Fireplace worth it?

[weatherguy]

All I can add is to report my experience with a traditional brick and mortar fireplace before and after a Pacific Energy Vista Insert was installed. Pre-insert, whenever I had a fire in the fireplace, the living room where the fireplace is located would get warm and the rest of the house would get cold. I had to shut off the upstairs heating zone (we have forced hot water baseboards and a separate zone for each floor) otherwise the upstairs heat would run continuously. I’m no heating expert, but I have to assume this was because the heat was being sucked out by the fireplace (or maybe the cold air was being sucked in). With the insert, we have a fire and it heats the living room nicely and the rest of the first floor pretty well. Some heat finds its way upstairs, but the upstairs zone runs pretty normally, cycling on and off as needed, rather than running contiuously.

Theres a difference in burning a fireplace with a modern heating system running and in the old days when the only source was a fireplace. Just heating a home with a fireplace/fireplaces with no other heating source will work but you would go through a lot of wood. The device mentioned earlier in the thread would help cut down on the amount of wood.
This of course cant compete with a new epa wood stove.

 

[Texas Fireframe]

>
You say fireplaces "suck a lot of wood up," but I can use an unsplit, two-foot long, ten-inch diameter log as a back log and watch it burn for many hours, providing intense radiant heat. When speaking of energy efficiency, you need to consider human energy as well. Some humans are unwilling/unable to split logs and they want a way of burning them unsplit. My husband has an ax scar on his ankle from childhood camp that serves as a reminder to avoid that particular task.
>

Allow me to focus on the one paragraph of your post that I am personally most interested in, namely burning large logs in a fireplace while maximizing radiant output.

I have two fireplaces and my own experience with burning 9-10 inch diameter logs is that it is a tough battle to keep the inner wood gasifying well enough to sustain real flames. Even if I am willing to settle for a glowing charcoal layer on the outside of the log instead I will need to sacrifice a continuous supply of smaller splits and kindling around the large log to keep the radiation going.

Could you perhaps show a few photographs of the various stages of such a burn (involving a large, radiant log) or point me to a YouTube video showing how it's done?

Henk

Edit: Texas Fireframe, please be assured this is a genuine question from someone who likes fireplaces and would love to learn more about how to maximize their radiant heat output, especially with large logs and even if it might require addition of a special grate/fireframe. In short, it is not some kind of trick question but is meant to help to start a more healthy discussion about the value of fireplaces.

Henk, I think most on this thread are genuinely interested in a friendly discussion about fireplaces. Let me preface my answer by saying that if the mod feels I am pushing my product, please alert me and some of us can continue this discussion in PM's or e-mails. But it's hard to respond without making an example of our product and I don't want to violate forum guidelines.

To keep a ten-inch log going, you do need other smaller logs or splits as it won't burn solo, but you do NOT need a continuous supply of kindling. The principle upon which our method of holding logs is based is (to quote my dad, the physicist/inventor) "the most efficient form of a radiator is a cavity" - also known as a hohlraum. Therefore, our grate holds logs in the shape of a sideways U (the cavity) as seen in the illustration on our homepage that compares ours to a conventional fire. www.texasfireframe.com. The larger back log is the base of that U (turned sideways). If you were to remove the smaller top logs, the large back log would go out. Likewise, if the arms were adjusted too high making the opening of the cavity too large, it would also not burn efficiently. But by making a two-inch opening in that sideways U,and by ensuring that all adjoining logs are making contact, the fire burns, including the large back log, radiating heat into the room, with the only maintenance required being to nudge the front logs back as they burn down (so contact between logs is maintained inside the cavity) and replace them as needed.

You raise a very good point that a video is needed to show and tell the story, and that is in the works! In the mean time, the photo on the home page gives you an idea of what it looks like to open up the hot inner cavity of the fire to the room - in contrast to the conventional fire where the hot cavity is closed by logs on all sides. (Our photo shows a greater than 2-inch opening in front because the fire has burned for awhile and also because you can increase that opening after the fire is going - if you like.)

Thanks for your interest. I hope that helps.

 

[henkmeuzelaar]

Thanks for the informative response.

Your reference to the effects of cavities on radiation output is very interesting to me since I used to design, build various types of "black cavity radiators". Although indispensable as temperature calibration sources for my pyrolysis/combustion research they were not particularly noted for high radiation output. However, I think I can see how a less deep "grey cavity radiator" formed by burning wood logs might possibly succeed in "having its cake and eat it" at the same time

Since I am certainly not a believer in reinventing the wheel, I intend to study the information on your website carefully, in particular as it relates to your father's ideas and contributions. From what I already know, I would not be amazed if some of it might yet translate into useful design & performance criteria for efficient "real" wood fireplaces, as opposed to dressed-down wood stoves made to look like a fireplace.

Henk

 

[Texas Fireframe]

You call fireplaces "dirty burners" even though there are far more bans on wood stove use than on firelace use.

[Citation Needed]

Carbon Neutral, I don't have a citation. I made that statement based on burning bans I've read about - wood stoves seem to have been banned much more than fireplaces, but if I'm not up to date on local laws and that's changed, I'd be interested in knowing more.

 

[begreen]

WA state info may help here. Fireplaces are covered in a stage 1 ban. Stage 2 EPA stove burning is still allowed during a common stage 1 ban.

Stage 1. During a Stage 1 burn ban:

* No burning is allowed in fireplaces and uncertified wood stoves, unless it is your only adequate source of heat. This includes the use of manufactured logs such as Duraflame or Javalogs.

http://www.pscleanair.org/airq/burnban/

 

[Texas Fireframe]

Thanks for the informative response.

Your reference to the effects of cavities on radiation output is very interesting to me since I used to design, build various types of "black cavity radiators". Although indispensable as temperature calibration sources for my pyrolysis/combustion research they were not particularly noted for high radiation output. However, I think I can see how a less deep "grey cavity radiator" formed by burning wood logs might possibly succeed in "having its cake and eat it" at the same time

Since I am certainly not a believer in reinventing the wheel, I intend to study the information on your website carefully, in particular as it relates to your father's ideas and contributions. From what I already know, I would not be amazed if some of it might yet translate into useful design & performance criteria for efficient "real" wood fireplaces, as opposed to dressed-down wood stoves made to look like a fireplace.

Henk

Thanks Henk. It sounds like you’ve really made a study of this subject. I’d be interested in knowing more about the black cavity radiators you designed and built.

If you, or any member would like to read further on the science behind this method of fire-building, I can e-mail the paper my father presented to the American Physical Society: “Domestic Fire and its Improvement: Qualitative Insights,†American Journal of Physics, Vol. 49, No. 6 (June, 1983): 596-599.
There’s another article about improving the efficiency of the fireplace with this log arrangement in the Scientific American, vol. 239, - radiation patterns were measured, comparing his method with the conventional fire. If interested, PM me your e-mail address or send it to me on my contact form here: http://www.texasfireframe.com/contact-us.html E-mail addresses are kept confidential, of course.

BeGreen - thanks for the WA info. My information may be out of date regarding fireplace/wood stove bans (though was aware EPA stoves are in a separate category). I'm searching for a website that lists burn ban laws throughout the U.S. No luck.

 

[begreen]

It's pretty logical based on emissions. This is a somewhat related thread, the graph sort of sums it up. Consider emissions as unburnt flue gases and wasted heat.

https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/69468/P15/#799404

 

[CarbonNeutral]

It's pretty logical based on emissions. This is a somewhat related thread, the graph sort of sums it up. Consider emissions as unburnt flue gases and wasted heat.

https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/forums/viewthread/69468/P15/#799404

Interesting that soft wood produces more emissions.

 

[VCBurner]

Well I'm surprised that this is the first discussion about open fireplaces here! I suppose because this is mostly a gathering place for wood stove users. But I'm interested in all points of view and in the various ways people burn wood for heat.

I'm surprised as well! Afterall, this is called The Hearthroom - Wood Stoves and Fireplaces. I thought we would be welcoming all burners, wood stove and fireplace alike. Glad to see you're still lurking around TF, there's a place for everything in this world. I'm not of the mind set to discount others opinions and view points. Much less am I prone to support anyone who is willing to say that a certain thing, in this case a fireplace, is useless. In my case it proved very usefull when I had no money to buy the very expensive oil!

With all that said, this has turned out to be quite an informative thread. It continues to stirr up views and opinions about this age old problem we face. How to heat a home with fire.

Thanks for the graph BeGreen, I agree, interesting to see how much is released into the atmosphere from different sources. Especially the soft wood as opposed to the hard wood. Would it be right to assume, that more waste would be expelled by burning soft wood in an EPA rated stove, than using hard wood? I'm just curious, could this be the reason why some people don't burn soft wood in their EPA rated stoves?

 

[spirilis]

lol! I don't enjoy a good argument until the graphs start coming out. That said, I have nothing to add, except I'd rather have my house built around a Masonry Heater. To hell with both wood stoves and open fireplaces!

 

[begreen]

Well I'm surprised that this is the first discussion about open fireplaces here! I suppose because this is mostly a gathering place for wood stove users. But I'm interested in all points of view and in the various ways people burn wood for heat.

I'm surprised as well!

Thanks for the graph BeGreen, I agree, interesting to see how much is released into the atmosphere from different sources. Especially the soft wood as opposed to the hard wood. Would it be right to assume, that more waste would be expelled by burning soft wood in an EPA rated stove, than using hard wood? I'm just curious, could this be the reason why some people don't burn soft wood in their EPA rated stoves?

That's because it isn't the first discussion. Just the first this year. There have been several threads on fireplaces, Rumfords and the like over the years. But most folks are here because first and foremost they want good heat, preferably using less fuel. That's why it tends to be the subject of the majority of posts.

EPA stoves are tested with softwood. They have to burn cleanly with it or will not get certified. A lot of folks living in the west only burn softwood.

 

[VCBurner]

EPA stoves are tested with softwood. They have to burn cleanly with it or will not get certified. A lot of folks living in the west only burn softwood.

I forgot they are tested with soft woods! That makes sense now. So, does it mean that by burning hard wood there will be even less emissions going into the environment? I burn pine here too. Some around here swear against it. But I see no reason not to burn it.

 

[Texas Fireframe]

Well I'm surprised that this is the first discussion about open fireplaces here!

That's because it isn't the first discussion. Just the first this year. There have been several threads on fireplaces, Rumfords and the like over the years.

Be Green, I was simply responding to what you wrote earlier: "Quite frankly this is the first open fireplace discussion I have seen since the forum started..." You must have remembered others after posting that.

Can you supply a source/link for the the graph you posted? Thanks.

 

[begreen]

Yeah, that was a bit bone headed of me, sorry. There are a couple a year, but the poster is usually complaining about the lack of heat from the fireplace and how to remedy the situation. This is one of the few on working with the fireplace. But I do stand corrected, there have been a few Rumford discussions over the years.

The graph came from the linked thread. Best to ask the poster for the source.