Most of the inexpensive moisture meter are calibrated for furniture grade wood. the little bit better ones will include a chart by species for readings, some may even be recalibrated most not. better meters are in the $60-100 class best above that yet. Most are not built strong enough to get beyond 1/4" penitration. you can make your own pins from a couple nails and a piece of thick plastic, keeping the spacing between the pins the same as oem. then pound those in and touch meter pins to those. Note , as was stated before, all reading should be done at room temperature. There are calculations to adjust for lower temps. The better meters may have something built in or a chart/ graph included with them. bit tecnical but that's the scoop.
How dry is dry enough?
- Thread starter Sodbuster
- 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.
Caw
Minister of Fire
I just treat my measurements as "within a few %" when I'm checking my stacks. I figure if I get 20% on the MM some will be 22% some will be 18% etc. If you're using a regular 2 prong and getting 15% you can feel pretty good whereas 20% is more on the fence.
Isaac Carlson
Minister of Fire
Yep. Wood density changes through the log anyway, and every piece will be different. The only thing the meter does is give you a ballpark figure to go by. I think most wood burners can tell wet wood from dry wood. I can't tell you if it's exactly 20%, but I can tell if it's dry enough to burn.
If you are relying on a moisture meter to measure your wood, you need to get further ahead.
If you are relying on a moisture meter to measure your wood, you need to get further ahead.
Caw
Minister of Fire
The wife gives me the stink eye every time we drive by tree work being done locally. She knows me too well. You can never have enough!
brenndatomu
Minister of Fire
brenndatomu
Minister of Fire
Ok...so to come at this from a slightly different angle...cat stoves are smoke eaters...and wet wood smokes more, so wouldn't wood a little on the damp side (say 20-25%) make more smoke, and therefore more "fuel" for a cat stove?
I don't have a cat stove, but I believe the conventional thought is that too high of moisture content inhibits heat production by using the combustion energy to boil water and creating steam rather than heating the air and the system.
Is that the same look that you get when you are at the beach and there's a group of college girls walk by in micro bikinis?
I know those looks...The wife gives me the stink eye every time we drive by tree work being done locally. She knows me too well. You can never have enough!
stoveliker
Minister of Fire
It does make more smoke, but Nick is right, it eats energy.
And adding low temp gases to a hot cat can result in damage.
Better to make the smoke by smouldering dry wood. More heat and less damage to the car.
brenndatomu
Minister of Fire
Exactly...I agree...but, I would think that there is a happy medium that makes the most smoke, but does not kill the efficiency too bad...and that would probably be a higher moisture content than what a modern tube stove would prefer...or maybe even more so, an old school stove?
I guess my point is that I'm not so sure that every wood burning appliance runs "the best that it can" on the same moisture content wood...
stoveliker
Minister of Fire
I don't see the reason for this; it's easy to make more smoke: choke the air supply. No need to do so by wasting BTUs in evaporating water.
And if one needs more smoke to make more heat with the cat, then why not just make more heat by adding air and burning, creating heat in the primary combustion.
More heat is not hard. Less heat is harder, hence the output lower limits on stoves.
So, no, I believe that also for cat stoves drier is better. Cat stoves don't *need* smoke to make heat - they just are also able to make heat from smoke, and in doing so extend the BTU output range to the lower end.
And if one needs more smoke to make more heat with the cat, then why not just make more heat by adding air and burning, creating heat in the primary combustion.
More heat is not hard. Less heat is harder, hence the output lower limits on stoves.
So, no, I believe that also for cat stoves drier is better. Cat stoves don't *need* smoke to make heat - they just are also able to make heat from smoke, and in doing so extend the BTU output range to the lower end.
Last edited:
The Cat as far as I understand it is more about burning the residual combustibles that would normally go up the flue versus a primary source of heat generation. Yeah it will produce some heat, but its primary purpose is to reduce emissions. I Agree with Stoveliker, making smoke for a Cat to burn is un-necessary. Burn as efficient as you can for heat and let the Cat clean up the residuals.
I dont know if you have been to a beach in america lately, but there isnt much to look at. Unless you like seeing tents being worn by humansIs that the same look that you get when you are at the beach and there's a group of college girls walk by in micro bikinis?
stoveliker
Minister of Fire
That depends on the stove model.
Blaze King stoves certainly use the Cat as a primary source of heat - at the low end of the output range. Primary fire is the primary source of heat (supplemented by Cat heat) at higher output ranges.
I don't know what other stoves do this - there are likely a few. (Kuma?)
But indeed there are stoves that do use the Cat to clean up emissions. I don't know the fraction of Cat stoves on these two sides.
