Worried about connection with 90° elbow

[Ignis]

Hi

I am a worried about the way the stove is connected directly with a 90° bend that connects almost horizontally (sloping up towards the chimney) to the T-element.
I see little alternative hence the stove needs to be facing the way it is. Is my concern justified/how can i improve the situation?
Would it be better to stick a piece of single-walled pipe between the stove and the bend? should I replace the bend with another T-element/a bend with inspection hole?

Thanks in advance!

 

[stoveliker]

This is not ideal indeed. A 45 degree up, and then a 45 degree into the chase could be better for draft.
Also, why connect at the bottom of the opening of the chase rather than at the top...

Finally, if the walls and floor are not insulated (basement?), you'll loose a significant amount of heat generated there (30% are numbers I've seen floating around).

 

[Ignis]

This is not ideal indeed. A 45 degree up, and then a 45 degree into the chase could be better for draft.
Also, why connect at the bottom of the opening of the chase rather than at the top...

Finally, if the walls and floor are not insulated (basement?), you'll loose a significant amount of heat generated there (30% are numbers I've seen floating around).

Thanks for the feedback.
Using 2 45° angles like that wouldn't result in a 90° turn, making the angle too steep to connect to the T-piece.
The T-piece has little wiggle room, i can make it lift about 3 inches to create some slope but thats it.

I could use a 45° angle up followed by a 90° turn and a horizontal connection on the T-piece rather than using a 90° elbow straight from the stove, sloped up to the T-piece as in the OP, but this would be 2 turns rather than one and i'm not sure if that's an improvement?

If i were to leave it as is (as seen on the picture) would it be a fire hazard?
For cleaning purposes, i would use a 90° elbow with a cleaning hatch, even tough the stove itself is quite easy to move.

I'll be losing heat over there for sure, garage build in 1969 with 0 isolation single pane glass😢.

 

[stoveliker]

I think you can do it (by definition...): Exit the stove with a 45 that you rotate a bit so it points sloping a bit less than 45 deg up (so it points up but also a bit to the back wall so your stove doesn't have to be as close to the wall). Then a straight piece, then another 45 degree which should match what you need there to get into the pipe.

I don't think this is a fire hazard per se, though a long horizontal run could accumulate more creosote which would be a hazard.

 

[Ignis]

Thanks for clarifying, in the meantime I have been to the store.
The stove is now less close to the wall which was indeed a problem. I think 90° bends can also be avoided so this seems to me a better solution. I will add clamps and supportbrackets to make everything safer.

I still have some questions, the T-piece rests with its bottom on the existing stone channel, is this a problem? (see photo)
Can I mortar/brickwork the T-piece with ordinary bricks and fire-resistant mortar or do I need fire resistant bricks?

Appreciate the help!

 

[stoveliker]

I am not sure the current set up is much better; I think you should cut some off of the liner,.move up the T and let the pipe slope up.

Also, is this stove pipe? I have not seen stove pipe that is not black.

I also note that the liner is not insulated. I'm not sure if you're in Holland MI, or across the pond in Europe, and I don't know the building code in Europe. But here you might need an insulated liner.

Bricking the hole with normal brick should be fine - that is what chimneys are built of. But I would not do so yet be of the issues above.

@bholler may have more things to say as the resident chimney expert.

 

[Ignis]

I understand that ideally the T would have been a little higher, however I do not wish to touch this as this work was carried out by craftsmen...

I am from Europe, insulation is not required here. This is stainless steel
non-insulated flue pipe.
Just made a test fire and the setup appears to have sufficient draft, but i am looking forward to more input

 

[stoveliker]

Ok. If you have sufficient draft *in this weather*, you may even have too much draft when it gets cold.

And frankly, I would use another company in the future as it does not make sense to use that hole in the chimney at its lowest point.

I'm not sure about the best way to support things.

 

[Highbeam]

I liked the original setup best. The 90 appears to be a long radius 90 which is like back to back 45 degree bends here in North America. If you could assure an upwards slope on the 90, I would have run it.

 

[Ignis]

Long radius 90 indeed, made me rethink the situation, think this is aesthetically better.
Did another test burn and the chimney and fire looked happy.
I'm gonna go ahead and brick this in now if i don't get any major concerns from here
Thanks for the advice and expertise.

 

[stoveliker]

As said, it can be more optimized if you connect to the liner higher. But if it drafts in summer, it'll draft in winter.

That makes me wonder how tall your chimney is?

 

[Ignis]

Yeah I know, the company that did the lining should've known better, stove was already on site when they did it.
Thats a nice way to put it! chimney is a approx little over 23 feet

 

[stoveliker]

I'd pay close attention to the burning when it gets cold outside as draft increases then. Make sure all gaskets seal properly so you don't have uncontrolled air being sucked in.

Let us know how it goes this winter.

 

[Ignis]

That a good tip, i'll be adding stainless steel clamps on all the connections. I'll post an update come winter for sure.

Appreciate the help

 

[stoveliker]

I meant the gasketed seals on the stove(door, window, and others, if present) as that is where air could get sucked into the stove.

 

[MR. GLO]

When you brick it in make sure you can still disconnect for cleaning...and replace... I would have insulated the pipe if stove was in basement or a cold space.

Enjoy.