1. Welcome Hearth.com Guests and Visitors - Please enjoy our forums!
    Hearth.com GOLD Sponsors who help bring the site content to you:
    Hearthstone Soapstone and Cast-Iron stoves( Wood, Gas or Pellet Stoves and Inserts)
    Caluwe - Passion for Fire and Water ( Pellet and Wood Hydronic and Space Heating)

I have a stove that can burn green pine and not get creosoted! Check it out!!

Post in 'The Boiler Room - Wood Boilers and Furnaces' started by mlbeardsley, Apr 15, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. skfire

    skfire Feeling the Heat

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    304
    Loc:
    NEPA

    Helpful Sponsor Ads!





  2. Karl_northwind

    Karl_northwind Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    184
    Loc:
    Central Wi.
    what's wrong with a 125+ degree delta T on a boiler/water heater? :eek:
    sounds like solid engineering to me:)
    K
  3. maple1

    maple1 Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2011
    Messages:
    3,981
    Loc:
    Nova Scotia
    Maybe there are multiple inlets/outlets?
  4. stee6043

    stee6043 Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2008
    Messages:
    2,349
    Loc:
    West Michigan
    I can only imagine the velocity of water that would be required to move a half million btu's through 1" pipe. I think I also read on that site that all of their boilers hold "10-15 gallons" of water. If I was really bored I'd love to briefly review the thermodynamics involved in transfering that much heat into into such a small amount of water.
  5. DaveBP

    DaveBP Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    May 25, 2008
    Messages:
    1,064
    Loc:
    SW Maine
    Cold fusion with a sales commision.
  6. slowzuki

    slowzuki Feeling the Heat

    Joined:
    Feb 1, 2007
    Messages:
    486
    Loc:
    New Brunswick, Canada
    Sounds like the Seton type BS. How'd they work out eh?
  7. skfire

    skfire Feeling the Heat

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    304
    Loc:
    NEPA

    AHAAA...eureka moment....with a velocity exceeding 32fps or even higher(maybe with anything over 50fps we make hot seltzer as well) the heat will get there faster....faster, better...!!!

    500kbtu into 1" at a 10 gallon capacity?? flowing into how many districts? one u say?
    http://www.heissheaters.com/pdfs/pressurized_boiler_setup.pdf

    Interesting. wondering ..is this thing reviewed by any engineering/approval agencies?


    Scott
  8. DexterDay

    DexterDay Guest

    When that water hits 88 miles an hour, Exactly! !! Look-out!
  9. Karl_northwind

    Karl_northwind Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    184
    Loc:
    Central Wi.
    just in case it didn't come across, that's sarcastic....
  10. bupalos

    bupalos Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    173
    Loc:
    ne ohio
    I think the idea of a masonry boiler is pretty good. Not sure about this one particularly, but the principle doesn't deserve the ridicule at all.

    As far as the 500k btu, It's 10 gallons of water inboard, but it's a ton of concrete, and depending on the flue layout, things could work out nicely, masonry heaters fire at those kind of rates. But it certainly should be thought of as a "batch" process, and it certainly should be insulated, and it probably has to be a bit bigger than what is there.
  11. skfire

    skfire Feeling the Heat

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    304
    Loc:
    NEPA
    Masonry principle regarding heaters, no problem there, but boiler-wise engineering...not sure there.
    Masonry mass absorption can be a detriment to the operation of the system in boiler principle design..heat should be delivered to district system and not absorbed by unit.

    Scott
  12. bupalos

    bupalos Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    173
    Loc:
    ne ohio
    Well, the idea is the masonry right there acts as your storage, instead of a separate tank. The tubes embedded in the masonry deliver that heat back out to the system, it's not lost or localized. But for that to work right, you'd need a lot of copper, and the outside face of the unit really does need to be insulated, and sized overall about like the equivalent water storage would be. There needs to be some kind of gravity heat dump too since the momentum on this kind of thing would be on a much higher magnitude. And the flue system needs to be more like a masonry heater, not necessarily contraflow, but there needs to be way more total flue area. Pretty sure this Heiss must lose a ton of efficiency up the stack with the short path.

    If I was building a boiler, this is the basic direction I'd go, with natural draft and maybe a gravity feed design. I think 3.5 foot cylinder 7' high would be good dimensions. You could fit an upward spiraling flue of maybe 25' or 30' in there, with 3/4" vertical copper tubes all around the perimeter. An open buffer or smallish storage tank on the floor above, then distribute from that.
  13. skfire

    skfire Feeling the Heat

    Joined:
    Nov 15, 2010
    Messages:
    304
    Loc:
    NEPA
    Agreed, but I thought this was an outdoor unit...so you are talking massive insulation.
    I happen to like the masonry idea..but not outdoors.
    I still do not see 1/2 million btu vs 1" outlet and limited capacity, as favorable..especially when the mass needs to be maintained.
    On the flue comments again I concur and why not do a Finnish style masonry design with dual downturns to increase efficiency and absorption.

    Scott
  14. heaterman

    heaterman Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Messages:
    3,039
    Loc:
    Falmouth, Michigan

    This is true. Masonry/Stone/Soapstone heaters are nothing new and work well if done right using the stone or cement itself as the heat emitter. I have always questioned though, the efficiency of using the heated mass to heat water as a secondary output. Why not just heat the water directly via a good heat exchanger design?........"good heat exchanger design" being the key phrase here.
  15. mlbeardsley

    mlbeardsley New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    19
    My unit has a baffled system in the cement so it has to travel through a few times. I think thats what makes these efficient plus they are insulated all the way around.
  16. bupalos

    bupalos Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    173
    Loc:
    ne ohio
    Well, then you need to store the water or throttle the fire...plus any heat exchanger exposed to fire will wear out quicker than one buffered by the masonry. The advantage here is you are combining storage and unit in one, and by volume you can get the same btu storage or more out of masonry. I'm just saying, the concept doesn't deserve ridicule. Done right it would have some pros and some cons versus our existing gassers, one pro being it should be able to be designed to last significantly longer, another that it could be self-built easier.
  17. bupalos

    bupalos Member

    Joined:
    Jan 26, 2009
    Messages:
    173
    Loc:
    ne ohio
    Agreed on the outlet and the site. One reason not to do a contraflow would be that they have hot tops (where the gasses turn back down is a hotspot) whereas at least if you want to thermosiphon you might be better off with an ascending heat gradient in the mass. Another is it's just a much more complex build. I'm envisioning a simple poured in place cylinder with a winding flue made of flexible flue liner spiraling just inside the ring of copper tubes.
  18. maplewood

    maplewood Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Feb 12, 2008
    Messages:
    610
    Loc:
    NB Canada
    Thanks for this link. I don't know why, but I didn't see any links or pics of what this thread was about until you posted.
    I welcome the discussion of this new-to-me gasser.
    I trust the moderator to keep the sales pitch to a medium level, and let us chime in with our thoughts and experiences.

    If the burning wood is drying out the green wood above it, the moisture is still making its way up the chimney.
    You can't avoid the creosote, as far as I can see.
    (There is no breakdown of the H2O in the 2000F gassification chamber, is there?)
  19. mlbeardsley

    mlbeardsley New Member

    Joined:
    Apr 3, 2012
    Messages:
    19
    I know burning green wood loses efficiency but that's what i have a times. The reason I like mine is that I can only get green wood for free and it doesn't get creosote all over. I think it happens because the walls being masonry let the firebox get that much hotter. When their is no flacky creosote on the wall the radiant heat can transfer better. There gasiers can burn a little wet wood they said but not alot. The primary chamber he said just isn't effected by the creosote. Also I think they are wrong about their system only holding 10-15 gals because mine has a 55 gallon storage tank.
  20. heaterman

    heaterman Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Oct 16, 2007
    Messages:
    3,039
    Loc:
    Falmouth, Michigan
    RE: green wood.

    We've gone over this a few times here but it's worth refreshing some memory's.
    Simply put, in order for the fuel (wood) to burn, the water/moisture has to be evaporated out of it first. Evaporating that moisture from the fuel takes a significant amount of heat, on the order of about 1000btu's per pound at the point of phase change from liquid to vapor. Looking at just that aspect of the burning process, you can quickly calculate that wood having a 45% moisture content will "steal" 45,000 btu's of heat / hundred pounds of fuel, just to effect the change from liquid entrapped in the wood itself to vapor which can escape. One could say that using wood seasoned to around 20% automatically increases the system efficiency by 25% compared to the moisture content mentioned before. When you add the heat required to bring that moisture up from ambient temperature to the phase change point (212*F) the difference is even more pronounced.


    This is a tremendous loss of efficiency and waste of fuel. I don't care if it's "free" or not. It's still a poor use of the resource and causes a much dirtier burn than one would see using seasoned wood.
    I really have a problem with anyone bragging or advertising that their unit will burn "green wood". Claims like that are what got us to the point of EPA involvement in the first place and to see that poor practice "encouraged" just perpetuates the black eye the entire industry has sustained. We all as wood burning consumers, dealers, manufacturers and reps need to adopt a best practice attitude and actively discourage poor use of the resource or some day that option will be taken from us. Don't believe for a minute that elimination of wood burners entirely has not been discussed.

    Don't brag on being able to burn green wood!!

    PS: to answer your second question regarding H2O breaking down. No it does not. Temperatures required to do that are more toward the "nuclear" end of the scale. (hyperbole intended)
    Fred61 likes this.
  21. leaddog

    leaddog Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Sep 24, 2007
    Messages:
    912
    Loc:
    Hesperia, Michigan
    30years ago I built what was called a HASSA from mother news plans. It was a simular type using sand with heat exchangers pipe running thru it. Great consept but it had some problems. The way they can get by with I in outlets is they are using the concrete as storage and only pulling off heat with the water. So you can only get say 80000btu's per hour to your house but can fire at 500000 in a burn. The problem is if you fire continueously at 500000. once the concrete gets to boiling temp you can't pull the btu's off fast enough and things will get very interesting. The HASSA used a copper and pvc pipes. 3/4 in pvc can swell to over 6in and gets very thin if you over fire and get the sand (or concrete) over 240* at 25psi. Copper pipes can and will become unsoddered if the sand or what ever gets to high from putting in to many btu's. Been there done that. 3/4 pipe just won't move enough btu's for my house so I had to fire it on the edge and had baseboard also so needed 180*+. Heated the place for two years before it destroyed it self. Rebuilt it, ran with all copper, outside shell busted apart from thermo expansion and contraction , sand ran out letting chimney sag and tried to burn the shed down. Gave up...........
    If I remember in the instruction it said. Build small fires and don't over fire. guess I missed that.
    The point I'm trying to make is it may put out 500000btu's but with out proper piping size and pumps and distrubution you better have a place for those btu's. I do think they will burn cleaner than typical OWB's but you won't have the efficency as a commercial engineered gasser.
    leaddog
  22. Fred61

    Fred61 Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Nov 26, 2008
    Messages:
    1,729
    Loc:
    Southeastern Vt.
    It would be interesting to be around to hear the noises that would come from that unit firing at 500,000 btu if the circulator should fail although I probably wouldn't want to be that close.
  23. pybyr

    pybyr Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2008
    Messages:
    2,301
    Loc:
    Adamant, VT 05640
    This is one of those things that one would assume to be self-evident, given that masonry is more dense than water, but it is incorrect by a large margin.

    You have to go by the "specific heat" of the material, and water's specific heat is dramatically more than masonry (about a 5:1 ratio). Don't believe me? Ask the masonry industry:

    http://www.cmacn.org/energy/basics/mat_sh.htm

    I'm not trying to be snippy, but it _is_ essential to tie discussions and advocacy back to physics, not supposition.

    Water's physical characteristics, specifically in regard to heat retention and heat-transfer, would be considered truly extraordinary in comparison to nearly all other materials (except for really exotic phase change materials), except we're all so used to having the stuff fall out of the sky that we don't stop to realize that it has these unique properties.
    heaterman likes this.
  24. stee6043

    stee6043 Minister of Fire

    Joined:
    Aug 22, 2008
    Messages:
    2,349
    Loc:
    West Michigan
    This whole thread still baffles me a bit.

    M Beardsley, you clearly must be the same Marsha Beardsley who left a rave review on the Heiss website, correct? And it just so happens the person two or three "testomonials" above you on the website is the owner of Heiss Heaters according to a quick lookup of the LLC registration. Are you being compensated somehow for your efforts to evangalize the hearth.com masses as to the greatness of Heiss?

    I hate to say it but anyone that comes to this site or any other wood burning site and claims that the material used to construct a boiler can somehow magically enable it to burn green wood creosote-free is just plain old misinformed. And it comes off as rubish when we read it. Furthermore, how many OWB operators really care about creosote? Most OWB owners I know expect a chimney fire once or twice a year - it cleans the pipe out quite nicely according to them.

    If you want to bring some data that might back-up the performance claims of Heiss we'd absoltuely love to see it and discuss it. But I think anyone on this site would suggest that Heiss Heaters stop pushing the creosote marketing angle and the "steel boiler bashing" if they ever want to be taken seriously by a knowledgeable group of wood burners.
  25. Karl_northwind

    Karl_northwind Member

    Joined:
    Feb 13, 2012
    Messages:
    184
    Loc:
    Central Wi.
    the thing that makes masonry heaters work is that the inner bits get to a couple thousand degrees during and after a burn, unfortunately with water we're limited by the working delta T, that being the difference between the minimum useable temp and the boiling point. masonry for all it's good and bad points, doesn't have a phase change, (at least that we're going to reach in this situation)

    there are some electric off peak storage units that heat (tons of) firebrick up to 2000F and store the heat there for later use.
    water is just about the best, in that it holds a lot of heat, is easy to move around, is cheap, only mildly corrosive, and works in the ranges we want to work in. as long as you can keep it from boiling and or freezing, good to go.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page