Chimney Liner finally done right!

[oconnor]

Well, 9 months later my installer and I got our schedules sorted out, and I no longer have a 5" uninsulated liner in my old brick flue, but a 6" insulated liner.

took some pics for those looking for a summer project

First - you can see how this is a real tight fit in the firebox. Screws are out waiting for removal.

Second - took out the mineral wool used as a "soft" block off plate. You an note the discoloration from the heat. Will be installing a steel plate vice reinstalling the mineral wool. Not to fond of the long term effects the heat may have on the mineral wool, given this is only after one season.

Third is a look down the flue - you can see the old tiles from the now removed oil furnace, and there is no liner tile at all on the fireplace side.

Forth is the installer cutting a larger hole in the cap my "mason" (used loosely) pour for me last year. Glad he didn't fall - not a recommended maneuver.

Fifth is the new 6" liner after we wrapped it and put the stainless wire mesh sock over it.

Last one is the old cap (new one is same style) I was glad to see little creosote build up overall - about a liter came out of the old liner after 2 1/2 cords of not dry enough wood, so I guess I'm doing something right as far as burns go.

Moral of the story - wish I had done this the first time, as opposed to finding out about the associated code issues for brick flues that have adjacent timbers - then I wouldn't have had to redo it. I let you know how the argument about the bill goes - I suspect the installer will want more money, but in all the discussion about geting the liner done right, the topic never came up - perhaps I won't get a bill, given he was the one who decided on what to install the first time.....

If you want the full details on the original install and how I learned I had a code problem you can read the post here-

https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/23980/#257300

 

[BrotherBart]

And in the interim you got your PHD in chimney lining. :cheese:

 

[jtp10181]

Always gotta have an insulation wrap on the liner for it to meet the UL 1777 listing. The liner companies need to do a better job of emphasizing this in their literature IMO. Like... giant bold letters by every liner kit, stating it does not meet UL 1777 without insulation. Only way its safe without insulation is if the entire chimney structure and clay tiles pass a level II (or is it III) inspection. Which usually involves cutting holes in walls and such to verify the proper air gap around the masonry structure. I say its easier just to do the insulation and not worry about it.

 

[Todd]

Always gotta have an insulation wrap on the liner for it to meet the UL 1777 listing. The liner companies need to do a better job of emphasizing this in their literature IMO. Like... giant bold letters by every liner kit, stating it does not meet UL 1777 without insulation. Only way its safe without insulation is if the entire chimney structure and clay tiles pass a level II (or is it III) inspection. Which usually involves cutting holes in walls and such to verify the proper air gap around the masonry structure. I say its easier just to do the insulation and not worry about it.

http://www.aer-online.com/aerpage.phtml?page=ar-vent1

Says here if the liner is UL 1777 listed and also zero clearance no insulation is required, but how many liners are?

 

[rdust]

http://www.aer-online.com/aerpage.phtml?page=ar-vent1

Says here if the liner is UL 1777 listed and also zero clearance no insulation is required, but how many liners are?

It also says that's only if the chimney meets the NFPA 211 standard which they say is more the exception than the rule. "To summarize the code, a masonry chimney is up to the standard when it is built with two critical one-inch air spaces. One between the combustibles outside of the masonry chimney and one between the chimneys masonry structure and the chimneys interior flue tile."

Also says "Getting back to the original question of "When should I insulate a chimney liner," my answer is "always."

 

[BrotherBart]

Also says "Getting back to the original question of "When should I insulate a chimney liner," my answer is "always."

That would be my answer too if I sold re-lining products.

 

[oconnor]

From a code perspective, to me it is a no brainer (especially given the PhD in chimney lining now bestowed to me by Brother Bart ). There is little to no way to assure that the clearances are met in an existing brick chimney. As well, most of the labelling or instructions do, with enough review, cover thier butts with a comment on air space issues, but they rarely indicate insulation needs, or they may indicate insulation, but they don't indicate how to do it.

From an effective solution perspective, it is also a no brainer to me- better draft, better burn, less creosote.

If we were talking about child restraints in cars, there would be gov't agencies all over the faults in documentation that industry puts out with these products as far as insulation needs go.

I don't see this as a profit issue (i.e. being advocated by those selling product) as most of the manufacturers don't have a good program to even sell these products - if they did, then you would see the industry promoting the product in local big box retailers.... unless they are afraid that someone will show that they knew all along, and did nothing about it (latent saftey issue), but that would imply conspiracy - not my style. I'm not a conspiracist, just a cynic.

 

[jtp10181]

Always gotta have an insulation wrap on the liner for it to meet the UL 1777 listing. The liner companies need to do a better job of emphasizing this in their literature IMO. Like... giant bold letters by every liner kit, stating it does not meet UL 1777 without insulation. Only way its safe without insulation is if the entire chimney structure and clay tiles pass a level II (or is it III) inspection. Which usually involves cutting holes in walls and such to verify the proper air gap around the masonry structure. I say its easier just to do the insulation and not worry about it.

http://www.aer-online.com/aerpage.phtml?page=ar-vent1

Says here if the liner is UL 1777 listed and also zero clearance no insulation is required, but how many liners are?

The only liners that are going to meet UL 1777 for zero clearance by themselves are products like the rigid DuraLiner which is a double wall with an insulation wrap built into it. Since its all about heat transfer, no single wall stainless steel liner is going to be able to resist heat transfer without insulation. I have only seen flexible liners meet UL 1777 WITH the insulation wrap on them. Without the insulation it meets no safety testing and its only purpose would be to re-size the flue.

Thanks for the good article by the way. I will pass it around at work.

 

[theheatelement]

Just realized that article was written by a buddy of mine Robert Huta.... what a world.

Always gotta have an insulation wrap on the liner for it to meet the UL 1777 listing. The liner companies need to do a better job of emphasizing this in their literature IMO. Like... giant bold letters by every liner kit, stating it does not meet UL 1777 without insulation. Only way its safe without insulation is if the entire chimney structure and clay tiles pass a level II (or is it III) inspection. Which usually involves cutting holes in walls and such to verify the proper air gap around the masonry structure. I say its easier just to do the insulation and not worry about it.

http://www.aer-online.com/aerpage.phtml?page=ar-vent1

Says here if the liner is UL 1777 listed and also zero clearance no insulation is required, but how many liners are?

The only liners that are going to meet UL 1777 for zero clearance by themselves are products like the rigid DuraLiner which is a double wall with an insulation wrap built into it. Since its all about heat transfer, no single wall stainless steel liner is going to be able to resist heat transfer without insulation. I have only seen flexible liners meet UL 1777 WITH the insulation wrap on them. Without the insulation it meets no safety testing and its only purpose would be to re-size the flue.

Thanks for the good article by the way. I will pass it around at work.