# How About A Firebox Capacity and Dimensions Database?



## velvetfoot (Feb 12, 2013)

I think it would be very handy to have a database of firebox capacity and dimensions?  Whatdya think?  I have no idea how it could work.  Start a thread and eventually put it into a spreadsheet?  It would just be a matter of individual owners measuring their fireboxes and including, maybe, the published firebox capacity in ft3.


----------



## Woody Stover (Feb 12, 2013)

Yeah, I mentioned that idea a while back. We really need real numbers on the _useable space_ rather than relying on mfr. numbers, which can be anywhere from 'pretty close' to 'way off.'


----------



## turbocruiser (Feb 12, 2013)

Woody Stover said:


> Yeah, I mentioned that idea a while back. We really need real numbers on the _useable space_ rather than relying on mfr. numbers, which can be anywhere from 'pretty close' to 'way off.'


 
I imagine that simply setting the standard that everyone here from the forum would use for usable space when measuring would be tough due to the dozens of variations of stoves but if that standard was set I'd follow it to the letter because I too would totally be interested in such a sheet.  Great Idea.


----------



## velvetfoot (Feb 12, 2013)

I can see noting the mfr's number for ft3 on the firebox (if they even publish it - I don't think they all do) if only because some fireboxes are not regular in shape.  That whole irregular shape issue is a little tough.


----------



## Woody Stover (Feb 12, 2013)

velvetfoot said:


> I can see noting the mfr's number for ft3 on the firebox (if they even publish it - I don't think they all do) if only because some fireboxes are not regular in shape. That whole irregular shape issue is a little tough.


I think the mfrs. a lot of times measure the raw firebox size, without baffles, shields or whatever else is installed in there. We could get the square loading area, then note weather there is room at the top some where to fit in another small split or two.


----------



## velvetfoot (Feb 12, 2013)

I have no idea how the cat stoves look inside either.  For mine, I would measure to the bottom of the secondary tubes.

I think it'd still be worthwhile to have the mfr's published value for the capacity.


----------



## Highbeam (Feb 12, 2013)

I don't think measuring will be a problem. Pretty easy to figure the space usable for wood. Trick would be avoiding the nooks and crannies by only allowing a single measurement in each direction. In my experience with the hearthstone brand, the manufacturer is downright fraudulent in their advertised firebox volume.


----------



## velvetfoot (Feb 12, 2013)

I was thinking mostly of the fireboxes that taper.


----------



## ddddddden (Feb 12, 2013)

Highbeam said:


> . . .Trick would be avoiding the nooks and crannies by only allowing a single measurement in each direction. . .


+1
For uniformity, you'd have to stick with the biggest cubic rectangle that would fit in the stove.  This might be the most unfair to the trapezoidal fireboxes, but there could be a column for notes about stuff like this.  The system should only cater so much to mfrs who make a stove that takes a 16" split in the back and a 22" split in the front.  Part of the "usability" of a firebox is how it can be loaded with wood that is processed to a uniform size, like all 16" splits.  Mfrs of tapered fireboxes would kinda deserve what they get; the point of this spec is usability, and a tapered firebox is less usable than a rectangular firebox of the same volume, IMO.


----------



## velvetfoot (Feb 12, 2013)

I agree.  I had one as I recall, the Quad 2700i.  I can't see making use of that area except if you had a longer split.  As you say, I can't see a way of loading the stove the max with, say, a 16" split that would fit in the back;  There'd always be some space left over.  I wouldn't penalize the stoves who could only load side to side though, right?

So you could have a measured usable space (ie, rectangle), and the mfrs published number for ft3, if it could be found.


----------



## Highbeam (Feb 12, 2013)

The dimensions of the rectangle could be "average" vs. minimum so the tapered firebox would get some benefit. That would capture the volume.


----------



## ddddddden (Feb 12, 2013)

velvetfoot said:


> . . .I wouldn't penalize the stoves who could only load side to side though, right?


Not sure what you mean. Front loading? Side loading? N/S vs. E/W log orientation? That would be useful info too.



> So you could have a measured usable space (ie, rectangle), and the mfrs published number for ft3, if it could be found.


Sure, if you're doing a chart, might as well list multiple specs. 



Highbeam said:


> The dimensions of the rectangle could be "average" vs. minimum so the tapered firebox would get some benefit. That would capture the volume.


You could do a separate category for total volume, but I don't see how trapezoids are much different from nooks & crannies. Other than wedging scraps into the triangular spaces on the sides, the only way to make effective use of a trapezoid is to put, say, 16" splits in the back, then 18" splits in the middle, then 20" splits in the front. . .PITA, the opposite of usability.  Only rectangles should be measured in the "usable space" category, IMO.


----------



## velvetfoot (Feb 12, 2013)

ddddddden said:


> velvetfoot said: ↑. . .I wouldn't penalize the stoves who could only load side to side though, right?Not sure what you mean. Front loading? Side loading? N/S vs. E/W log orientation? That would be useful info too.



Right about the side to side.  Yes, I meant front loading e/w, because the splits can't be loaded vertically.  I guess, very short splits could be cut as well to fit it n/s, so I'd say no penalty for e/w.


----------



## Highbeam (Feb 12, 2013)

That would certainly be the easiest way to go, yes you're right, it would be better information as well. Same deal with fireboxes that taper top to bottom as with bricks, the measurement should be the smallest dimension.


----------



## MasterMech (Feb 17, 2013)

What about using some sort of agreed upon media to measure the usable space? Like say, how many 16" 4x4's (can be oriented in any direction) will fit? Then calculate the total volume occupied by the 4x4's (or 2x4's or whatever but 4x4's are pretty close to a normal sized split.) and use that as your "standard".

There used to be a standard here and was measured by how many cases of your favorite adult beverage would fit in the firebox.....


----------



## BrotherBart (Feb 17, 2013)

Why not just use the measurement criteria from EPA Method 28 that is where the manufacturers got it in the first place.

"12.2.2 Firebox Volume.  Determine the firebox volume in cubic feet.  Firebox volume shall 
include all areas accessible through the fuel loading door where firewood could reasonably be 
placed up to the horizontal plane defined by the top of the loading door.  A drawing of the firebox 
showing front, side and plan views or an isometric view with interior dimensions shall be provided 
by the manufacturer and verified by the laboratory.  Calculations for firebox volume from 
computer aided design (CAD) software programs are acceptable and shall be included in the test 
report if used.  If the firebox volume is calculated by the laboratory the firebox drawings and 
calculations shall be included in the test report."

The BrotherBart Standard is:


----------



## MasterMech (Feb 17, 2013)

BrotherBart said:


> "12.2.2 Firebox Volume. Determine the firebox volume in cubic feet. Firebox volume shall include all areas accessible through the fuel loading door where firewood could reasonably be placed up to the horizontal plane defined by the top of the loading door. A drawing of the firebox showing front, side and plan views or an isometric view with interior dimensions shall be provided by the manufacturer and verified by the laboratory. Calculations for firebox volume from computer aided design (CAD) software programs are acceptable and shall be included in the test report if used. If the firebox volume is calculated by the laboratory the firebox drawings and calculations shall be included in the test report."


 
While that is wonderfully scientific and all, we all know that sloping top baffles and protrusions into an otherwise rectangular firebox will have very little effect on the mathematically correct volume but a very real impact on how much actual wood you can get in there.  I don't care how big the firebox is.  (much )   How much wood can I stuff in it?


----------



## velvetfoot (Feb 17, 2013)

BrotherBart said:


> The BrotherBart Standard is


impressive.  i'm jealous.


----------



## BrotherBart (Feb 17, 2013)

Fill the thing with Styrofoam peanuts and then take them out and measure the volume. Please do it with a cold stove.

"all areas accessible through the fuel loading door where firewood could reasonably be 
placed " says the same thing you are saying.


----------



## BrotherBart (Feb 17, 2013)

velvetfoot said:


> impressive. i'm jealous.


 
It will hold four but I only had three on hand.


----------



## velvetfoot (Feb 17, 2013)

i'm even more jealous.  and you have TWO of them?  Amazing.


----------



## BrotherBart (Feb 17, 2013)

O





velvetfoot said:


> i'm even more jealous. and you have TWO of them? Amazing.


 
One is just hanging out in the basement not even connected. The deal was just too good to pass up.


----------



## velvetfoot (Feb 17, 2013)

Oh geeez, a spare 3.x ft3 of firebox power


----------



## MasterMech (Feb 17, 2013)

BrotherBart said:


> O
> 
> One is just hanging out in the basement not even connected. The deal was just too good to pass up.


I've heard of hoarding firewood but stoves? .......


----------



## BrotherBart (Feb 17, 2013)

MasterMech said:


> I've heard of hoarding firewood but stoves? .......


 
Collecting. Collecting. Classier than hoarding.


----------



## webbie (Feb 17, 2013)

Unless I had a lab and LOTS of clear documentation, I would not want to hazard such guesses! 
Many stoves even accept some 16" logs and then some 20". It would be very hard to get an idea of exactly how they compare. You COULD get such a comparison if you had the same pile of the same species of wood (some have more twists and knots) and then loaded up each of the stoves when cold.

We did that in our shop with various stoves and found, for instance, that you could get a lot more wood in an Intrepid than in the Jotul #3. 

But, realistically, this often has gotten reported here by users anyway - or in the stove reviews.

I classify this as a good idea - but not one that I can do....


----------



## MasterMech (Feb 17, 2013)

webbie said:


> Unless I had a lab and LOTS of clear documentation, I would not want to hazard such guesses!
> Many stoves even accept some 16" logs and then some 20". It would be very hard to get an idea of exactly how they compare. You COULD get such a comparison if you had the same pile of the same species of wood (some have more twists and knots) and then loaded up each of the stoves when cold.
> 
> We did that in our shop with various stoves and found, for instance, that you could get a lot more wood in an Intrepid than in the Jotul #3.
> ...


I still think we should compile pictures of stoves using BrotherBarts 'unofficial' firebox volume measurements. Might both useful and a hoot.


----------



## ddddddden (Feb 18, 2013)

MasterMech said:


> I still think we should compile pictures of stoves using BrotherBarts 'unofficial' firebox volume measurements. Might both useful and a hoot.


 
https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/how-big-is-your-stove-really.51736/


----------

