Advantage of longer wood in an Eko?

I have been running a Paxo-40 for about 2 weeks. It is similar to the Eko, both by Orlan. The manual says the -40 handles 20" logs and the -60 25", both with 7" splits. I am using 16-18" by 5" and it is working pretty well. I had more bridging with the 7" splits. I also have a 4000 sf house. I don't have the heat exhanger installed yet to tie into the existing in floor radiant. In the meantime, I heat my 1000 gal storage (2x500 popane, stacked) in the basement as one big radiator. This keeps the 2500 sf basement at 72+ floor, 78+ ceiling. The significantly off loads the infloor radiant on the first floor (2500sf). Opening the basement stair door helps as well.

I put my boiler in an outbuilding. I am glad I did since there is inevitable smoke when servicing the boiler. Not to mention the ashes, wood, and other litter.

I am in my third season with the Eko 40. The first year I was stuck with wood cut for the Newmac furnace at about 12 to 16", it worked but the larger diameter pieces didn't. The next season I cut to 20" but didn't split small enough and found to have more bridging. Now we have 20" very dry wood and smaller splits and scrapwood from reno work and things work well.
If I were to do it again I would take the 60 for the extra wood capacity, but I don't believe it is as much as 30". You also want to leave some space in front and back for the wood to move down freely.
I would try the Biomax if given a chance, seems very similar to the Eko and manufactured (maybe no more) by Orlan for New Horizon as far as I know.

Henk.

I would not recommed it as a way to heat the house - no very well controlled. The temps have been pretty cool(for us) teens and twentys overnight, 30's in the day. The last two days have been very heavy heat load wih in the teens and twentys and winds up to 45 mph. Right now I get about hours on a load of wood. Boiler temp is 165. Storage temp is less, 145 or so, and stratified.

Things to do: Add heat exchanger; temp montor system.

I would say make your decision based on how many BTU's you need. One advantage to the Eko 40 is that it has a single nozzle. From my experience the mixture/burn is more stable. The Eko 60 is nice because of the larger firebox and output, however there are often times when one nozzle is running differently than the other because of wood position, etc. If you go with the 60, I recommend adding 500 gallons to the storage system capacity.

If I was to do it all over again I would go with the biomass 60 I had a chance to work on one and liked it better than my eko 60. How ever the best feature I liked on it was the built in draft fan. I think the paxo comes with one built in now. The add on draft fan for the older eko does not work very good.

Rob

Something to consider... I run my EKO 60 with the rear nozzle blocked & only 1 fan at 1/2 speed. I bought it with this intent. Essentially, it's a 40 (at 1/2 fan speed, even less), the 40 has 1 1"x8" nozzle, the 60 has 2 1"x8" nozzles.
One advantage to this is the greater hx area in a 60-about 50% more. Because of this, you can extract more heat into the water for a given burn. I've never seen flue surface temps over 150 °F, which equates to probe temp of 300 even during a sustained full bore burn.
If I ever add storage I may continue to use only 1 nozzle & I could still use 24" or 30" wood. Running 2 nozzles can produce differing burns one to the other depending on coal above it as mentioned.
Another reason I went with the 60 is we plan to more than double sf & if I add storage, larger firebox=less times loading for a given output.
If I never change anything, I'm quite happy with the performance as is.

Hydronics said:

Something to consider... I run my EKO 60 with the rear nozzle blocked & only 1 fan at 1/2 speed. I bought it with this intent. Essentially, it's a 40 (at 1/2 fan speed, even less), the 40 has 1 1"x8" nozzle, the 60 has 2 1"x8" nozzles.
One advantage to this is the greater hx area in a 60-about 50% more. Because of this, you can extract more heat into the water for a given burn. I've never seen flue surface temps over 150 °F, which equates to probe temp of 300 even during a sustained full bore burn.
If I ever add storage I may continue to use only 1 nozzle & I could still use 24" or 30" wood. Running 2 nozzles can produce differing burns one to the other depending on coal above it as mentioned.
Another reason I went with the 60 is we plan to more than double sf & if I add storage, larger firebox=less times loading for a given output.
If I never change anything, I'm quite happy with the performance as is.

Click to expand...

This is interesting...what did you block the nozzle with and did you do anything with the secondary air coming out the blocked nozzle? I remember discussing this awhile ago but I thought everyone was just doing it during the shoulder season. Hopefully I don't take this to far off topic.

sdrobertson said:

Hydronics said:

Something to consider... I run my EKO 60 with the rear nozzle blocked & only 1 fan at 1/2 speed. I bought it with this intent. Essentially, it's a 40 (at 1/2 fan speed, even less), the 40 has 1 1"x8" nozzle, the 60 has 2 1"x8" nozzles.
One advantage to this is the greater hx area in a 60-about 50% more. Because of this, you can extract more heat into the water for a given burn. I've never seen flue surface temps over 150 °F, which equates to probe temp of 300 even during a sustained full bore burn.
If I ever add storage I may continue to use only 1 nozzle & I could still use 24" or 30" wood. Running 2 nozzles can produce differing burns one to the other depending on coal above it as mentioned.
Another reason I went with the 60 is we plan to more than double sf & if I add storage, larger firebox=less times loading for a given output.
If I never change anything, I'm quite happy with the performance as is.

Click to expand...

This is interesting...what did you block the nozzle with and did you do anything with the secondary air coming out the blocked nozzle? I remember discussing this awhile ago but I thought everyone was just doing it during the shoulder season. Hopefully I don't take this to far off topic.

Click to expand...

Shannon,
I didn't block the secondary air tubes in the blocked nozzle. If you block the top of the nozzle (I do it with a 1" fire brick laid on top) start the fan(s) & put your hand through the lower chamber and into the blocked nozzle you'll feel very little flow volume for secondary air. I did verify that my tubes are aligned with a penlight & still welded. I thought about casting a brick which would cover the tubes but based on the minimal flow decided it wasn't worthwhile.
In your case with the large storage volume you have, I wonder if it would take too long for you to recharge your tanks with the reduced output to be convenient. I'd be quite interested in your results, please PM me if you do.
What length do you cut your wood?
Another advantage to the longer firebox -if you cut your own wood is that you can cut the small diameter tree top pieces (pencils as my Father says) 30" long allowing less handling & making them more worthwhile to save.

I cut all my wood to 21" for two reasons:

1) Longer lengths mean less handling

2) That allows me to maximize the volume of wood that I can get into the little bitty firebox on the EKO 25.

You have to be careful not to load too many pieces with large cross-sections or you can get bridging.

My ultimate boiler would be an EKO 25 with an extra 4" of secondary combustion chamber height and an extra 12" of primary chamber height, with twice as many HX tubes (all 16" longer due to increased boiler height). Since we're talking ultimate, add in closed loop lambda and flue temp control of primary / secondary airflow rates.

I sometimes wonder if I would have liked the 40 better than the 60, but I reconsider when it stays in the teens and single digits like it is now. And also when I heat my garage for auto maintanence.
I cut my pieces as long as my woodsplitter will take. At 20-22 inches though, this length of wood leaves a space in either the front of the loading chamber or the back. I always seem to have little short pieces that I place in this cavity sideways. While this is effective, it does change how each nozzil performs. I really have no remedy. I think ideally, it would burn the best if using 16 inch pieces all placed ontop of each nozzil. Im not about to cut and handle more wood for this reason though. My sytem works well enough to satisfy me in this manner.

If you plan on using any forced air for heating, go with the 60 for sure with 1000 gal storage. If it is mostly a radiant floor, I think a 40 would be plenty.

gorbull said:

Sounds like this reduced flow from the second nozzle might actually be a design flaw in the Eko 60? Any other gassers with 2 nozzles have this problem?

Click to expand...

No its not.....he is running his this way due to the fact that he does not need the btu output of the 60 right now. He has it blocked off to run like a 40. I did this last year to my 60 and it ran fine. I also disconected 1 fan and unblocked the 2nd nozzle and it worked fine. Right now I am running both nozzles open both fans on and running at 50% speed and 50% fan open and it works fine.


Rob

taxidermist said:

gorbull said:

Sounds like this reduced flow from the second nozzle might actually be a design flaw in the Eko 60? Any other gassers with 2 nozzles have this problem?

Click to expand...

No its not.....he is running his this way due to the fact that he does not need the btu output of the 60 right now. He has it blocked off to run like a 40. I did this last year to my 60 and it ran fine. I also disconected 1 fan and unblocked the 2nd nozzle and it worked fine. Right now I am running both nozzles open both fans on and running at 50% speed and 50% fan open and it works fine.Rob

Click to expand...

Exactly Rob. In my opinion it's an advantage, it allows flexibility. If you want to use both nozzles it will probably work best with at least 20" wood centered in the firebox so both nozzles remain evenly covered.

I'll chip in on the BioMass vs EKO. Went to New Horizon with my mind made up to buy an EKO. I'm a design engineer with almost 40 years of product development experience and saw the advantages of the BioMass over the EKO but was nervous about the much smaller customer base. The clear advantages of the BioMass design motivated me to take a chance on the BioMass. ABSOLUTELY NO REGRETS. As a new gasser boiler operator I just don't know how all these other guys do it without that little window in the lower chamber door. Minor design issue but for my children, wife, and myself we are always using the window to check the status and for this first season.... very often moving the wood to correct bridging or other issues to tune the gassification. New Year's day I spent 3 hours reading the sticky about tuning the EKO and learned a huge amount how to better optimize our boiler but kept wondering how do these guys do this without being able to see the flame coming out of the nozzle.

That's just a start of design improvements in the BioMass. Upper chamber designed to reduce smoke escape, draft blower designed in, the little window, what appears to be a much better lower chamber ceramic liner, 6" exhaust (cheaper flue pipe). Time will tell regarding long term build quality vs the EKO but I would NEVER go back on my decision. As a business owner, I'm always thinking of new products and I'll bet I could sell a lot of those little windows to EKO guys. Maybe once I get more experienced I will use it less but I seriously doubt it. I guarantee you there is a new model EKO coming with the features in the BioMass today. I can't speak to the Econoburns and other good equipment discussed here but I'm really glad I took the chance on the BioMass vs the EKO. I want to repeat the EKO is proven and the unit I intended to come home with. I stared at both for over an hour and took the chance that the design improvements were worth the risk versus the much smaller user base. Two months in my only regrets are that I didn't get wood in last Spring. Unfortunately this winter I'm buring poorly seasoned wood which is killing my efficiency BUT I'm not buring propane. The BioMass design is clearly superior.... only time will tell if the build quality is as good as the EKO.

Oh.... heating a very energy inefficient 150 year old 4800 sq ft home with the BioMass 60. Boiler about 170-180 feet from house. Best wishes on your decision.

I must say that I am happy with my Paxo so far (Eco-Orlan), but I too wish I had the little glass viewing door. My boiler is in an outbuilding so I CAREFULLY open the lower door to check gassification. Other than that, it seems my only problems are typicaly leaning curve - how to split to minimize bridging, loading, well seasoned wood. I am buring splits from 6 foot lengths cut 2 1/2 years ago. I split as I need it. Moisture meter says about 20% - 25% so I am close on the wood (mixed hardwoods).

gorbull said:

My goodness Tennman you are one heck of a salesman.....now who do I make that cheque out to? Seriously I suspected the same from studying both brands but truth be told I have never seen either boiler in person only vicariously through the web.

One thing that bothers me about the Biomass is I can't figure out where the hell they come from! Plus the distributorship trail is rather sketchy. I know they are built in Poland and if you search on the New Horizon web site you will find a reference to Zaklady Maszynowe Hamech which leads to this website. http://info.hamech.pl/ where you will find impressive industrial boilers and such both no evidence of the Biomass. Perhaps these boilers are coming out of the Orlan plant?

Click to expand...

I thought about the Biomass when I bought my EKO also. They are built for Zenon, not by Orlan or Atmos(which the lower chamber is a copy of). I asked him which he prefers & why. He said in broken English/Polish: "They both good units, I likea Biomass because I design & it's my baby, but EKO good unit."

I think Zenon is a good guy, but tough to get answers from particularly after the sale. To be fair I have not talked to him in several years, so he may have learned much since then. I had a rough first 2 seasons and some of which could have been avoided had I gotten some better advice. I think he is busy. I learned most of what I know from this forum, it would have been great to have this place when I started.

I have only burned using my eko and have not even seen any others at work. Is there a price difference to compare? I think they all should have temp gauges at different areas of the boiler STANDARD, and you would not even need a window to see the flame, other than to make you smile. I have heard though that some guys say those windows get pretty cloudy after a while.

I have been thinking to myself that I should make a EKO "bible" in case I would ever kick the bucket, cause I don't think my wife and family would understand how to make her sing and keep things running smooth. If this only goes for the eko (I have an older model) then buy something else. I think generally most are happy with whatever gasser they get, so if this is true just hope what you bought holds up for many years of service.

By the way Hydronics, nice work on the Zenon impersonation.

I wish I could figure out how to see the previous posts as I write this. After months of study and reviewing all the trade studies done on this web site during the Fall of 08 and Spring of 09 I decided that the EKO 60 was the lowest risk, best bang per buck. Drove to WV with my car hauler to bring back my EKO 60. This was all based on info at this site and online studies. Very few folks in my neck of the woods have ever heard of a gassification boiler, lots of OWB smokers. Never saw or touched a gasser until I showed up at NH. Zenon showed me the various add-ons to the EKO that was already on the BioMass. He took all his years of feedback from his EKO customers and has tried to address those issues in the BioMass. Please no one interpret my comments as criticism of EKO, I still believe it's longevity in the marketplace make it the lowest risk, import boiler of the price range I was in. I do not believe the design changes make a measurable change in efficiency between the two designs. Variations in my wood will vastly overwhelm the design differences. But the first thing I did was open the door of the EKO and I was eyeball level looking at the top plate of the upper combustion chamber and I said to myself.... holy cow... what's gonna keep me from getting a blast of smoke or singeing my eyebrows everytime I open this thing. There are other design factors that pushed me over the edge standing there looking at both units that I said what the heck I'm gonna live dangerously and hope this thing doesn't rust out in 12 months. I asked who made the BioMass and it's made by a Polish company who makes commercial boilers. At that point I concluded... shoot... either one is made by someone far away and if bad stuff happens I'm probably screwed either way. Pretty uncharacteristic of the way I make big decisions. I was leaving WV with one or the other and would be linked to Zenon. Most of my installation help and subsystem selection came from folks right here... Taxidermist in particular and other. Zenon answered my questions but folks like Taxi were kind enough to spend time to help me (and his english is not broken). Without this website and you EKO users it would have been very difficult. So my reply here is to re-emphasis my intention is NOT to bash the EKO. But to provide hopefully some scarce feedback on the BioMass. All from a 2-month "Burning Chunk" boiler operator!

About choosing either an EKO40 or EKO60

I had to make this decision not too long ago, and chose the '60. I have (potentially) about 7000 sq feet to heat, and a thousand gallon (unpressureized) tank. So I felt I could use the output of the bigger boiler.

However, another consideration was this: I burn alot of junk softwood blowdowns and such. "Balsa Wood," my wife calls it. Since this kind of wood has less than half the BTU value/unit volume as opposed to normal hardwood fuel, I figured I would need the larger firebox to get the BTUs out with this kind of junk in.

Also, I love 2 foot wood. Less handling, and it stacks so easy.

I'll let you know at the end of the winter if my plan works out or not. Meanwhile, thanks for the info on blocking one of the nozzels. Presumably, you get lower output, but a longer burn time -- right?

Very interesing thread. Thanks
Smee

Smee said:

I'll let you know at the end of the winter if my plan works out or not. Meanwhile, thanks for the info on blocking one of the nozzels. Presumably, you get lower output, but a longer burn time -- right?

Very interesing thread. Thanks
Smee

Click to expand...

That's correct Smee, you may want to try it.
As I recall you replaced a Memco with the EKO?? You like it so far?

Regarding a previous reply: the proven track record of the EKO is what pushed me toward it over the Biomass, though I do like some aspects of the Biomass over the EKO.