Im not sure if this has been discussed in the past or not....or is even feasible. The recent discussions regarding stove optimization/efficiency have got me thinking about what options there are truly.
Reading all of these threads and discussions have been great but in some ways pointless as well. I've been waiting to see who would venture into discussion more regarding this....hopefully it is interesting for others as well. At the end of the day we are all trying to optimize thermal heat transfer (out of the burn pot -->exchangers -->convection air output) and there are 2 conflicting ideologies going right now....choke the draft and redirect more air into the fire.
Choking the draft makes the most sense as advice from a manufacture/service perspective as it keeps the stove in manufacture recommended burn temp ranges. Slowing the draft allows more time for the heat exchange to occur, while not affecting the other parameters of the stove operation. It is safe. This bumps extraction efficiency from the fuel used but is not geared to improve the heat exchange rate.
Others are redirecting air or burning a 'hotter' flame to actually get a significant rise in thermal output....This is a stress on the stove itself (albiet likely 'safe') but still a stress. Cheaper stoves with bad metal or thin metal run the risk of burning out components. This method is actually increasing the RATE of thermal exchange by increasing the delta (out of the burn pot -->exchangers) AND again (exchangers-->convection air output). This likely has more loss up the flue.....although with increased heat transfer across the exchangers I am not sure how much net loss there is?
Of the 2 options, I think extracting a hotter flame has given the most feedback in regards to an 'improvement' in output from the community here......and so currently, a higher cfm convection blower, or more thermal mass (turbulators)/better metals are the 2 options of improving the exchange rate in our current configurations.
**Short Attention people here for conclusion**
Has there been any attempt in the past to build a 'smoldering' style pellet stove with an incorporated catalyst?? It seems a pellet stove has everything needed to build a really superior catalyst burner (controlled draft, convection exchange, constant controlled fuel feed). Clean emissions, a REALLY hot burn....any thoughts?
Reading all of these threads and discussions have been great but in some ways pointless as well. I've been waiting to see who would venture into discussion more regarding this....hopefully it is interesting for others as well. At the end of the day we are all trying to optimize thermal heat transfer (out of the burn pot -->exchangers -->convection air output) and there are 2 conflicting ideologies going right now....choke the draft and redirect more air into the fire.
Choking the draft makes the most sense as advice from a manufacture/service perspective as it keeps the stove in manufacture recommended burn temp ranges. Slowing the draft allows more time for the heat exchange to occur, while not affecting the other parameters of the stove operation. It is safe. This bumps extraction efficiency from the fuel used but is not geared to improve the heat exchange rate.
Others are redirecting air or burning a 'hotter' flame to actually get a significant rise in thermal output....This is a stress on the stove itself (albiet likely 'safe') but still a stress. Cheaper stoves with bad metal or thin metal run the risk of burning out components. This method is actually increasing the RATE of thermal exchange by increasing the delta (out of the burn pot -->exchangers) AND again (exchangers-->convection air output). This likely has more loss up the flue.....although with increased heat transfer across the exchangers I am not sure how much net loss there is?
Of the 2 options, I think extracting a hotter flame has given the most feedback in regards to an 'improvement' in output from the community here......and so currently, a higher cfm convection blower, or more thermal mass (turbulators)/better metals are the 2 options of improving the exchange rate in our current configurations.
**Short Attention people here for conclusion**
Has there been any attempt in the past to build a 'smoldering' style pellet stove with an incorporated catalyst?? It seems a pellet stove has everything needed to build a really superior catalyst burner (controlled draft, convection exchange, constant controlled fuel feed). Clean emissions, a REALLY hot burn....any thoughts?
