Wood stove heat

Stove costs ... As many around here switch to Pellet Stoves or buy new ones w fancy enamel and catalytic s , found one of mine for $200 and the other (in mint condition) free for the hauling.
 
I took a Baker wood/coal stove out of a house and got paid to do it. It wasn't a bad stove till some idiot overfired it. It had exhaust pipe style tubes running through the fire box that cracked where they were welded to the plate. I might take them out and fill the holes in. Good solid(heavy!!!!!) stove.
 
Tree09 said:
i literally weld pressure piping all day. I could build anything i wanted... It's a large job, but i do literally have piles of steel pipe of multiple sizes, assorted scrap including drums, more welding rod than i could ever burn, all sorts of fabrication tools, a backhoe, all hydronic parts except for the pump (i might have one) and pipes stubbed out just for this.
Click to expand...

Why not build a build a small size nuclear sub while you at it :/: :lol:
 
Shit I’ve got an idea. How about we put our heads down on a design and I will pay to build it. You get heat I get R&D for free. Referring to touliaki redneck stove
 
Wood stove water heaters are AWESOME. Maybe Sven will chime in, his dad rigged up a loop on the woodstove, filling a 40ish gallon tank.

Last year I didn't have much wood put away, and pretty obsessively collected dead oak "bones" from jobs. They burn way better than no wood!
 
Gotta be careful doing that in a epa certified woodstove ... they get their 76-80 efficiency by burning the gas that normally goes up the stack ... a coil flowing water may “wick away” enough heat to adversely affect this process ... outdoors with a homemade unit ... lite it up Chris !!!
 
Put a coil in the stove pipe, that gets it above the burn area. Or put it in the bottom under the coals, but ash may slow the heat transfer. At least it is hot there, hot enough to melt ash.
 
Yup the whole premise is to burn the fuel as hot as possible with an abundance of oxygen to facilitate maximum combustion. So after the incineration you extract the heat. So basically you want a blast furnace that is safe and sequesters the entire thermal output and radiates it over a long period of time. The tuelioki stove does this with literally a ton of soapstone, not really sure how much they weigh but they need their own foundation. I believe soapstone is the best material per volume at absorbing heat. You start the fire with a straight pipe up the flue till the fire gets hot then you pull a dampener and the exhaust gets routed through a laberinth in the soapstone to suck out the heat. This is an elegant solution other than being stupid expensive.
What however if you have a burn chamber that is insulated and narrows down at the top to accelerate gas velocity at that point fresh air that has been piped through the heat is sucked into the hottest zone so reburning the smoke. After that it would be piped through a large water filled vessel . Obviously the water would be removed for transport
I would imagine you could get very efficient burns which are inherently safe as they would be in water!
Just need to find a pipe welder who needs a stove
 
PCTREE said:
Yup the whole premise is to burn the fuel as hot as possible with an abundance of oxygen to facilitate maximum combustion. So after the incineration you extract the heat. So basically you want a blast furnace that is safe and sequesters the entire thermal output and radiates it over a long period of time. The tuelioki stove does this with literally a ton of soapstone, not really sure how much they weigh but they need their own foundation. I believe soapstone is the best material per volume at absorbing heat. You start the fire with a straight pipe up the flue till the fire gets hot then you pull a dampener and the exhaust gets routed through a laberinth in the soapstone to suck out the heat. This is an elegant solution other than being stupid expensive.
What however if you have a burn chamber that is insulated and narrows down at the top to accelerate gas velocity at that point fresh air that has been piped through the heat is sucked into the hottest zone so reburning the smoke. After that it would be piped through a large water filled vessel . Obviously the water would be removed for transport
I would imagine you could get very efficientt burns which are inherently safe as they would be in water!
Just need to find a pipe welder who needs a stove
Click to expand...
Tulikivi makes excellent soapstone stoves that use the concept of thermal mass to give a steady heat throughout the coldest of winter days ... I imagine it gets considerably colder in Finland than in most areas of the USA so I’m sure it with keep the derrières toasty warm ... There is however one design that’s better imho and that’s the Russian Fireplace / rocket stove ... It may be a stretch to suggest a homeowner can build one that operates safely but armed with the knowledge , proper building materials and some grit it can be done ... The other option is to have on site-built to your specifications - not cheap , 6000and up ... The Russian Fireplace uses thousands of pounds of stone and instead of a conventional pipe that goes straight up and out , the exhaust follows an ever rising maze until it finally is expelled after extracting the maximum heat ... A large fire is made in the am with up to 100lbs of wood - it burns f’n HOT ! Like 1800+ Fahrenheit, temps you simply wouldn’t be able to reach with a woodstove ... The large thermal mass soaks up this incredible heat and slowly releases it for 12-36 hrs before another load ... I’ve seen one fitted with a cook stove that would bake a pizza it about 8minutes ! ... Again , not for everyone but dollar for dollar the cheapest heating solution available over the long haul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top