i bought a new used stove and its 6" my old one is 8" does it matter where I put the reducer? I could either put it right on top of the stove or put it where it meets the wall. if it matters it goes up 1'6" then takes a 90* to the wall. thanks.
6" to 8" reducer
- Thread starter bluedxj
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
It would probably look cleaner to put it at the wall thimble. Is the flue system all 8" up to the cap or is the thimble dumping into a larger chimney area?
SteveHyper
New Member
Some reducers are not recommended to be fitted directly to the stove spigot, so you might want to check the manufacturers spec.
double-d
Feeling the Heat
Technically unless the stove is a smoke dragon being fed wet wood, the reducer should be installed immediately after the stove outlet. This means a longer length of larger diameter pipe to radiate heat out into the room. I also would expect slightly higher heat transfer due to lower flue gas velocity. The trade off is sometimes with wet wood and a marginal stack you want to get the gases as soon as possible put of the stove and into the chimney, best case is it keep the creosote buildup inside the chimney instead of in the stovepipe. It also may keep creosote from dripping out of the pipe at seams.
Squisher
Minister of Fire
Why should the reducer technically be installed at the flue collar?
As begreen mentioned the cleaner looking install is going to have the reducer at the thimble.
As begreen mentioned the cleaner looking install is going to have the reducer at the thimble.
Squisher
Minister of Fire
Aesthetically I agree, but radiant heat is directly related to surface area and a 8" pipe have 33% more surface area then a 6" pipe, thus more radiant heat for a 8" pipe than for a 6" pipe for a given flue gas temperature.
edyit
Minister of Fire
Yes and that is a bad thing you want to loose as little heat from that pipe as possible especially when you are going to be going into an oversized flue you will need all the heat you can get
No i saw it but no matter what the stove or wood is after it leaves the stove you want to loose as little heat as possible
Squisher
Minister of Fire
Yes. Peakbagger what you are describing as the reason to use 8" right off the flue collar/adaptor is the exact reason why you wouldn't want to do it.
That's why I asked.
Blue ridge mark I hope this reply informs you too as to why I was asking? I am a certified sweep and inspector in Canada, so yes I understand with solid fuel burning systems that there is a little more to consider than aesthetics.
I was asking to see if there was a good reason to do it the unaesthetical way. Scavenging more heat off the pipe is not a good thing. And is not a 'technical' reason to upsize to 8"s off the flue collar.
That's why I asked.
Blue ridge mark I hope this reply informs you too as to why I was asking? I am a certified sweep and inspector in Canada, so yes I understand with solid fuel burning systems that there is a little more to consider than aesthetics.
I was asking to see if there was a good reason to do it the unaesthetical way. Scavenging more heat off the pipe is not a good thing. And is not a 'technical' reason to upsize to 8"s off the flue collar.
Last edited:
Squisher
Minister of Fire
You really contradict yourself in this post. You say that technically the reducer should be at the flue collar to allow greater heat transfer by using bigger pipe and to slow the velocity of the exhaust gas with bigger pipe. Then you go on to say how creosote should be in the chimney not the stovepipe. But what you described doing is going to cause more build up in the connecting pipe by losing more heat quicker and slowing velocity. Lastly creosote won't drip out of pipe connections if they are the proper direction, they will drip their way all the way back and into the stove.
I dont agree with your contention. If I have seasoned wood and clean burn in an older stove, I have no problem with cooling the gases by radiating more heat into the room via the larger diameter flue piping. Heck I could even use a magic flue in that situation and actually did with my Fisher clone for a few years. My old Fisher clone and even my Defiant put out some serious heat up the stack, I would much rather have it in the room and burn smaller intermittent loads than heat the outdoors and that supports going with the 8" as soon as possible. After a day of burning, the entire chimney would be warm all the way to the attic. I went for years between chimney cleanings and usually do it out of guilt rather than need. My boiler definitely puts out far less heat into the chimney but since I burn it flat out with dry wood to charge up my storage its not going to plug up my chimney as the only way one gets creosote is incomplete combustion. Realistically with a clean burn you can run the stack temp way down to the dewpoint and all you are going to get it water vapor condensing as all the combustibles are long gone.
No skin off my back if folks want to burn their houses down by running a stove for long durations on less than ideal wood by cranking down the damper and starving the air for hours on end One of the tricks to comply with EPA regs was to hide secondary air ports or install stops on the air inlets so that folks couldnt fully crank down the air yet I read on occasion how people plug these ports to get longer burns.
No skin off my back if folks want to burn their houses down by running a stove for long durations on less than ideal wood by cranking down the damper and starving the air for hours on end One of the tricks to comply with EPA regs was to hide secondary air ports or install stops on the air inlets so that folks couldnt fully crank down the air yet I read on occasion how people plug these ports to get longer burns.
There are so many innaccuracies in that post i dont know where to start. But magic heats are without a doubt one of the worst inventions associated with eood stoves that i have seen. Those and the fan draft inducers you cut into the pipe.
Squisher
Minister of Fire
So how does burning wide open with a pre EPA stove equate to being a technical reason to upsize off the flue collar on a EPA stove? It is not a reason, and most manuals will not allow upsizing as you've described. Most don't allow upsizing further up the line either.
To burn a pre EPA stove as you've described you'd better be at home a lot.....chucking wood in. You never ever damped down for a overnight burn then obviously? Just full tilt wide open all the time?
To burn a pre EPA stove as you've described you'd better be at home a lot.....chucking wood in. You never ever damped down for a overnight burn then obviously? Just full tilt wide open all the time?
Last edited:
Squisher
Minister of Fire
Heh. I just asked in this thread to see if there was a actual technical reason to do as you described.
I've learned that aplenty online. If you're going to put something out there. Expect to be questioned. Sorry to have insulted you by questioning you. But geez man, come on.
Easy Livin’ 3000
Minister of Fire
Having a bad day, peak? Im sorry to hear it, and, I understand, we all have them.
We are among friends here, and bholler, for all his abruptness, is one of the most valuable members of this community. Obviously smart, experienced, and eager to help. I'd need periodic refreshers from charm school as well if I did what he does for a living.
You'll be missing out on some excellent advice if you keep him blocked, as well as some fine entertainment. Remember his exchanges with that guy from New Zealand with his miracle stove a couple years back?
Well, we still have bholler doling out his excellent and entertaining advice. That guy from NZ and his miracle stove are nowhere to be found.
I also value and enjoy your posts, I count on you for your intellectual and research prowess.
Often, two intelligent people disagree. Our best growth opportunities occur at these moments.
The bad part about the intensifire thing is it may be a very good idea. It tested well. But he was making outlandish claims about apsolutly perfect complete combustion. And would not even give a basic overveiw of how it functioned. What really got me was when he said there was no point in trying to explain it because there is no way we could understand it anyway.
But i wouldnt dismiss it as gone yet. Getting a new product to market csn take a long time
Easy Livin’ 3000
Minister of Fire
I am very optimistic about the future of heating with wood because of the type of people who are interested in it, and the modern rapid advancement of technology. I also believe that folks who are unfailingly stubborn have a greater chance of success.
I hope to see the intensifyer technology available soon. That said, I also tend to be skeptical of people who tell me something is too complicated for me to understand.
Similar threads
