange emails with Tom occasionally on specific things I want to bring to his attention and several Woodstock staff are forum members here. Its a pretty simple method of Beta testing. It's very informal but given the diversity of installations over a decent geographic range they are pretty much assured of discovering most issues that need improvement or revision prior to going into production. One thing that has been a concrete result of Beta testing for instance is the shorter and wider spaced andirons.

 

It is refreshing to see such a logical approach in Industry between the customer and a product.