Remove side shields new KE40?

[m37charlie]

Just replaced 25yo KEJ1102 with new KE40.
Admittedly due to time of year have only had 2 fires at night with partial dry spruce only loads (~40% full).
I most definitely don’t have a clearance problem, corner has tile/cement board /1” air/cement board walls and tile/cement board ceiling.
I notice thermostat controlled air inlet control knob requires well past midpoint at 3 oclock to produce major heat.
The old KEJ1102 sans side shields radiated significantly to sides (now the sheet metal gets up to maybe 40C).
The question is: if I were to remove side shields (categorically NO safety concerns in my installation), would the increase in radiation cause less heat buildup in the vicinity of the bimetallic spring that controls the air inlet, thus likely allowing a somewhat faster burn at a given control knob setting?
Before anyone mentions it, I know it’s verboten and downright stupid to even think about messing with the thermostatic system itself.

 

[stoveliker]

To your question, yes, I think it would run with more air if you removed the side shields.

But what is your flue height?

About the 1" vented wall panels: does the manual say one can decrease clearances with such a vented panels?

And are there studs in the wall? The clearance distance is to those studs.

 

[m37charlie]

The 1” spacers are ceramic.
Measured wall temperatures closest to corners have been barely above room temperature (maybe 38-40C) in past winters.
To repeat: after 38 years of BK King operation in this installation without side shields, safety isn’t the issue.
I’m curious to hear if simply removing side shields without any other changes risks overfiring to the point of potential stove damage.
Maybe BKVP could opine.

 

[stoveliker]

That depends on what the definition of over firing is.
I do think that yes, the safety feature you have in that the stove doesn't over fire (upon normal usage) is compromised. So yes there is a risk.

I wasn't talking about the spacers, but about what is in the wall behind the shield. If that's studs behind the cement board of the wall, the distance from stove to those studs is the distance one is supposed to maintain for clearance (decreased if the manual - i.e. the testing - allows by the vented shielding in front of the wall).
The 38 years don't mean much when the stove is different, but more importantly, the wood could have slowly decreased its ignition temperature by pyrolysis over those 38 years. I.e. you could end up with a sudden and unexpected fire in the wall despite 38 years of "it worked fine".

I know you think you're safe, and seem to be set upon this (and I won't be able to talk you out of it, I sense) but a warning is in place.

I would look at the clearances (to first combustibles,.i.e. possibly the studs in the wall) needed, whether the manual states that the wall shield allows it to be reduced, and I do think you risk damage to the stove by taking its shields off. Otherwise BK wouldn't void warranty if you run it without stove side shields

My question about the flue height had to do with draft. If you don't have sufficient draft, you'll need to run higher for the same heat output. Maybe this modern King needs more draft than your previous one?

 

[m37charlie]

The “E” installation specification for both US and Canada is 4” from rear corners to combustible wall. Mine are 6” from tile. Add 0.25” for tile, 0.5” cement board, 1.00” air space (ceramic spacers, 1” gap at bottom and top for warm air to convect upwards), 0.5” for more cement board (we’re up to 8.25” so far), finally 0.5” sheet rock (that’s coated the usual paper); then studs.
So, again all I’m concerned with is
1) will the maximum btu/h output rise (I suspect it will but not dangerously so)
2) any risk to the stove (I suspect not, the shields are restrained with 2 screws and 2 tab/slots at bottom)? Nowhere in the manual does it say “do not remove shields” and there’s no stickers saying “do not remove”.
The Drolet 3000 with a sustained output rating 57k bth/h and maximum 110k btu/h (BK is around 40k btu/h, limited by allowed air input which in turn depends on temperature of bimetallic spring which resides in the metal box in picture.

 

[stoveliker]

The “E” installation specification for both US and Canada is 4” from rear corners to combustible wall. Mine are 6” from tile. Add 0.25” for tile, 0.5” cement board, 1.00” air space (ceramic spacers, 1” gap at bottom and top for warm air to convect upwards), 0.5” for more cement board (we’re up to 8.25” so far), finally 0.5” sheet rock (that’s coated the usual paper); then studs.
So, again all I’m concerned with is
1) will the maximum btu/h output rise (I suspect it will but not dangerously so)
2) any risk to the stove (I suspect not, the shields are restrained with 2 screws and 2 tab/slots at bottom)? Nowhere in the manual does it say “do not remove shields” and there’s no stickers saying “do not remove”.
The Drolet 3000 with a sustained output rating 57k bth/h and maximum 110k btu/h (BK is around 40k btu/h, limited by allowed air input which in turn depends on temperature of bimetallic spring which resides in the metal box in picture.View attachment 347677

Clearances look good then, for operation with the shields.

Max btu output will rise imo.
Maybe not much as I see the thermostat is not shielded by the side shields so the temp there won't be too different, I think.

Based on that it may be fine.

The fact that it doesn't say to not remove the shields doesn't mean anything. You can't list all that folks can but should not do with a stove. It says to use it according to the manual. No word about removing shields means the manual implies usage with shields. And that is the only way it was tested.
So The UL listing is with the shields. Removing those means no one knows what clearances are anymore.
Your home owners insurance (if any) may not pay out if a fire happens.


You're an independent bunch up there, but those are the boundary conditions within which you're making a decision.

 

[m37charlie]

Sorry to repeat but this BK that was just replaced has no side shields; however there’s the little tab slots visible at the bottom and some sort of clip at top which looks to me like intended for an optional side shield.
Same on other side.

 

[stoveliker]

Sure, but that doesn't mean it shouldn't have had them, and it has no bearing on the situation of the new BK.

 

[m37charlie]

I purchased it new from a BK dealer, and have very intermittently wondered if shields were even an option. So it wasn’t “supposed to have them” when new.

 

[stoveliker]

That's good.
No implication for the current stove tho, if the manual doesn't offer the option to remove them.

 

[m37charlie]

FWIW removed L side shield easily. R side has bracket with hole for rotating thermostat control rod. Would require temporary removal and replacement of black knob. So I left it alone for the time being.
Won’t know result till next cool evening.
PS: successfully got R shield off. The thermostat knob is NOT retained by “a small Allen screw” as per references, but a square head (female) 2mm screw. Fortunately I have that in a multihead kit.
After removing shield, I put the knob back on in same position, 6 oclock= full blast. All that’s gone is the background, which is informational rather than functional.
The manual or something else BK publishes says thermostat innards are set for 95 degrees (“3:20 pm”) = “medium low”.
I’m hoping medium low will be 230-300, and we’ll have to wait till at least October to see what full blast at 6 oclock does.