I did forget one important thing. Please see the description (below, not in this video) on the small "clean out door" you will need (once a year) at the base of the "chimney" in the stove. You need a way to get "in there" once a year to vacuum out ash.
Thanks Matt. I was pondering an experiment. I noticed my Hearthstone soapstone stove uses a fiber ceramic board with secondary air tubes that the board sits on. The ceramic heats to 1000F and then the secondary air lights the smoke gas. Then this secondary burn is directed to the stove top before exiting the stove. It is so cool to watch those spooky secondary flames roll off the roof of the fire and up under the stove top. Anyhow I was thinking this ceramic could be added with secondary air injection for any stove design. That secondary air is piped up through the heat so it is hot when it comes out on the ceramic. I like it better than those catalytic designs. Smoke is fuel that got away. I’m not sure but it seems like you don’t like smokey stoves?Maybe I misunderstood but it seems like a good rule for efficiency. For example that smoke has enough btu to run a car engine. I hear Al Gore has a government designed balloon that catches the smoke for use in cars. The prototype blew up with the power of a large bamb when the spark arrestor failed!!Killed some rare dolphins. Never heard that in the news did we😂
Hi Joe.. if you look at the "exit" of the chimney to a stove like this and there is no smoke, then it does not need secondary air. Yes, secondary air is very important in stoves where you see some smoke above your roof. The ceramic board though is NOT what you want for secondary air because it is the most reflective / insulating material out there. A metal pipe is always better than ceramic board for secondary air because it's important to "warm up" or pre-heat the secondary air as much as you can for it to be 100% effective. The secondary air must always be "pointed" at the place in the stove where the smoke is squeezed through the smallest "slot" or along size a place where the smoke MUST travel, AND be 3 feet or less from the bottom of the firebox. Secondary air only works at super high temps so it must be placed close to the laping flames... no higher than the height the flames could reach.
Have you looked at the “batch box” rocket stoves Paul Wheaton and co. have been experimenting with? I think that style of burn chamber would work well on this basic design. In my experience, too much space around the fire leads to less efficient and complete burns. Having a horizontal burn chamber would also allow you to bring your flue lower, which would give you a larger “bell” or second chamber. That will capture more heat and give better stratification in the bell. You could also try a two bell design which would put your cooking surface on the same side as the door, and the chimney at the back (closer to the hypothetical wall…)
Yes, I'm familiar with all the rocket stove design options. The entire purpose of this stove is to AVOID having to build a rocket stove. Simply make the thermal mass the stove itself, like the Russians do. Why does everyone want to insert a rocket stove into a thermal mass????? Per your third sentence, no, the large space "above" (high firebox) combined with the thin stove (only two bricks wide) makes no smoke, and no smoke 95% of the time proves it's an efficient burn. Yes, if people want to lay all the wood "down" simply make the grate go all the way to the back. That works but will produce a tiny bit more smoke than stacking the back like a T-Pee.
@ I didn’t say insert a rocket stove. I was talking specifically about the burn chamber on the “batch style” rocket stoves. It’s actually similar to the trough style burn chamber you see on some (usually Dutch or German) masonry heaters if you’re that allergic to rocket stoves… Smoke is not caused by how you lay the wood, it’s a function of turbulence during and after combustion. The rumford teepee is one approach to optimize this, but there are certainly others. You have to understand the rumford was born because the U.S. didn’t have the same quality brick foundries that Northern Europe had at the time. It’s basically a rocket stove for poor bricks. The teepee lay helps get the draft going up the back wall faster and thus prevent smoke in the early stages of a fire. That’s not especially necessary in a decent masonry heater. Modern concepts like secondary combustion are vastly superior if you’re worried about smoke.
@@atomicsmith This is a stove for a homesteader, off-grid, low skill, or poor person. They have no way of doing "secondary air." This stove is for them. It is for the 35 year old single mother in Peru. It is "the best compromise" of all things, with low to no smoke being a big factor.
Love how simple this is, I have a friend who’s a perfectionist and still waiting to move into his house that he started building 3 years ago. He’s building an insanely complex masonry heater from a professionally designed and certified kit (in Canada, regulatory hell), still waiting to use the thing… beautiful though. One question I have, how much waste heat are you loosing out the chimney of this design? To me it seems it could still have the main burn chamber as designed, but with more of a ‘hearth’ to dump the heat prior to going out the chimney?
Yes, you are correct, "waste heat" and "too much going up and out" with this stove is a trade off here for quick, easy, simple-to-start, immediate draft, and easy to clean. That's its one downside to its 5 upsides. Yea, this stove will cost you 3 or 4 more logs per day than the type you are talking about if it's really cold outside... but for most people who cut down trees and don't have to buy wood... so what if you have to feed some extra wood. Most of "us" are overflowing with wood. Yes, this "efficiency" will be 30% less in this stove. Good call. If I start winding the gasses all over the place, I give up the other stuff.... and... I make stoves so ANYONE can do it, the opposite of the stove you described.
@ yes, I love the simplicity - I guess just wondering it would still burn efficiently if the draft came down for one loop before exiting? I know I personally could easily build this thing and would up for something slightly more efficient/complex, but using the same method you’re using here. I absolutely love it…. I’m also a landscape designer/installer by trade - I’ve got a lot of paving stone and retaining wall building experience, but nothing with firebrick. So fully willing and capable of building something like this on our new family homestead in North Central Saskatchewan Canada… and when I’m in -40… I do care about the extra efficiency even though we’re surrounded by forest. No one likes filling the wood box in that temperature.
Thank you!
Awesome videos, this is genius stuff!
I did forget one important thing. Please see the description (below, not in this video) on the small "clean out door" you will need (once a year) at the base of the "chimney" in the stove. You need a way to get "in there" once a year to vacuum out ash.
That metal mesh is often called hardware cloth.
Thanks Matt.
I was pondering an experiment. I noticed my Hearthstone soapstone stove uses a fiber ceramic board with secondary air tubes that the board sits on. The ceramic heats to 1000F and then the secondary air lights the smoke gas. Then this secondary burn is directed to the stove top before exiting the stove. It is so cool to watch those spooky secondary flames roll off the roof of the fire and up under the stove top.
Anyhow I was thinking this ceramic could be added with secondary air injection for any stove design. That secondary air is piped up through the heat so it is hot when it comes out on the ceramic. I like it better than those catalytic designs. Smoke is fuel that got away. I’m not sure but it seems like you don’t like smokey stoves?Maybe I misunderstood but it seems like a good rule for efficiency. For example that smoke has enough btu to run a car engine. I hear Al Gore has a government designed balloon that catches the smoke for use in cars. The prototype blew up with the power of a large bamb when the spark arrestor failed!!Killed some rare dolphins. Never heard that in the news did we😂
Hi Joe.. if you look at the "exit" of the chimney to a stove like this and there is no smoke, then it does not need secondary air. Yes, secondary air is very important in stoves where you see some smoke above your roof. The ceramic board though is NOT what you want for secondary air because it is the most reflective / insulating material out there. A metal pipe is always better than ceramic board for secondary air because it's important to "warm up" or pre-heat the secondary air as much as you can for it to be 100% effective. The secondary air must always be "pointed" at the place in the stove where the smoke is squeezed through the smallest "slot" or along size a place where the smoke MUST travel, AND be 3 feet or less from the bottom of the firebox. Secondary air only works at super high temps so it must be placed close to the laping flames... no higher than the height the flames could reach.
Have you looked at the “batch box” rocket stoves Paul Wheaton and co. have been experimenting with? I think that style of burn chamber would work well on this basic design. In my experience, too much space around the fire leads to less efficient and complete burns. Having a horizontal burn chamber would also allow you to bring your flue lower, which would give you a larger “bell” or second chamber. That will capture more heat and give better stratification in the bell.
You could also try a two bell design which would put your cooking surface on the same side as the door, and the chimney at the back (closer to the hypothetical wall…)
Yes, I'm familiar with all the rocket stove design options. The entire purpose of this stove is to AVOID having to build a rocket stove. Simply make the thermal mass the stove itself, like the Russians do. Why does everyone want to insert a rocket stove into a thermal mass????? Per your third sentence, no, the large space "above" (high firebox) combined with the thin stove (only two bricks wide) makes no smoke, and no smoke 95% of the time proves it's an efficient burn. Yes, if people want to lay all the wood "down" simply make the grate go all the way to the back. That works but will produce a tiny bit more smoke than stacking the back like a T-Pee.
@ I didn’t say insert a rocket stove. I was talking specifically about the burn chamber on the “batch style” rocket stoves. It’s actually similar to the trough style burn chamber you see on some (usually Dutch or German) masonry heaters if you’re that allergic to rocket stoves…
Smoke is not caused by how you lay the wood, it’s a function of turbulence during and after combustion. The rumford teepee is one approach to optimize this, but there are certainly others. You have to understand the rumford was born because the U.S. didn’t have the same quality brick foundries that Northern Europe had at the time. It’s basically a rocket stove for poor bricks. The teepee lay helps get the draft going up the back wall faster and thus prevent smoke in the early stages of a fire. That’s not especially necessary in a decent masonry heater. Modern concepts like secondary combustion are vastly superior if you’re worried about smoke.
@@atomicsmith This is a stove for a homesteader, off-grid, low skill, or poor person. They have no way of doing "secondary air." This stove is for them. It is for the 35 year old single mother in Peru. It is "the best compromise" of all things, with low to no smoke being a big factor.
Love how simple this is, I have a friend who’s a perfectionist and still waiting to move into his house that he started building 3 years ago.
He’s building an insanely complex masonry heater from a professionally designed and certified kit (in Canada, regulatory hell), still waiting to use the thing… beautiful though.
One question I have, how much waste heat are you loosing out the chimney of this design? To me it seems it could still have the main burn chamber as designed, but with more of a ‘hearth’ to dump the heat prior to going out the chimney?
Yes, you are correct, "waste heat" and "too much going up and out" with this stove is a trade off here for quick, easy, simple-to-start, immediate draft, and easy to clean. That's its one downside to its 5 upsides. Yea, this stove will cost you 3 or 4 more logs per day than the type you are talking about if it's really cold outside... but for most people who cut down trees and don't have to buy wood... so what if you have to feed some extra wood. Most of "us" are overflowing with wood. Yes, this "efficiency" will be 30% less in this stove. Good call. If I start winding the gasses all over the place, I give up the other stuff.... and... I make stoves so ANYONE can do it, the opposite of the stove you described.
@ yes, I love the simplicity - I guess just wondering it would still burn efficiently if the draft came down for one loop before exiting?
I know I personally could easily build this thing and would up for something slightly more efficient/complex, but using the same method you’re using here.
I absolutely love it…. I’m also a landscape designer/installer by trade - I’ve got a lot of paving stone and retaining wall building experience, but nothing with firebrick. So fully willing and capable of building something like this on our new family homestead in North Central Saskatchewan Canada… and when I’m in -40… I do care about the extra efficiency even though we’re surrounded by forest. No one likes filling the wood box in that temperature.
You said it’s about 1000lbs? How many sq ft do you think you could heat in a Northern climate like N Wisconsin?
It would keep a (small) 1,000 square foot home 60 degrees. In a large home it would keep a big room or basement 65 degrees F.