Webmaster said:
The filters on most newer shop vac are vastly better than the older ones - as I remember, original units used foam-type, while the current units use the same type (corrugated paper) that the pro chimney sweep vacs use. They also sell an additional filter or cover for drywall dust - which I assume will help with ash.
Still, that water filter seems to be good ideal. But tell me this - assuming bubbles coming up through the water, what stops the ash from being suspended in these bubbles and then released at the top? it would seem that a method to break up the bubbles into very small ones would be cool....like a screen in the middle of the water....
Maybe one of the more industrious hearthnet members will check on ash particle size and compare to available shop vac filters. That would certainly be a reasonable alternative (in cold ash situations), but having the wet filter as a pre-stage still reduces the load on any dry filter.
As far as bubbles, that's a good question, and one I wondered about myself when building thing. To help with that I implemented the tube sock suggestion (above) and I was hoping that would take care of most of it since the sock is wet and a lot of black stuff sticks to it on the way out. Probably not all of it, but at least some more of it.
Usage Update:
I used this thing a couple weeks ago to clean creosote that had fallen beside my bag during chimney cleaning and a half ashed cleaning of the stove insides before the first burn (I'm from the BB school of stove cleaning once a year before burning season, and I still leave an inch of ashes on the grate...). The first usage was only for debris on the hearth and a little bit of ash stuck to the door and in the cat chamber. That first usage came off without a hitch. I think the ash is so light it rushes through the hose and seems to leave nothing in the hose.
This second usage was to suck up super fine creosote dust from my chimney sweeping that had missed the bag I had taped (the tape let loose) inside the stove, resulting in a pile of creosote on a bypass damper gasket that was going to be a problem if not removed completely. Otherwise, I probably wouldn't recommend using this for suck funky stuff. The result of this cleaning wasn't as good as the last. I had a bunch of black powered creosote left in the first stage hose (the one I was holding and using to suck up the creosote) that I had to rinse out after I was done. That stuff is a nightmare. Like talcum powder. Now I know why sweeps wear black clothes and hopefully respirators.
I use a long hose between the wet filter and the canister. This puts the shop vac canister, and the exhaust, outside, so particles bypassing both filters get discharged outside. My only worry is that some linger in the canister and exit on a subsequent usage when the canister is in the house. Still, I think I have a leg up on the situation.
One drawback with the tube sock intermediate filter occurred unexpectedly on the creosote project. The vacuum was powerful enough to suck the tube sock up into the exit hose, which led to a bunch of really funky (as in black) water deposited into the hose, which I eventually deposited onto my 60% wool, Bur bur carpet (oops, sorry, Mrs. Mo Heat). So next time I'm going to make the sock taught instead of letting it dangle into the slurry (yuk). Or maybe weigh it down with something. After "cleaning" the funk water from the hose, or so I thought, and letting it dangle outside for several days to dry, I unexpectedly had a repeat performance of black slurry water onto the carpeting thing (oops, sorry again, Mrs. Mo Heat).
The first time I used this rig without the tube sock, there was no water accumulation in the hose, so I think the prolapse of the tube sock up into the hose was the culprit, and hope that's not going to happen again. I'll be more careful moving the hose next time, just in case (at the suggestion of Mrs. Mo Heat :red: ).
