# Home design for wood heat.



## wazzu (Jan 21, 2012)

What do you guys think an efficent design for a home would be, in order to heat with a wood stove? I am thinking 1600-2000 sq ft. possibly 2 story. Maybe someone has already done it. I find that most homes are not designed to be an efficent system, rather more of a piecemeal style put together over the years.


----------



## SlyFerret (Jan 21, 2012)

Open floor plans and a centrally located stove.  Keep things compact, not sprawling.

If there is a second story, a high ceiling in the stove room with a loft type landing upstairs with the bedrooms near the stove room.

Ceiling fans can help destratify the air to keep temps even.

-SF


----------



## nate379 (Jan 21, 2012)

Wood furnance that is ducted through house same as a forced air system.  My folks heated their home like that over 20 years and just this year the wood stove was replaced with a self feeding coal unit.


----------



## begreen (Jan 21, 2012)

Nate, efficiency is going to be a bit less by introducing a furnace due to duct losses, power for the blower, and less clean burning technology. 

I agree with the first part of SlyFerret's suggestion for employing an open floor plans and a centrally located stove, but not for the second part. Avoid cathedral ceilings and the need for ceiling fans. That really falls apart when the power fails. And open bedroom lofts in these high ceiling installations are often too hot for comfortable sleeping. If building new, maybe consider an open floorplan designed around a central masonry stove. That's what I would be doing if starting from scratch.


----------



## theonlyzarathu (Jan 21, 2012)

A big open living/dining/kitchen combined with an open staircase leading to the upper rooms with open doorways to those rooms off of a central space from the stair way.  Choose a stove with a good convection fan or put in a fan somewhere in the staircase to encourage the air movement up stairs.  The cold air will then fall down the stair way.  

This is what I looked for when I purchased my house in Maine.


----------



## woodgeek (Jan 21, 2012)

I agree with the floorplan, but I would spend $$ on superinsulation rather than a masonry heater...with good distribution and insulation, you could run a modest stove like a masonry heater...a big burn every now and then without big temp swings, and a lot less overall wood consumption.


----------



## Valhalla (Jan 21, 2012)

If I had it to do all over again, it would be an A frame with a loft. The stove in the center of the ground floor open area.


----------



## jotul8e2 (Jan 21, 2012)

You are thinking correctly - the house does need to be designed with the heat source as an integral feature.

Caution:  the following contains blatant biases and strong opinions developed by many years to struggling with energy hungry construction.

Assuming you are going to use traditional right-angles... the more nearly square the structure the easier it is to evenly distribute heat, and the smaller the wall and ceiling areas are for a given amount of floor area - which reduces heat losses.  Keep projections, ells, niches, and bump-outs to a minimum, some houses have so many wings it is hard to say just where a central stove location might be.  Use air-lock entries.  Make all doorway openings as high and wide as possible.  Design without hallways.  Build with super-insulation techniques - this gives the highest return on investment for any energy saving construction, device, or appliance.  Avoid the temptation to use large expanses of glass - the r value of the best is still a small fraction of a r-35 wall.  Plan for thermal insulation through drapes or shades or both on what glass you do have.  Stairways need to be as open and wide as practical - most house designs can accommodate 4' wide stairways.

Two story construction is problematic.  Heat will rise, no surprise there.  If the upper level is too open, it will be difficult to keep it from overheating in summer and a/c will over cool the lower level.  If it is not open enough, then heat from the stove down below will not be able to find its way to the upper level.  Hence the suggestion above concerning a wood burning forced air furnace.  My own house has a 4' wide open stairway not far from the stove, and we very well in winter, although obviously the upstairs bedrooms get cold if the doors are kept shut.  In summer, well mostly we cool the house on the upstairs a/c unit alone.

I am of two minds about cathedral ceilings:  on the one hand I think they are a maintenance nightmare, but on the other hand I think they make climate control difficult to impossible.  I suppose a cathedral ceiling and mezzanine or loft design can be engineered so that hot and cold spots do not occur, but the few dozen I have seen certainly weren't.  Keep in mind that a wood burning appliance MUST operate on a relatively low btu/hr, but continuous, basis or it will run you out, so the process of warming up the house will be two or three times longer than with a furnace.  The knowledge that just an hour or so after you start the stove back up it is toasty warm 12 feet above the floor is not really all that comforting in practice.


----------



## HotCoals (Jan 21, 2012)

jotul8e2 said:
			
		

> Keep in mind that a wood burning appliance MUST operate on a relatively low btu/hr, but continuous, basis or it will run you out, so the process of warming up the house will be two or three times longer than with a furnace.  The knowledge that just an hour or so after you start the stove back up it is toasty warm 12 feet above the floor is not really all that comforting in practice.


Could no agree more on this.


----------



## dafattkidd (Jan 21, 2012)

A few things I would do with wood burning in mind if I could build my own house:

-2,500 sf single story with an open plan
-Centrally located living room with a masonry fireplace, a raised hearth and a large stove or insert.  The masonry soaks up the heat and radiates for hours.  
-2x6 framing with sprayed in insulation as well as r30 bat insulation, and sheathed on the interior with 1/2" plywood, then apply wall covering (sheetrock, or wood v-joint)  
-South facing windows for sunny days with heavy thick insulated curtains.  Soak up those solar rays with the ability to close it off when we want.
-Attached garage with extra space to store a good sized stack or wood.  
-The masonry fireplace would have a cut out for wood storage, or it would be an extra large fireplace with a freestanding stove and enough space like an inglenook for wood storage on both sides of the stove. 

pipe dreams.


----------



## eclecticcottage (Jan 21, 2012)

DaFattKidd said:
			
		

> A few things I would do with wood burning in mind if I could build my own house:
> 
> -2,500 sf single story with an open plan
> -Centrally located living room with a masonry fireplace, a raised hearth and a large stove or insert.  The masonry soaks up the heat and radiates for hours.
> ...



+1

Nearly describes my grandparents house, except it was a longer ranch with the bedrooms at one end down a longer hall (and no wood storage cut out), the rest was open concept and the diningroom, kitchen and living room all had a wall with the stone from the central fireplace in them.  You could burn a good fire in the day, and the stone wold still be radiating heat the next am.  My grandpa built it in the 60's...of course he was also a carpenter/stone mason, so it was a bit easier than for your average new home builder (and cheaper, lol).  He did find the plans in a trade magazine though, so there are houses out there designed this way, somewhere.


----------



## ironworker (Jan 21, 2012)

I have a center hall colonial, and it is perfectly designed for wood burning, I have an insert in a masonry fire place that retains a lot of heat, it is located in the front of the house with a 6' opening on one side towards the back adjacent to the family room with only a knee wall separating it with my kitchen, so both those rooms are nicely heated, and in the front of my stoveroom there is a 40" opening right next to the stairs leading upstairs to a short hallway right in the center with the 4 bedrooms equally spaced, I did not build this house with wood burning in mind, but my first winter there I decided to build a fire and realized what a great job it did of sending heat upstairs and wondered how good a stove would do, and after a few oil bills my mind was made and the rest is history.


----------



## Lumber-Jack (Jan 21, 2012)

I'm with Nate on this one, EPA wood furnace with well designed ducting is the best way to get the heat through the house. 
"Duct losses" is only an issue in a poorly designed house, and can be totally eliminated by running the ducting inside the insulated envelope of the house. (eg. Ducting in an insulated crawl space or between floor joists, or drop ceilings) 
The only short coming of a wood furnace is when you loose power, same short coming as pellet stoves.


----------



## ecocavalier02 (Jan 21, 2012)

Carbon_Liberator said:
			
		

> I'm with Nate on this one, EPA wood furnace with well designed ducting is the best way to get the heat through the house.
> "Duct losses" is only an issue in a poorly designed house, and can be totally eliminated by running the ducting inside the insulated envelope of the house. (eg. Ducting in an insulated crawl space or between floor joists, or drop ceilings)
> The only short coming of a wood furnace is when you loose power, same short coming as pellet stoves.


 Nothing a generator couldn't handle. im sure if your building a new house as well set the panel up to plug in a generator. i myself would rather design around a wood stove though. interesting thread for some future ideas someday down the road.


----------



## woodgeek (Jan 21, 2012)

If the building is actually superinsulated and airsealed well then thermal storage is not an issue as the building materials themselves act as great storage (might take the house a few hours to drop 1Â°F in cold weather with no heat input) so a huge masonry mass is not needed.  A stone stove would be fine.

If this superinsulated house is built with ducting in the interior space (e.g. for central A/C), then a stove is fine rather than a furnace. The central blower on 'circ' will give highly effective heat mixing and distribution, and be inexpensive if an ECM blower is used.  While the heat source should be central and the plan fairly open, this provides plenty of design freedom on the number of stories and layout IMO.
While the blower is off during blackouts, the house will certainly still be warm, even of the thermal gradients go from a couple degree to 4-5.


----------



## jharkin (Jan 21, 2012)

Disclaimer - Im an old house buff and biased heavily to traditional styles.

I think we could learn a lot by looking at how homes used to be built when wood was the only option for heat. Small footprint, good southern exposure, small window to wall area, low ceilings, etc.  About the only thing that dosen't make sense anymore is a lot of small rooms with doors (good for heating just the in use room with fireplaces, bad for a central stove).

joutl, I think you were right on with the idea of minimizing wall to floor area... but you contradicted yourself later with the one level recommendation. Modern single story construction - ranch homes - are actually the worst deign layout in this regard. Multiple story design is much better optimized for minimizing exterior surface area, the turn of the century "American 4 square" cube is probably the ideal in this regard.

If I look back I think one of the best designs ever from a heating perspective might be the center chimney Saltbox.  With proper southern exposure you have a nice wall of windows on the south side to make the most of solar gain, and that long sloping roof on the north side to give you the best protection from the prevailing northerly winds.  The big central chimney puts your heat sources inside and allows you to make the most of the heat retention in all that masonry.  The only update to build one today is that you might want to open up the floor plan a bit to get the heat distributed, and of course the super insulation. I would go for two smaller stove, one each floor, rather than one big one.


If I was going for central heat with wood I think I would do a boiler with storage... maybe a Garn... and in floor radiant.


----------



## LLigetfa (Jan 21, 2012)

SlyFerret said:
			
		

> Open floor plans and a centrally located stove.


That describes my former home to a T although it was not designed with wood heat in mind but rather the stove was added later.  The central flue with a vented chase going up through the top floor did well to heat the upstairs.  The central location on the main floor however tended to get a bit too hot at times. 

I designed and build my current home with wood heat in mind but went against common thinking of a central stove.  I designed it with a 14'x14' El and put the fireplace at the far end of it.  This hearth room does tend to get a tad too warm at times but the adjacent main living space is just right.

The vented chase goes up through our master walk-in closet that is above the El and with the door left open warms the master bedroom.  The central open stairwell warms the rest of the upper floor as long as doors are left open.

I have the central heat 650 CFM blower option drawing cold air from the floor of the crawlspace, blowing it up to the stove and this evens out the heat for the main floor.  It does depend on electricity but around here electricty is very reliable with outages seldom exceeding 4 hours.

Here is a pic of how I get up to clean the chimney.


----------



## RORY12553 (Jan 21, 2012)

SlyFerret said:
			
		

> Open floor plans and a centrally located stove.  Keep things compact, not sprawling.
> 
> If there is a second story, a high ceiling in the stove room with a loft type landing upstairs with the bedrooms near the stove room.
> 
> ...



Have a low ceiling in my stove room which is downstairs but I also have a ceiling fan. issue is that it takes a while to get upstairs. i have a fan in between the two floors to draw the heat up but would turning on the ceiling fan help more?


----------



## LLigetfa (Jan 21, 2012)

Here's a last Winter pic from another angle.
https://lh3.googleusercontent.com/-cnW5TVVTIg8/TxrWj8OtqwI/AAAAAAAAAx8/kSUouu5VgGw/s640/100_0575.JPG


----------



## precaud (Jan 21, 2012)

Why focus on wood heat? Think solar, with wood backup. Take advantage of what the sun is giving you for free nearly every day. It is most cost effective when you can plan your house around it from the beginning.


----------



## tcassavaugh (Jan 21, 2012)

SlyFerret said:
			
		

> Open floor plans and a centrally located stove.  Keep things compact, not sprawling.
> 
> If there is a second story, a high ceiling in the stove room with a loft type landing upstairs with the bedrooms near the stove room.
> 
> ...



+1     I had pretty much that set up in a contemporary and it was great, after i put a liner in the fireplace and connected an insert to the fireplace. you walked into a great room the full length of the house with a fireplace at one end. stairs to a loft were at the other with two upstairs bedrooms and a bath. a kitchen and master bedtoom and bath were off the greatroom at opposite ends. i installed a cealing fan to keep the air curculating and it worked great. loved that house, unfortunately i couldn't hang on to it and had to sell it, but i agree, a great room with an open floor plan and centerally located stove if possible is the best way to go if you can design and build.

cass


----------



## WarmInIowa (Jan 21, 2012)

Both thoughts are good.  A wood furnace with the ducts in the appropriate places; and a wood burning stove centraly located with an open plan.  The bedrooms off a "loft" area and they won't get too hot.  All you have to do to regulate heat to them is open or close the doors.  That is basically what I have and it works well.


----------



## Fechmup (Jan 21, 2012)

I can't say that my home was entirely built around the very principle you're considering, but my wife and I looked at several styles of homes and we considered ours to be the best choice of those offered for heating.  We live in an 1800 sq ft ranch with our kitchen, living room, and dining room to the center of the house.  Master bedroom/bathroom to one end of the house, and two bedrooms/bathroom on the other end.  We do have a 14' ceiling in the family room with a fan running opposite of normal summer operation and our Kozy Heat zero clearance has no problem heating the entire house.  

As another poster stated - central location of the stove is key.

I will also add, because I agree with Precaud - the sun does indeed help keep temps up in our home.  I find myself opening the blinds to let the light in, and the thermostat seems to hold steady without the need to tend the fire.  We're having a really mild winter here in the mid-atlantic; I really haven't stopped shoulder season burning.  Yesterday I started a fire around 4:30pm after letting the previous evening's fire go out and the house was still at 66.  We had daytime temps in the 30's, blowing NW 15-20, and the house only lost 6 degrees all day.


----------



## LLigetfa (Jan 21, 2012)

Fechmup said:
			
		

> As another poster stated - central location is key.


IMHO, central is overrated.  The wife and I duked that out for a very long time when I was drawing up our house plans and my design carried.  Now, if she wants more heat, she sits in the hearth room and I sit in the living room that is not too hot.


----------



## precaud (Jan 21, 2012)

Fechmup said:
			
		

> the sun does indeed help keep temps up in our home.  I find myself opening the blinds to let the light in, and the thermostat seems to hold steady without the need to tend the fire.



Fechm, it can do WAY more than that if the house is designed for it from the start. The passive solar air heaters can carry the majority of the heat load for the entire house. Easily - and cheaply. And the resale value of the house will be MUCH higher with it in place. It's a no-brainer no matter how you look at it.


----------



## Realstone (Jan 21, 2012)

If performance is THE most critical factor and aesthetics are not, then you can't beat a monolithic dome.  They are a true R60, even when it's wet & windy.  They are earthquake, hurricane and tornado proof and fire & flood resistant, to the point that if one is built as an institutional building, it automatically qualifies for a FEMA disaster shelter.  As for efficiency, there is a report of an Alaskan owner that claims that he didn't realize that his furnace had run out of oil for two days because it took so long to cool off.  But the downside is the aesthetic appeal.  Bloody igloos or flying saucers.

Here's the link


Here's a pic:


----------



## LLigetfa (Jan 21, 2012)

Not sure of the weather in SW Idaho WRT passive solar versus Sunny New Mexico.  I do see some minor gains in the shoulder seasons with passive solar up here North of the 49th but think the windows are a net heat loss overall given our cold Winters.

Something that we did consider was to use radiant floor heating in conjunction with a gas fired boiler and a wood fired boiler.  In the end, the initial cost was just too high so we opted for forced air.  Another consideration is what other heat source is available and what you list as the primary heat source on your home insurance.  Also, if you are designing an air handling system for cooling, will it also suffice for heating?  With my natural gas F/A heating, it can also accommodate cooling but it cannot be tied in to my wood heating.  I had to keep the wood stove's air handling separate.


----------



## precaud (Jan 21, 2012)

LLigetfa said:
			
		

> Not sure of the weather in SW Idaho WRT passive solar versus Sunny New Mexico.  I do see some minor gains in the shoulder seasons with passive solar up here North of the 49th but think the windows are a net heat loss overall given our cold Winters.



Simple south-facing windows, while not to be minimized, are not considered a comprehensive passive solar implementation.

Idaho looks very good for annual solar energy availability:
http://www.nrel.gov/gis/images/map_csp_us_10km_annual_feb2009.jpg

Simply scale up in size to make up the difference.

A member of this forum, who is one of the leaders of solar energy use, lives in neighboring Montana, which has lower solar concentration than Idaho...


----------



## begreen (Jan 21, 2012)

Realstone said:
			
		

> If performance is THE most critical factor and aesthetics are not, then you can't beat a monolithic dome.  They are a true R60, even when it's wet & windy.  They are earthquake, hurricane and tornado proof and fire & flood resistant, to the point that if one is built as an institutional building, it automatically qualifies for a FEMA disaster shelter.  As for efficiency, there is a report of an Alaskan owner that claims that he didn't realize that his furnace had run out of oil for two days because it took so long to cool off.  But the downside is the aesthetic appeal.  Bloody igloos or flying saucers.



Dome homes are awesome in winter. And the space inside feels wonderful. I knew a lady that put up a pair of joined domes and was blown away with how little heat it took to stay warm in New England winters. Her biggest problem was condensation on the windows, in spite of double-glazing. This was back in the early 70s. A modern HRV would have solved the issue.


----------



## Realstone (Jan 21, 2012)

> Dome homes are awesome in winter. And the space inside feels wonderful. I knew a lady that put up a pair of joined domes and was blown away with how little heat it took to stay warm in New England winters. Her biggest problem was condensation on the windows, in spite of double-glazing. This was back in the early 70s. A modern HRV would have solved the issue.



I read that they are just as good in the summer for avoiding AC use.  And yes, they do require a method of de-humidifying, something most of us the opposite problem with in the winter.  I'm currently trying to convince our church to consider a dome for a new building rather than the traditional box style building.

But again, there is the look of the thing


----------



## LLigetfa (Jan 21, 2012)

At one time I wanted to build an earth bermed house.  For that one needs the right landscape to fit it into and I was eyeing up some lakefront property near here that was a challenging site because of a South facing cliff preventing access to the beach.  I wanted to build into the cliff face so that one could have the garage entry level with the top of the cliff and a multi-level home hugging the face to the bottom.  The wife didn't like the non-traditional home nor the notion of all the stairs.  I suggested an elevator too but that went nowhere.  AFAIK the property still hasn't been developed and I'd still like to take it on.


----------



## wazzu (Jan 21, 2012)

I should add that the home will not be built in Idaho but rather in Montana at about 5500 feet elevation and in a canyon that does not lend itself to solar heating. Solar would not be cost effective anyway. I will not need AC either as it gets cold at night in the summer. I do not plan on having a central air or duct system in the house because of cost and simplicity. I should have been more clear about my needs, I have also considered the super insulation route. I do not have any need for anything other than a regular square house, no nooks, bay windows or any of that mess. Thanks for all the suggestions.


----------



## jimbom (Jan 21, 2012)

"Efficient design for a home"?  This problem we addressed when we built 20 years ago in Missouri.  Our solution follows, YMMV.  Sorry for the length, but we have benefited from low operating costs for very small initial investment.

Ours is 50' x 42'.  First level partially underground walkout with 9' ceilings.  Walls and floor insulated.  Second level 10' and some 8' ceilings with 12" double stud walls and 24" deep trusses at bearing.  Therefore, two feet of blown in fiberglass in attic and 12" fiberglass batts in walls.  Every penetration I could find in any location in the house was sealed with foam.  House is wrapped with Tyvek installed iaw manufacturers recommendations.  Careful use of sill gaskets and sealing complimented by carrying the Tyvek down below the sill.  Do not have a lack of humidity in the winter which indicates to me little infiltration of dry outside air.

South and east glass and overhangs maximize winter passive solar heat and minimize solar gain in summer.  Minimum west and north glass.  Three skylights.

Radiant floor on both levels.  Work done by local general contractor using normal pea gravel concrete for second level and regular concrete for first level.  Site built copper manifolds and polybutylene pipe.  Not expensive.  Around 3800 ftÂ² of conditioned space.  Actual measured heat load at design  Î”Temp of 70Â°F is 23,000 BTU/hour at steady state with no solar and no wind.  We have heated and provided domestic hot water with a 40 gallon natural gas water heater for 20 years except for this year.  We live in a 4800 heating degree day climate.  Zero degrees F is the ASHRAE winter design temperature.

So far this year we used only wood heat from a reasonably central location in "the" room.  We have on the second level, an entry, living, dining, family, kitchen and breakfast in a single large room.  The only other rooms on this level are four bedrooms, two baths and a laundry closet.   Problem has been that every day is shoulder season. Especially if the sun is out.  We have enough passive sun that stove must be allowed to go out at night or we roast.  We fire the stove in the evening when inside temp drops to 72Â°F then run it up to 78Â°F.  House stores and releases heat very well due to the concrete floor and heavy insulation.  I circulate the unheated water in the second level floor to move the solar and wood heat from "the" room to the bedrooms.  This takes a very small 80 watt pump which has used $17.41 worth of electricity since last October(Kil-a-Watt meter).

The south porch serves three functions:  solar shading, wood storage, clothes drying.  I stage about 2000 pounds of wood on the south porch to keep it dry and ready to burn.  It hits temperatures of 70-80Â°F easy on cold winter days when the sun is out.  This wood is a few steps from the stove.  I bring every piece up sixteen steps to this porch.  This will become a problem as I age.  At some point, we will move to the first level and use the stove on that level.  When we can no longer handle the wood, we will go back to the hot water radiant floor by turning two valves.  

The east 8' wide porch is for solar shading, but has furniture and a desk where I am allowed to exist at the basest level of Ozarks man.  Couch, book shelf, desk, rocking chair, beer, and even work on the chain saw at my desk.  And, since the wife doesn't keep a very good eye on me, I have the naughty pleasure of letting it rip over the rail.  Every few years, she asks why doesn't the grass ever grow right here.  Doan no hunny is all I say.  Twenty years and the boys never told on me.  Good kids.

We dry our clothes on the south six foot porch.  The laundry closet is handy to the kitchen and opens off the main room at the bedroom hall entrance.  Total length of all hallways in the house is 20'.  About the same involved in the steps between levels.

We have heavy drapes for the large glass areas, but above 7.5' on the south wall, we have windows that bring in light at ceiling level.  These are not draped.  Since they are under the six foot southern overhang, radiant loss to winter sky is minimal.  These windows bathe the entire room in diffuse light all year even with the drapes closed.  Coupled with two skylights at the north end of the big room and the east window wall, we never use artificial light during a normal day.

You can not tell from casual observation, but the utilities are concentrated at the center of the house.  The kitchen, laundry, public bath, master bath, and lower level water heater and stove flue are in a central core.  As is the air conditioning air handler, a horizontal unit adjacent to the kitchen in the hall ceiling.  Very short plumbing runs.  The main service panel is directly under the kitchen also.  These are small items, but over twenty years, some little savings have accrued from not having to run the hot water very long etc.  Main savings were in initial costs.  Really surprising how little pipe and heavy wire is in this house.

Do overs:
- Two inches of blue board under the basement floor rather than one inch.
- Foam the sill cavity rather than 12" of fiber glass batt.
- Exterior insulation on exposed basement concrete.  Still possible, but a little more difficult now.
- Originally installed a fireplace in the main room second level.  Should have gone with a stove originally.  What were we thinking?  That has been corrected.  The fireplace is gone and the stove is in place.
- Master plan for improvements that could be made over the next twenty years.  A small wall penetration now when the concrete is cast costs nothing compared to doing it later.


----------



## woodgeek (Jan 21, 2012)

Ok.  Cold climate and no solar.  Build super insulated and compact/simple shape with open plan.  Put a big rock stove in the center.  The 'super' will make passive distribution work much better, and allow the whole structure to work as storage.


----------



## nate379 (Jan 22, 2012)

The setup my folks had worked ok without power as well just from natural convection of the heat.  It didn't go through the house "as well" but it still worked fine to make heat.



			
				ecocavalier02 said:
			
		

> Carbon_Liberator said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's nice to keep the stove and the mess in the basement instead of tracking it in the house, like I do with a stove in my living room.  Plus it's nice to have the winter's suppy of wood near the stove instead of having to get it outside.


----------



## dafattkidd (Jan 22, 2012)

> It's nice to keep the stove and the mess in the basement instead of tracking it in the house, like I do with a stove in my living room.  Plus it's nice to have the winter's suppy of wood near the stove instead of having to get it outside.




I agree with you here, but I like having the stove in the room I'm in the most.  I really enjoy being around the fire, watching it and feeling the radiating heat.


----------



## LLigetfa (Jan 22, 2012)

DaFattKidd said:
			
		

> > It's nice to keep the stove and the mess in the basement instead of tracking it in the house, like I do with a stove in my living room.  Plus it's nice to have the winter's suppy of wood near the stove instead of having to get it outside.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Put in a dumbwaiter.

http://www.woodwaiter.com/en/


----------



## flyingpig (Jan 22, 2012)

May be this one...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4dZVIBhKqWc


----------



## dafattkidd (Jan 22, 2012)

ok, 2 things:

1.  I want to live in a dome.
2.  The wood waiter is hilarious, but all I want is that metal rolling cart.  I love that thing.


----------



## firefighterjake (Jan 23, 2012)

jharkin said:
			
		

> Disclaimer - Im an old house buff and biased heavily to traditional styles.
> 
> I think we could learn a lot by looking at how homes used to be built when wood was the only option for heat. Small footprint, good southern exposure, small window to wall area, low ceilings, etc.  About the only thing that dosen't make sense anymore is a lot of small rooms with doors (good for heating just the in use room with fireplaces, bad for a central stove).
> 
> ...



Agree 100% . . . the old-timers knew what they were doing when it came to heating for all the reasons you mentioned . . . as you say the only thing I would not do today would be the small, multiple rooms that could be shut off if not in use (not so practical today when so many homes have indoor plumbing and folks tend to have much larger rooms.) I would also suggest going with super insulation . . . something they may not have had access to in the old days (just had to make do with newspaper.)

I would definitely not recommend cathedral ceilings or lofts -- I lucked out in my house when it came to heating. Low ceilings (originally I was looking for a house with a loft) . . . nearly every place I have been to that has had a loft and woodstove has had to use ceiling fans and even then it was usually hotter than Hades in the loft. 

I also believe two floors is a better route than going with a more sprawling single floor with the same square footage . . . heat travels pretty easily and naturally upwards. I know the bedrooms upstairs are always the perfect temp -- not too hot and not too cold.

For most efficient . . . I would have to go with an indoor wood boiler with a heat sink capture like a Tarm with water storage device and hot water baseboard or to be even more efficient in floor heating. A masonry heater would also be another option. However, both of these options can be pretty pricey . . . if I was to build today I would go with a smaller house rather than a larger house and super insulate it . . . but otherwise it would be pretty simliar to what I have today.


----------



## nate379 (Jan 24, 2012)

Hmm, I find that single floor is better for heating.  Around here it's kind of common to have "ass backward" houses where the kitchen/living room is upstairs and the bedrooms downstairs.  I lived in one and it sucked.  Would be 70* upstairs and barely holding 55-60* downstairs.  it would get bad enough I would open the door to the attached garage and turn up the garage heater so it would warm up downstairs.

I lived in a couple 2 story houses and upstairs/downstaris would be 15-20* difference in temp.

I have catherderal ceilings in my house where the stove is and rest of the house has 9ft ceilings.  I like it, makes the house feel larger than it really is.  Ceiling temp is same as floor temp within a few degrees.  You'll get the hot ceiling cold floor with drafts/poor insulation though.


----------



## greythorn3 (Jan 24, 2012)

low ceiling height 8' , round or octogon shape, wood stove in center, bedrooms around family room in center, kitchen by rear entry, mudroom by 2nd entry. no windows.


----------



## LLigetfa (Jan 24, 2012)

greythorn3 said:
			
		

> low ceiling height 8' , round or octogon shape, wood stove in center, bedrooms around family room in center, kitchen by rear entry, mudroom by 2nd entry. no windows.


I'm guessing an outhouse and sauna are behind the woodshed?


----------



## jotul8e2 (Jan 24, 2012)

jharkin said:
			
		

> joutl, I think you were right on with the idea of minimizing wall to floor area... but you contradicted yourself later with the one level recommendation.



I certainly agree we neglect the lessons learned in some of the older house designs.  And I did make one monumentally stupid statement in my post - back to that later - but this was not it.  I do not recommend single level ranch style construction.  My point is that given the constraints of traditional construction, the more nearly square the floorplan is the less wall area there is for a given number of sq. ft. of floor space.  Certainly stacking some of the space above the floor level can bring additional efficiency.  This is why my own house is a story and a half over a full basement, only about 20% wider than it is long, and has the wood burning stove almost exactly where the X drawn from the corners will meet.  My objection is to mezzanine or loft construction, particularly where you are dependent upon a point source of heat such as a wood burning appliance.  It is hard enough to keep temperatures within a reasonable range in such designs using high volume air handlers; without major air movement it can be unbearable.

This point is important, I think, because it is studiously ignored by architects and plan books.  The old salt box houses and their near relatives were built that way for efficient use of materials, efficient use of space, and the ability to maximize the heat from fireplaces; which are, after all, point source heaters just like our standard wood burning stoves.  Coupled with the thermal storage in a massive, centrally located, chimney these houses excelled in their time for comfort.

Back to my stupid statement - minimizing the wall area does not also minimize the ceiling area, which of course is simply a reflection of the floor area.  It was late....


----------



## chadihman (Jan 24, 2012)

I was really worried how the heat would move through my 2800 sq/ft cape cod home. I am amazed how the heat rises up one stairway, travels through the bed rooms and then returns the cold air back down the other stairway at the opposite end of the house. I can keep the upstairs within three deg of down stairs were the Quadra Fire 5700 is. The fan on my stove is a must and I would have two stairways on my next house.


----------



## greythorn3 (Jan 24, 2012)

LLigetfa said:
			
		

> greythorn3 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



the beauty of round design is you can put the bathrooms in any bedrooms its pretty much like cutting another slice of pie.could have registers in the bedroom walls facing the stove family room, also to climate control the rooms, i think it would be a very good design, the whole works could be above a underground basement where you could house your supply of ready to burn wood. and if it were a daylight basement could also be a large garage or workshop. you could even sink the center stove living room area into the basement some.


----------



## barkeatr (Jan 24, 2012)

check out adirondack alternate energy..this fellow has created a passive solar house with a central air duct.  folks plug there woodstove into areas near the central vertical duct so the house is heated by either the sun or if you live in upste NY, the woodstove.  

Tim

Tim McCarthy Architect PC.


----------



## barkeatr (Jan 24, 2012)

further on this adirondack alternate energy house plan ...here is the website.  

http://www.aaepassivesolar.com/


----------



## begreen (Jan 29, 2012)

wazzu said:
			
		

> What do you guys think an efficent design for a home would be, in order to heat with a wood stove? I am thinking 1600-2000 sq ft. possibly 2 story. Maybe someone has already done it. I find that most homes are not designed to be an efficent system, rather more of a piecemeal style put together over the years.



I stumbled upon an article today that is quite interesting.  It's a net-zero home way up in Edmunton, Alberta. 

http://greenedmonton.ca/blog/3

This posting on the total wood consumption should wake up a few people with poorly insulated homes. They will be heating this place with 2/3ds a cord of wood per year.

http://greenedmonton.ca/mcnzh-wood-heat-part-02

Well, that might be right in a typical year. It you read the observations, they ended up having a very, un-sunny January. Instead of their normal 92 hrs of sunshine for Jan. they had under 10 hrs total. That put a dent in the wood supply.


----------



## precaud (Jan 30, 2012)

Very cool. We shouldn't be surprised that such a house would be subject to environmental conditions. Once they get past the novelty and measurement phase and get it dialed in, they'll just light the stove when they need to and move on with the day. But it's great that they're sharing the numbers.

This also points out what we've said in other contexts here; getting the insulation right is the main ingredient of any efficient house, and what energy you use as supplemental heat is almost a secondary concern. No matter what it is, you won't be needing much of it.


----------



## Ehouse (Jan 30, 2012)

Whatever your design for the shell, build a large hearth with a double flue to accommodate two fireboxes.  One perhaps a high mass masonry heater for sustained temps and to keep the heat downstairs longer (radiant heat is omni-directional), and a smaller stove (cookstove?) for topping off and quick heat when needed.  The best advice I've had is to design the main heating source for 2/3 to 3/4 of the maximum expected need and then top off with supplemental sources.  That way the main heater will run efficiently most of the time and will not bake you out.

Ehouse


----------

