Heat through glass

  • 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.
  • Hope everyone has a wonderful and warm Thanksgiving!
  • Super Cedar firestarters 30% discount Use code Hearth2024 Click here
Status
Not open for further replies.

Theo

New Member
Hearth Supporter
Nov 4, 2008
18
MA
Sorry if this has all been covered before - I searched the forums, and didn't find a similar post.

My impression is that every wood stove I've ever used emits most of its heat under most conditions by convection - like the so-called "radiators" in homes and cars. Even with the big window on my current insert, it's only under exceptional conditions that radiation equals or exceeds blower-air heat. This has significant consequences: for example, there is no way that this unit will, as the dealer had said, keep my pipes from freezing in the event of a power outage - much less keep the house comfortably warm.

The only time I get much radiation is with an extremely hot fire, which I've been unable to maintain for more than an hour or two. After that, the box fills up with glowing coals, which don't deliver much heat. I got to wondering about that.

As some people here know, energy emitted from a so-called "black body" (a scientific ideal fairly well approximated by coals or the specks of glowing soot in a flame) goes like the fourth power of absolute temperature. For example, a fire at 1500F (ca. 1100K) would emit about twice as much total radiant energy as one at 1200F (ca. 900K).

That's an impressive change, but my sense is that the increased radiation output during those peak bursts is even more dramatic. Also, I noticed that a 6" bed of coals sends very little heat out the blower, and not much out the front door either. If I open the door half-way, the heat outside the glass is still moderate - but just inside, I can't even leave my hand for a few seconds.

So - I think that the glass is blocking much of the radiation. To dig deeper, we need to consider the wavelength spectrum of emitted heat.

A useful number is Wien's displacement constant, ca. 2898 kelvin-microns. Simply put, the emission peak of a black body will be at a wavelength equal to the that constant divided by the absolute temperature. For the sun, the emission peak is at about 5760 degrees. Divided into 2898, that gives .503 microns = 503 nanometers, conveniently near the middle of the human eye's sensitivity. For wood fires, emission peaks in the mid-infrared: about 2.7 microns at 1500F, 3.1 microns at 1200F.

What about the window? Most matter, even "clear" stuff, absorbs pretty strongly at wavelengths longer than about 3 microns. Here's a relevant spectral transmission plot:

(broken link removed)

(I'm assuming that the faceplate is a Pyrex-class glass.) It looks like at least half of the radiation coming from inside the stove will be absorbed by the window. At higher temperatures, not a little but a LOT more will get out past that absorption edge. It's kind of like turning up the dimmer on an incandescent bulb: even at low settings, there's plenty of output. We just can't see it, because it's almost all in the infrared. The filament has to get very hot before the short-wavelength "tail" of the radiation curve gets bright to our eyes, and the shift in peak wavelength is more important than than the increase on overall power.

What happens to the absorbed radiation? It's not lost; just heats up the window. Some will be re-radiated back into the stove, and some radiated outward. The problem is that it's being re-radiated at a much lower temperature. (Note that the window itself never glows.) And per the fourth-power law, there will be very little radiation at that lower temperature. So some heat will still get out, but mainly by convection off the faceplate.

If this reasoning is correct, very hot fires send more radiation from the window partly by greatly enhanced short-wavelength radiation passing through the window, and partly by more-efficient re-radiation of heat absorbed by the window.

Corrections and refinements welcome.

-Theo
 
I boil it all down to, and I agree, that the window is for viewing, has little if anything to do with stove heat performance and, in fact, detracts from heat performance.

My impression is that every wood stove I’ve ever used emits most of its heat under most conditions by convection - like the so-called “radiators” in homes and cars.

This I am unable to agree with. My stove has no blower, most all of its heat is emitted by radiation from the stove surfaces and the stovepipe. That radiation heats surfaces (and air molecules) which in turn become warm and emits infrared which I feel as heat. My no blower wood stove comfortably heats 1500 sq ft by radiation.
 
C-ZAR: is this
≠! JEB?
a credit to me? ... as I think I explained how to do a ≠ sign.
 
I'm guessing Theo is using an insert, thus no exposed stove body to radiate the heat and the need for blowers.

Theo, very interesting write up, thanks for sharing.
 
jebatty said:
My impression is that every wood stove I’ve ever used emits most of its heat under most conditions by convection - like the so-called “radiators” in homes and cars.
This I am unable to agree with. My stove has no blower, most all of its heat is emitted by radiation from the stove surfaces and the stovepipe. That radiation heats surfaces (and air molecules) which in turn become warm and emits infrared which I feel as heat. My no blower wood stove comfortably heats 1500 sq ft by radiation.

I'm using an insert because that's all that would fit in the available hearth while complying with fire codes. Would have preferred a stove for a number of reasons, including good heat extraction w/o blower, and the ability to leave a kettle simmering on top. I also used to toast muffins right on top of a stove, which was kind of fun.

Even with a free-standing stove, though, it seems to me that most of the heat is removed by convection. Here's a simple test: in a draft-free room, put your hand 2-3 feet to one side of the stove, and the same distance above it. Every time I've done this experiment, most of the heat was convecting upward rather than radiating uniformly. I'd be interested to learn that others find more radiation than convection. Nothing wrong with convection; it just requires a different kind of management to get heat where we want it - more likely to stratify heat near the ceiling, for example.

-Theo
 
The "warm hand" test shows lots of heat from the top and the glass front; my stove has side and rear shields for close to wall placement, so no reasonable way to measure side radiation. Plus, my stove is lined with firebrick on bottom and sides, which insulate considerable the sides.

A better test would be a barrel stove, and my guess is that it would be really hot all the way around, with near equal radiation from all surfaces except the bottom, which would be insulated by accumulating ash.
 
Actually, read up on NeoCeram & PyroCeram. This is NOT anything like pyrex glass, and it is what is used for the glass in most modern wood stoves. It passes UV and visible light easily, while (relatively) blocking IR. That being said, after much testing by our very own Precaud, it's been found you actually don't want the radiant heat escaping from the stove. Holding more heat in the firebox tends to increase the overall efficiency and heat output. I very much like the viewing ability, but a highly insulative door instead of a glass door would be much better regarding efficiency. I'd like to get a comparison of the Fireview and Woodstock classic regarding heat radiation and efficiency for this reason.
 
Fun topic. Playing around with my IR thermometer I got the impression that the windows were effectively opaque to the thermal radiation that would be emitted at typical stove temps. That is, if I swing the door open and read the IR looking through the (hot) window at a (cold) wall, and then re-read the window with the door closed (and now with the IR looking toward the coals) I get the same reading. So, when I feel radiation coming off the windows, I conclude that I am feeling emission from the hot windows themselves, rather than radiation passing through--that is, when I've got a hot fire in a cold stove, I don't feel any radiation.

I always assumed that this feature of the windows was by design, to enable high temp firebox operation. Any stove engineers care to chime in?

One thing I learned here that was cool is that the windows have a transparent conducting surface on one side (confirmed mine with an ohmmeter). Is this an engineered IR reflective coating??
 
Not a stove engineer, but the "thermal opacity"(that's right, we at hearth.com can coin new terms) seems to be exactly what the makers of PyroCeram and NeoCeram mention on their website; the ability to pass UV and visible light while blocking IR. Nice to see that you confirmed this with your IR gun.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.