# My Everburn procedure



## BurningIsLove (Nov 16, 2007)

Posting this to a separate thread to keep stove-specific threads and/or rants about VC from polluting this thread:

Here is the procedure that I follow once the stove (Dutchwest 2479 everburn) is up to temp and needs to be reloaded:

1) Open bypass
2) poke residual logs to collapse into coals (if necessary).  Needs a good 2+" of coals, so plan accordingly
3) load fresh splits (see note below on orientation)
4) open air inlet 100% for about 10-15 minutes or until fire is very active (about 475 on the flu connector magnetic thermometer)
5) Damper down to about 1/3 air and let burn for another 10 minutes.  This reduces wasteful burning that is just rocketing right up the chimney, but is necessary to pre-heat the new splits on the top
6) Open air inlet to 100% again for about 2 minutes to get an active fire again
7) Close bypass/engage everburn.
8) If rumble persists, temps are good, smoke-free at the top of the stack, I damper down to about 3/4 then 1/2 then 1/4.

If the everburn "stalls", it means that the coals werent oriented right, there weren't enough of them, or the fresh splits were 'ready' for that stage yet.  All the above assumes dry, seasoned hardwood.  Also, I have a thick masonry chimney which has to be properly heated before it drafts well enough to use everburn.  This takes about 2 hours in my set up.

Also, when the drafting is good and outdoor temps are low, lately I've been experimenting with the following to reduce 'thermonuclear' incidents.  A freshly loaded stove holds about 6 medium sized splits on top of the coal bed.  I have been putting two less-seasoned splits on the top row.  That way they bake for a while and dry out before the splits below them reduce to coals.  I dont mind the extra energy required to heat the water in the unseasoned splits because this stove throws more heat than I need when everburn is working properly.


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 17, 2007)

Forgot my own note on orienting the splits.......

When I add new splits, I create a small 'pocket' in front of/ above the throat entrance to the reburn chamber.  Split-size willing, I do this often by resting a split on the flat, top section of the block that houses the throat.  When that split and the ones around it eventually reduce to coals, it falls into place on its own.  For some reason, creating that pocket seems to help.  Maybe it allows the air to not have to travel across cooler splits that have not completely caught yet, therefore making it more hot before it enters the throat.


----------



## Gunner (Nov 17, 2007)

Is there enough coals left in the morning to just add wood, char it, close the damper and start "everburning" or do you have to start from scratch with establishing a coal bed big enough to everburn?


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 17, 2007)

IN the morning there are still coals remaining, but not the 2-3" required to jump right back into the everburn process.  Also the stove has dropped to about 200 degrees (surface), which isn't hot enough.  But the stack is still warm and the draft is moderately strong, so after loading with fresh splits it is only a few minutes before the fire is roaring again.  However, it does take a while to rebuild the thick bed of coals necessary.

So in the morning, the procedure is similar but different and goes something like:

1) open bypass and reload about 1/2 way with small diameter splits (2-3") and open up air inlet all the way
2) make big pot of coffee
3) once the splits are about halfway to coals, jumble them w/ the poker to break off some coals and build up the coal bed
4) completely load the firebox as normal, finish the pot of coffee, and revert to the previous posted steps and enjoy.

Every fire is different based on the fuel & weather conditions, but it's a procedure that seems to work often enough.  So the morning procedure takes about an hour before everburn is ready to go again, which is less than half the time it takes starting a cold stove/stack.


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 17, 2007)

Don't want to speak for someone else, but in my experience, there's usually enough coals in the morning to get restarted, but no where near enough to start everburning right away, so basically you are starting almost from scratch reestablishing that thick coal bed required for everburning.
[I see Burning jumped in while I was typing]


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 17, 2007)

Oh, and for some reason, ash (the wood species not the substance) seems to work really well for building the initial coal bed.  It's lower in BTUs than red oak, but it's quick to season & dry out, and therefore works like super-kindling.


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 17, 2007)

Ask not to mention manufactures, but I am soon receiving a DVD detailing the Everburn technology and how to burn with it. After reviewing it, they want some feed back. They are hoping it will make it easier for new comers to the everburn technology. I am replacing my Cat intrepid with a medium size Dutch west evern burn stove,  I can experiment with it and use it in conjunction with the DVD.  Trader an I have been exchanging notes and I now have a direct line to the head of operations. the chief engineer. and the chief combustion engineer. They have been monitoring simmilar everburn post. The chief engineer called me a couple of days back. We would love to share all info with you and compare notes with the manufacture, Trader, and Burning, or others to participate. Let me know if there is any interest.  That's all I can say now


----------



## Todd (Nov 17, 2007)

I don't have the stove so forgive my ignorance, just trying to help. If your burning with the bypass open for about 30 minutes, maybe your missing out on alot of those volatile gases by the time you engage, and it's already close to the final coaling stage and most of the heat is up and out the chimney? It shouldn't take that long to engage, you only need 1100 degrees inside the firebox for secondary combustion. That secondary chamber has to be at that temp with a good bed of coals and fresh wood after 15 minutes? You shouldn't have to get that stove top temp up to 600 for the everburn to take off. Does it have to rumble to be working? If you engage sooner, does the temp climb at all? Does it smoke after engaging til the fire is out, or just for a few minutes? Maybe it needs more of those gasses for ignition of the everburn and it needs to pass through slower?


----------



## Gunner (Nov 17, 2007)

elkimmeg said:
			
		

> Ask not to mantion manufactures but I am soon receiving a DVD detailing the Everburn technology and how to burn with it After reviewing it they want some feed back They are hoping it will make it easier for new comers to the everburn technology. I am replacing my Cat intrepid with a medium size Dutch west evern burn stove so I can experiment with it and use it in conjunction with the DVD Trader an I have been exchanging notes and I now have a direct line to the head of opperations the chief engineer and the chief combustion engineer they have been monitoring simmilar everburn post the chief engineer called me a couple of days back We would love to share all info with you and compare notes with the manufacture trader and burning or others to participate let me know if there is any interest That's all I can say now



This is good news...I look forward to your review.


----------



## North of 60 (Nov 17, 2007)

No-one take this personal But the everburn sounds like it needs an everamount for lift off and an everamount of attention. It must give an everamount
of heat though.  :cheese:


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 17, 2007)

I find that if I wait less time, the reburner stalls out and the temp drops like a stone well into the 'creosote' zone.  That temp referring to the flue pipe connector, not the stove itself which of course takes much longer to heat up/cool down.  And when it stalls after about 30 seconds, the stack goes from clear to smoke dragon almost immediately.

Yes, there is certainly some loss of gas & efficiency when the bypass is open.  That is why I normally damper it down a bit so that it's burning slower.  Takes longer to create the coal bed, but it results in an overall efficiency since those fresh loaded splits will last longer.  It's certainly part of the balancing act one must do each day w/ this stove.  But there is still plenty of unburnt wood in there at these stages, so when the everburn is working well you arent losing too much (but more than we'd like).

And one can tell that there are plenty of volatile gases in the box when you close the bypass.  In my opinion, that is the source of the infamous everburn 'rumble', at least one of them.  That is not to say that if you cant hear the rumble, the everburn isnt working.  But when you hear the rumble, you know for sure that it is.


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 17, 2007)

elkimmeg said:
			
		

> Ask not to mention manufactures, but I am soon receiving a DVD detailing the Everburn technology and how to burn with it. After reviewing it, they want some feed back. They are hoping it will make it easier for new comers to the everburn technology. I am replacing my Cat intrepid with a medium size Dutch west evern burn stove,  I can experiment with it and use it in conjunction with the DVD.  Trader an I have been exchanging notes and I now have a direct line to the head of operations. the chief engineer. and the chief combustion engineer. They have been monitoring simmilar everburn post. The chief engineer called me a couple of days back. We would love to share all info with you and compare notes with the manufacture, Trader, and Burning, or others to participate. Let me know if there is any interest.



With all my heart, I am interested in participating with whatever info you can share!  For comparison and proving feedback to VC, would be helpful to know the specifics about your setup.  Trader has a vertical setup with a ClassA I think from the video, mine is horizontal w/ thick masonry chimney.


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 17, 2007)

some observations here: I have two different chimney setups , center house location with 4 flues starting at the bottom floor threw the second and into.an attic space and out the roof

Second one, is an exterior chimney block flue containing 2 8/8 clay flues 

 The interior one on my main level, I have the encore connected. I find it easy to start and easier to control (Interior location)

 The family room Intrepid II ,is the chimney block exterior one.  It takes a bit more kindling, a little more coursing.  Once a decent temp and bed of coals it drafts fine, but it takes longer to get it rolling. 

 Burning, I think you suffer from the same symptoms as my exterior Intrepid chimney  needing to nurse it along longer, aligning  wood spacings, and establishing a coal bed. It does not draft as good as my interior 8/8 clay flue chimney

 Just wondering, if your chimney and draft situation is  more a product of your efforts to get results, than the burn technology of the stove.  ITs true here for me.  I have direct comparisons.  3 years later, I still learning how to run this intrepid or encore. Every wood load sets different  and I been burning wood well over 35 years and still learning..

 The rumble happens to a lot of stoves  when bi passed .I believe it to be a pressure differential and causing a rush or vacuums and a resonance. When air rushes in to replace the vacume created after bi pas mode it engaged.  It even happens occasionally with my Cat stoves. In a few minutes it usually settles down or stabilizes and the secondary combustion continues. The rumble does not need to be present at all times for secondary combustion. There will be times, when you never hear it, but still are employing secondary combustion.


----------



## webbie (Nov 17, 2007)

Suggestion for everyone........ I think it is best to not use the word "Everburn" since it is just marketing speak for a downdraft stove. We should use either or both - downdrafting stove - or baseburning stove - I think downdrafting stove is most descriptive. This was the information will pertain to the harman, lopi, avalon and other brands as well as to the models in the VC line (acclaim) which are not labeled everburn....... 

So before we confuse the entire world, let's settle on a term.

I'm working on a wiki article stealing parts of this thread that perhaps can be the place we point people to learn to burn these stoves.


----------



## webbie (Nov 17, 2007)

elkimmeg said:
			
		

> The chief engineer called me a couple of days back. We would love to share all info with you and compare notes with the manufacture, Trader, and Burning, or others to participate. Let me know if there is any interest.  That's all I can say now



It honestly is not our job here to do R & D for manufacturers - one would assume that after a couple million stoves they would not have to ask a few of us internet addicts what is right and what is wrong.....

Obviously each individual can do what they like. But other than personal sharing and off the cuff experience, I'd prefer Hearth.com not be involved in corporate communication and feedback.....on a more opinionated note, the last thing a manufacturers should listen to is a tiny subset of their users, many who have opinions that are far from "detached".  If they really want to find something out, get 20 "green" customers, and give some of them various stoves for a month each - PE, Woodstock, VC, etc.....and have them take notes. Then do some focus groups!

I have seen many dealers and reps DESTROY manufacturers with their well-intentioned advice. Despite wishing that all hearth manufacturers will survive and thrive, I think they will be better off hiring consultants than using our Forum.

My first suggestion for VC is to KISS. The original Acclaim manuals all had those cutaway drawings showing how the embers built up and what they did. That is how I learned to burn my Acclaim correctly from day one. Two drawings and two paragraphs of text would do more good than some DVD's and videos. 
(That one is FREE - any more will take a consulting contract)

Ah, but that might be too easy. We'll have to get a committee together 

Anyway, I hope this is something folks can understand.


----------



## webbie (Nov 17, 2007)

OK, here is an article to point people to - and to add to or edit.

Anyone who is registered can add to a wiki article - just hit the edit button at the top right of the wiki page!
https://www.hearth.com/econtent/index.php/wiki/Downdraft_Stove_Operation/


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 17, 2007)

MY OPINION: I think many posters are not using their stoves correctly.  I think they prematurely  engage the bi pass mode I think thermometers are also being used  incorrectly.

Let me explain: It is one thing to read the thermometer and say ok time to engage. The thermometer is one indication,  but there is more than just temperature readings.

 Another indication is , charing of the wood, indicating the second stage of the burning process. What is not being taken in consideration, is there is still a lot of water contain, that still has to be evaporated  This vapor is still stored within the interior of the splits/ logs,  even dry at 20 -25% Till the water is evaporated out one will still see smoke exiting the chimney . OR is it smoke? could it be steam? steam is white and looks like smoke and if one can smell it they assume it is smoke. Well it may be both. I think many are falsely seeing steam and think their secondary combustion is not working.  Till the moisture is removed there will be a visual white exiting your chimney. To me I prefere to see it exiting rather than condensating within the interior and creating the shiny creosote. If you are seeing that shiny creosote this could be caused by two factore One your wood is not as dey as it should be or two you are engaging the bi pas damper too soon  You have to evacuate that moisture for good secondary combustion  

A third indication as to when to engage the damper is a well established coal bed I usually allow 3 splits to burn into the coaling stage. without dampering down only controlling the primary air 

 To be successful you need a combination of all three. Good bead of coals moisture removed and high enough temperatures before engagement. I think if you are a bit more patient and not so hell bent to engage, you will  obtain better results This is not confined to just the everburn or cat combustors ,but to all  wood stove burning.  We are receiving a post of post of my stove is not burning as I expected. Well the on and off burning is hard to get results. The warmer temperatures are not draft condusive . so results suffer

 A word about expectations: Wood stoves are area heaters not central heating systems I really think productivity is from burning 24/7,  constantly producing BTUs. Few are instant warm ups. it takes time.  one advantage is they are constantly producing BTUS,  where central heating is on again the off it requires lee btus to keep it constant .  Many manufacture over stat a heating areas and BTU output in reality those numbers can be reduced 1/3.  when sizing a stove the usage might be more important than the BTUs the ocasional burner will want instant heat and needs to  be bludgeoning a stove to get there He might need a stove larger.  The 24/7 constant output never needing to raise that much temperature differential


----------



## RonB (Nov 17, 2007)

Webmaster said:
			
		

> Suggestion for everyone........ I think it is best to not use the word "Everburn" since it is just marketing speak for a downdraft stove. We should use either or both - downdrafting stove - or baseburning stove - I think downdrafting stove is most descriptive. This was the information will pertain to the harman, lopi, avalon and other brands as well as to the models in the VC line (acclaim) which are not labeled everburn.......
> 
> So before we confuse the entire world, let's settle on a term.
> 
> I'm working on a wiki article stealing parts of this thread that perhaps can be the place we point people to learn to burn these stoves.




Thanks Webmaster and good point.  I don't know what "Everburn" is but I can visulaize downdrafting--and I will read the article now.     Also, ditto for me on your next post.   You are making good sense.


----------



## Todd (Nov 17, 2007)

BurningIsLove said:
			
		

> I find that if I wait less time, the reburner stalls out and the temp drops like a stone well into the 'creosote' zone. That temp referring to the flue pipe connector, not the stove itself which of course takes much longer to heat up/cool down. And when it stalls after about 30 seconds, the stack goes from clear to smoke dragon almost immediately.
> 
> Yes, there is certainly some loss of gas & efficiency when the bypass is open. That is why I normally damper it down a bit so that it's burning slower. Takes longer to create the coal bed, but it results in an overall efficiency since those fresh loaded splits will last longer. It's certainly part of the balancing act one must do each day w/ this stove. But there is still plenty of unburnt wood in there at these stages, so when the everburn is working well you arent losing too much (but more than we'd like).
> 
> And one can tell that there are plenty of volatile gases in the box when you close the bypass. In my opinion, that is the source of the infamous everburn 'rumble', at least one of them. That is not to say that if you cant hear the rumble, the everburn isnt working. But when you hear the rumble, you know for sure that it is.



The pipe temp should drop and the stove temp should rise if it's working correctly, shouldn't it? Don't they claim that these downdraft stoves are suppose to burn similar to cat stoves? For example, when I reload and bypass, my pipe temp can go up to 600 or more and I watch it and try to keep it around 500, then when it's time to engage the pipe temp will drop all the way down to 250 and the stove top will slowly rise up to 500-600. When I look outside at my chimney I see white steam and no blue/gray smoke. What color is your smoke? Does it continue throughout the whole fire?


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 17, 2007)

Todd said:
			
		

> I don't have the stove so forgive my ignorance, just trying to help. If your burning with the bypass open for about 30 minutes, maybe your missing out on alot of those volatile gases by the time you engage, and it's already close to the final coaling stage and most of the heat is up and out the chimney? It shouldn't take that long to engage, you only need 1100 degrees inside the firebox for secondary combustion. That secondary chamber has to be at that temp with a good bed of coals and fresh wood after 15 minutes? You shouldn't have to get that stove top temp up to 600 for the everburn to take off. Does it have to rumble to be working? If you engage sooner, does the temp climb at all? Does it smoke after engaging til the fire is out, or just for a few minutes? Maybe it needs more of those gasses for ignition of the everburn and it needs to pass through slower?



My experience seems a little different than BurningIsLove in this regard.  After the huge coal bed is established, I can toss new splits on and damper down almost immediately and still get good secondary combustion.

"you only need 1100 degrees inside the firebox for secondary combustion"  
The secondary combustion chambers are NOT in the firebox, this is the problem in my personal opinion, but we don't have to go there in this thread 

"Does it have to rumble to be working? "

Elk doesn't seem to think so.  I'd love to see if his opinion changes after he actually installs and burns the stove.  I say yes, I've observed this probably more carefully than anyone outside of Vermont Castings themselves.  If its not already in the coal stage, and its dampered down, AND its NOT rumbling, then it seems to pretty much always be smoking.  I can also tell the difference between steam and smoke, and I'm talking about smoke.  You can smell smoke, you can't smell steam.  Steam is more "vaporous" and usually dissipates quickly.  I've observed steam coming from all of the neighbors natural gas furnace roof vents, on any cold morning.  It's not that hard to see the difference.

Burning - what are your observations?  You've got splits in the firebox that aren't coals yet, you are dampered down, but its not rumbling.  Are you ever getting secondary combustion / smoke free burns at these times?

The "rumble" is kind of like a small propane torch.  I'm pretty sure its the actual sound of gasses igniting.  If you've used a propane torch then you know what I'm talking about.  Of course sometimes it's VERY quiet, you might have to put your ear right up near the secondary air inlet to hear it.


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 17, 2007)

So much to reply to....dont we ever sleep?  

Agree w/ most of the comments... Yes, I like to close the bypass earlier and have a clean burn faster.  Who on this forum can honestly say otherwise?  My comments about the length of time it takes to get to that point are not a reflection of taking the time to achieve good secondary combustion (read: patience), they are strictly a comparison between this stove and other cat/non-cats I have used under similar conditions.

Elk, my chimney is dual concrete w/ clay liners (6/6) from the main floor-->2nd floor-->attic-->roof.  It also drops one floor to the cleanout in the mechanical room in the basement where the oil furnace connects to the other flue, whose use is of course mutually exclusive with the stove flue.  The one difference in our setups is that my chimney run up the common wall between the house and garage, so it's quasi-interior.  On average, my garage stays quite warm as its the newest and best insulated.  The chimney brick reaches about 120 and heats the garage nicely.  So only a small portion of the stack where it pokes out the roof is exposed to the outdoors.



> Burning - what are your observations?  You’ve got splits in the firebox that aren’t coals yet, you are dampered down, but its not rumbling.  Are you ever getting secondary combustion / smoke free burns at these times?



I have gotten quick turnarounds in the past to get successful secondary combustion after loading fresh splits, but my coal bed has to be darn thick, outdoor conditions perfect, and there needs to be leftover splits from the previous loading that havent completely coaled yet.  I usually wait about 15-20 minutes after reloading when the wood is good & charred.  Again, that time changes widely depending on all the above factors.



> Let me explain: It is one thing to read the thermometer and say ok time to engage. The thermometer is one indication, but there is more than just temperature readings.



Absolutely.  I hope I did not give the impression that a surface thermometer reading is my sole measure of when to close the bypass.  While the thermometer reading X degrees does not always imply that its time to attempt successful secondary combustion, a reading of X that quickly drops to Y always implies that I jumped the gun, didnt orient splits/coals correctly, atmos. conditions not right, Mars not aligned with Jupiter, etc.  When that happens, I dont even have to go outside and look at the stack to know that it will be a smoke dragon.  And yes, I can tell the different between steam & smoke.  At this time of year when I am burning some junk wood, I often see white smoke (steam) coming out even with secondary combustion and I fully expect that.



> For example, when I reload and bypass, my pipe temp can go up to 600 or more and I watch it and try to keep it around 500, then when it’s time to engage the pipe temp will drop all the way down to 250 and the stove top will slowly rise up to 500-600. When I look outside at my chimney I see white steam and no blue/gray smoke. What color is your smoke? Does it continue throughout the whole fire?



The same for mine give or take.  The pipe temp needs to be 500+ (stove 350+) in order to close the bypass.  When I close it, one of three things occurs.  The 'stall' is that pipe temp drops RAPIDLY (under 5 minutes) from 500+ to 200 if I let it go that low which I dont.  The rumble only last 2-4 seconds in that case, smoke dragon.  Second result is a consistent rumble for about 5-15 minutes which sometimes never fades completely.  Stove temp slowly rises, pipe temp diminishes to about 350-400, emissions are clean, life is darn good.  Third is thermonuclear.  Stove temp rises, pipe temp rockets to 700+, rumble is loud & consistent, nothing can stop it except letting it burn itself out over the next 2 hours before temps fall back into what I consider comfortable.  But the emissions are very clean in that mode.  If this was a self-cleaning oven, it would be desirable.


----------



## James04 (Nov 17, 2007)

Burning,

What is the typical stove top temperature when you have archived the second scenario. I do not have a VC I have a Harmon tl300. But, it is a down draft type. I still haven't figures out how to get an accurate stove top temperature. As, my stove is a top loader and the underside of that door has a second plate bolted to its underside. Then from the door back were it is just single wall. There is a heat shroud that creates a duct of sorts for the optional blower motor. So in short there is no place to get a good reading. Anyway I would say I am getting around 400-450 average when getting a good burn with the air damped down for an overnight burn.

James


----------



## webbie (Nov 17, 2007)

Todd said:
			
		

> The pipe temp should drop and the stove temp should rise if it's working correctly, shouldn't it? Don't they claim that these downdraft stoves are suppose to burn similar to cat stoves? For example, when I reload and bypass, my pipe temp can go up to 600 or more and I watch it and try to keep it around 500, then when it's time to engage the pipe temp will drop all the way down to 250 and the stove top will slowly rise up to 500-600. When I look outside at my chimney I see white steam and no blue/gray smoke. What color is your smoke? Does it continue throughout the whole fire?



Todd, I think it is somewhat the opposite in these stoves - remember the member with the glowing red flue collar? During the updraft (bypass) stage, you are usually just starting the stove from scratch or possibly getting it back up to speed from a long burn. As a result, you are probably burning off a lot of water vapor and also not burning the wood completely, both of which contribute to a lower (relatively) stack temp. When you go into downdraft mode, the nuclear reaction starts and you get an incredible amount of heat being created in the rear of the stove. And while the idea is to exchange as much of this heat to the stove and room as possible before it leaves the stove, since you are already in the upper back of the stove by that time, it is a difficult thing to do....so there would be high stack temps during the initial (gas burnoff) parts of a wood fire. Very different than a cat since most cat stoves do not have high temps very far above the cat when it is working - the cat acts somewhat as a damper and also a heat radiator and exchanger to the surfaces around it.

Although central heat has been out of favor in general, it would seem that an updated downdraft system would work well for a mid-sized natural draft boiler. In fact, the Greenwood is somewhat similar....but not as highly tuned for lower burns. Such a design would do all the heat exchange to water AFTER the secondary burn occurs....so as to avoid lowering the temperature of combustion in the main chamber (with water surrounding it).

If we were sitting down to design a stove using this technology, and we didn't have to concern ourselves with style, we would probably make it in REVERSE - with the secondary chamber to the FRONT. After all, that would force the heat toward the living space. But no one would buy the stove. So design of these beautiful space heaters requires a lot of compromise, including a vast amount of the heat radiated from the rear of them.


----------



## swestall (Nov 17, 2007)

HI Elk,and all. I am definately interested in participating in anything that will move this technology toward simplicity and reliability. With all the help each of the contributors have provided, I'm slowly figuring the downdraft (everburn) out. I'd like to watch that video, can VC or someone post that on Utube? We could all get to it via the a Utube link. 
The rumble is definately a combination of air siphon and the secondary burning: basically it is like a little blast furnace igniting the smoke/gasses. The big question is how to reliably/simply establish the proper conditions to be able to achieve secondary burning consistently. What good is an installation with several thousand dollars of equipment that can not be used unless the "expert" is home and then that "expert" has to spend large amounts of time getting the stove to burn without creosote build up that can destroy the chimney or burn the house down? That's my problem in a nutshell: The CAT stove does not require all this attention and CFM is presenting this product to the marketplace as the latest, greatest thing. 
I was at the dealer yesterday ordering a second ash pan and I overheard the salesperson's pitch: you can get the CAT version or the NC version. With the CAT version you will have to replace the CAT every X years, rebuild, etc. With the NC version there is no CAT to replace and it burns pretty much as clean. WELL, he never mentioned that you had to go to the Hearth and get significant assistance just to be able to figure out how to get the stove to burn in secondary mode, that you will spend hours watching it get there, etc. etc.
So, if we can work through this and help establish either a reliable procedure or CFM comes up with some sort of mods that will make this product line as easy and reliable as the CAT version, I am all for it.
PS: Without all your help I would have spent one heck of a lot more time trying to figure this monster out, for that I am EverGrateful! Steve.


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 17, 2007)

James04 said:
			
		

> What is the typical stove top temperature when you have archived the second scenario. I do not have a VC I have a Harmon tl300. But, it is a down draft type. I still haven't figures out how to get an accurate stove top temperature. As, my stove is a top loader and the underside of that door has a second plate bolted to its underside. Then from the door back were it is just single wall. There is a heat shroud that creates a duct of sorts for the optional blower motor. So in short there is no place to get a good reading. Anyway I would say I am getting around 400-450 average when getting a good burn with the air damped down for an overnight burn.
> James



It's about 450-500 when everything is optimal, dampered down, and I'm heading to bed for the night.  The DW stove also has the vents for the blower system, but they are on the L/R side so the middle section is directly above the bypass and is usually a good indication of the stove temp.   Since your stove design doesnt lend itself to that measure, you might want to pick up an IR (infrared) thermometer.  But if you do, make sure you pick up one that can read stove temps.  The first one I snagged topped out at 420 degrees, and the exterior gets well above that.


----------



## James04 (Nov 17, 2007)

Were would I be pointing the IR? Inside the firebox (through the glass)?


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 18, 2007)

Somewhere that isn't double-insulated like a side.  Inside the firebox will be way outside the range of an IR thermometer.  After dnloading the manual for your stove, maybe that flat metal area above the front glass?

Again, its not really the temp that you should be interested in (outside of safety of course) if it's effectively heating the space you want it to.   Are the emissions coming out of your stack clean or sooty?  Are you getting the long burn times when dampered down?  Whats the creosote buildup like in the stack?  

This thread is only temp-heavy because we're not getting the clean burns, and the amount of creosote in my chimney this year was more than I think should be for a modern stove.  If the stove operated well consistently, I'm wiling to bet it would be a much cleaner stack.


----------



## James04 (Nov 18, 2007)

I have some of the same issues that you lot are having. Only they are not as frequent for me. My wood is not fully seasoned. I purchased seasoned wood that had just been split two weeks prior. Before that it was cord length unsplit for two years supposedly. I only get the dropping temps after kicking in if a) haven't established a bed of coals b) didn't let the new splits come up to temp before kicking in. Most times I get it right and I see no smoke at all. Just heat waves. Like hot ash fault in the summer. I do agree that it takes a little too much effort though. I now wish I had gone with a cat stove. Only before I knew any better. Everyone would preach about how bad they are. Of course I fell for that. I believed the statement that the cat was a band aid for a poorly engineered stove.

I haven't thrown in the towel yet though. After all I am getting over night burns with not just coals left in the morning but rather charcoal logs that if broken up quickly start to glow and after ten minutes with some fresh splits I am after burning. Its just the cold starts that are a pita.

James


----------



## swestall (Nov 18, 2007)

^^^DITTO. I am still thinking of rebuilding my CAT stove and putting it back in. Before I do that, I want to see what happens when the temps get cold consistently. I think if VC doesn't do something about this, they are going to undo their brand name; too bad. But for me, this is a very expensive lesson. I not only had to pay all that money, but I hurt my back getting the 580 pound monster in... My biggest problem at this point is the Everburn stalling out. It will be interesting to see how we all make out as the season progresses, and what sharing our input with CFM-VC/DW accomplishes. Oh, one more thing, I am still thinking of giving it a little more secondary air by enlarging the secondary air siphon holes a "very" little.


----------



## James04 (Nov 18, 2007)

swestall,

Considering what the others have mentioned about there stoves going "thermonuclear" I would think this is not a good idea. Besides that it was engineered the way it is for a reason. I am sure if getting it to burn easily was just a matter of more/larger air holes it would have been done. That said I am a tinkerer and understand you wanting to try this. As long as it can be reversed should it not work, and you are willing to take a chance on a runaway fire that could ruin your stove. Hey why not. 

Again, I do not have the same stove as you. What I am thinking about doing is getting lots of kindling and smaller splits in order to get a hot coal bed ASAP. That and some "real" seasoned fire wood should do the trick.

James


----------



## swestall (Nov 18, 2007)

Yes, I understand. My problem is the secondary stalls out on me all the time. I think it is due to the outside temp and my installations specific config. I'm not ready to drill yet, but when it is in the teens outside that might be different. (we are in Litchfield County so that may be fairly soon.

 My wood is 3 seasons old and mostly Oak, Maple, etc. Yes, the tinkerer thing is big in me. I figure in this real world environment, I can engineer a solution. However, my solution may be to pass the Everburn on to someone else and go for a different technology stove that burns clean without so much trouble: Burn tubes, CAT, whatever. 

My biggest problem is I need a cast stove that looks old fashioned to fit in with our home. I haven't given up on woodburning for 40 years, so I'm sure I'll find a soulution. Hopefully before I get too much creosote in my stack. 

Thanks for the kind thoughts.


----------



## James04 (Nov 18, 2007)

Swestall,

Just to clarify. The comment regarding seasoned fire wood was referring to my wood. I purchased wood that was supposed to be seasoned but, it is not.

James


----------



## swestall (Nov 18, 2007)

No problem. I had that a few years ago. That's when I started to work my wood a year ahead or so. If you have any seasoned wood, that previous post about mixing the dry with the less seasoned wood is a great idea. I did it that year and it worked very well. It'd take a bit longer to get up to temp. but my burn time was longer and since I had a CAT stove at the time, it burned it clean.


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 18, 2007)

Swestall,
  I also recommend you dont make such a modification to the stove.  Those 'thermonuclear' instances can be VERY unnerving.  From my experience, I'd rather have more inefficient burns than risk burning down the house.  I'm also not convinced that the source of our problems with the design are related to those holes in the firebox, there could very well be other ramifications to enlarging them.

When the temps get consistently cold, you'll find that downdraft stoves work more consistently and with less effort.

Another point to consider, where does your stove get its air from?  If you dont have a direct outside air vent, is there a source of fresh air nearby?  My connecting door to the garage is near my stove, and I find that it works better with that door open as the stove pulls in a lot of air along the bottom from the garage.  It's a nice system because the convection blows hot air out the top of the door and keeps the garage toasty warm.  Nothing better than a 60 degree vehicle at 4AM when it's 15 degrees outside.


----------



## swestall (Nov 19, 2007)

Yes, I know I should not enlarge holes; I'm just frustrated at paying big bucks for the "top of the line" and then getting nothing but problems. My air feed is from the room, but it is a very big room and I have even operated with the door right next to it open. For now, I'm just continuing to "get to know" the Defiant. I think I'm spoiled from having the CAT version of this stove. It was easy for everyone in the house to use, always burned clean and the only problem I had was a little puff back when damped way down on a cold night. 
Moral of the story, don't worry be happy. I'm just going to wait to see what happens when it actually gets cold before I do much of anything but burn a little.


----------



## mikeathens (Nov 19, 2007)

Interesting that this is still an issue.  All of the talk about "stalling" is bringing back memories that I'd rather forget.  I remember with my non-cat dutchwest, I'd have what appeared to be a perfect fire going, rumble and all, no smoke from the stack.  I'd watch for 20 minutes to be sure, go to bed, and get up a couple hours later to find the stove "stalled" and smoke pouring out the chimney.  I'm still a HUGE advocate of catalytics - expecially the dutchwest.  I'm interested to see how opinions changes throughout this season.  Seems more and more like if you don't have a PERFECT setup, you're going to have problems.  And I'm thinking that there are less of us with perfect setups than those that do.


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 19, 2007)

I think my stove can read this forum and has been humiliated into submission to my will....it's been working like a champ the last few days w/ the cold nights (25 and under).  Tougher during the day when it's warmer (35-45).  Had a few stalls, but letting it burn down an extra 15 minutes then some strikes w/ the poker to collapse the bed has worked effectively.   Been getting clean burn times in excess of 10 hours.

Yes, I anthropomorphize my stove......


----------



## webbie (Nov 19, 2007)

No kidding - I find that most mechanical things will eventually SUBMIT to your will. The way I look at it, they understand you are not going to give up, so they capitulate sooner rather than later, thereby saving face.


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 19, 2007)

Coal stoves are very draft dependent don't even think of starting them till temps fall below 40  to many that could be 30. To  achieve effeciency draft has to be reduced. keeping heat in longer,
 Could it be these stoves no not work well in warmer weather or as on and off situations? but come to life when its cold to promote stronger drafts?


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 19, 2007)

So would it be completely insane to try to add a cat to these stoves?  With the dutchwest in particular, it doesn't look like it would be very hard to do.  The nice thing about it is that it would almost be like having the best of both worlds - when the "everburn" combustion is working, the cat won't have anything to burn, when everburn isn't working, the cat will be firing - maybe the cat will last twice as long as it would otherwise.  Such a modification would probably void your warranty not to mention the stove wouldn't be technically UL listed anymore, but I really don't see how or why it would be a safety issue.  It would not require any drilling or any real changes to the existing stove at all based on my vision of it - the cat could be inserted below the flue collar near the top of the ceramic lined secondary combustion chamber area where secondary combustion exhaust only flows after dampering down.  Not sure there is really enough room for it though, would have to measure it and see what cats, if any, could fit in that space...  I figure the worst that could happen is that it just doesn't work and I undo the change.

p.s.  I too am looking forward to seeing this everburn DVD Elk mentioned - please keep us updated, I would love a copy although I have serious doubts that it will contain anything that we don't already know!  I'm picturing lots of timelaspes - wow how'd that 3 inch coal bed get there?


----------



## swestall (Nov 19, 2007)

We can only hope that is the case Elk!


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 20, 2007)

It just occurred to me  all stoves stall  secondary combustion when the temperatures fall below the ignition point of smoke.  whether you have top tubes or secondary combustion chambers

 its an on off proposition as temperatures fluctuate in the fire box. Now I am starting to understand why the  deep bed of coals is needed to keep generating heat in the fire box

 I think some of the issues is weaker draft this time of year I also think the primary air control is cut back to much in weaker draft situations and when it stalls it is telling you it really needs more combustion air add it I bet it starts again.. I notice wood quality I need more primary air in this part of the w burning season.  last night upper 20 again I grabed wood seasoned one year
 I had to open the air up a bit more and waite a bit longer before engaging secondary combustion. I'm so spoiled using 3 year old seasoned wood I forgot what it was like to use only 1 year seasoned wood. Much harder to obtain results the  stove does not function nearly as responsive.  The difference is really noticable.

For those that were used to the cat models I see where the fustrations exist the ability for secondary combustion to happen at only 500 degrees and not the on off of temps flutuating around 1100. It really is a lot easier to maintain secondary combustion needing only 500 degrees


----------



## mikeathens (Nov 20, 2007)

Here we go again  The fact of the matter is that no matter how much advice someone has about the neverburn system, there appear to many applications for which this system won't work.  We can sit here and talk about coal beds, draft, seasoned wood, outside temperature, etc, etc, but the fact of the matter is these neverburn stoves appear to need "perfect" conditions to work.  Apparently, I don't have "perfect" condidtions, and neither do many (if not most) other people.  Nor do I always have time to rush in to get fresh wood on before the required 6" coal bed burns down 1/4" too much, necessitating a complete cold start procedure.

My biggest complaint about this system is the fact that it took almost 24/7 babysitting to even get it to work right a fraction of the time.  My dutchwest catalytic?  Very few problems, worked like a charm.  My new Hearthstone Heritage?  Same thing.  The DW NC?  A complete PITA.

What I think many people are missing that say "thousands of these stoves have been sold and no complaints" is that MOST people don't really give a crap if there's smoke billowing out of the chimney.  If the stove's putting out heat, it's working fine.  Those of us participating in these forums obviously look at that sort of thing, but we are just a tiny fraction of those thousands of NC stoves sold.  I'm all for new technology, but this neverburn thing seems to be a step backwards.


----------



## dtabor (Nov 20, 2007)

The last part of Mike's post hit on something I had been thinking of for some time.....

The general purpose of the Everburn system is to be more environment friendly? If thats a correct statement, then for the majority of people burning wood the mentality Im sure is....WHO CARES? Most people, I believe, are burning wood for heating their home for less money than the dreaded oil. I purchased a new wood stove for heat number one. If it heats my house and my furnace stays off or only on for a fraction of the time, then my goal has been achieved....if I produce less smoke then that is a bonus.....

As far as my Everburn system on my Defiant. I follow all the tips Ive gotten from people here and I DO get the rumble and it seems to be ok, but I WILL NOT stay up all night checking and babysitting it to see if it stays. Nor do I care if the rumble stays all day long while Im at work, cannot control that. I come home and my house is at 70+ after burning all day and Im a happy camper. To the birds outside coughing and choking, sorry bout that! 

I keep my chimney clean and follow the directions to the best of my ability. Thats all I can do If I was to find there was a flaw that VC created, Id be on their tail to fix it but no one has been able to prove it yet. I suspect Mike is correct on the conditions needing to be perfect and few people are perfect.

OK, sorry for the rant, thats all folks!


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 20, 2007)

elkimmeg said:
			
		

> It just occurred to me  all stoves stall  secondary combustion when the temperatures fall below the ignition point of smoke.  whether you have top tubes or secondary combustion chambers
> 
> I think some of the issues is weaker draft this time of year I also think the primary air control is cut back to much in weaker draft situations and when it stalls it is telling you it really needs more combustion air add it I bet it starts again.. I notice wood quality I need more primary air in this part of the w burning season.  last night upper 20 again I grabed wood seasoned one year
> I had to open the air up a bit more and waite a bit longer before engaging secondary combustion. I'm so spoiled using 3 year old seasoned wood I forgot what it was like to use only 1 year seasoned wood. Much harder to obtain results the  stove does not function nearly as responsive.  The difference is really noticable.



Elk, I always start (or try to start) the secondary combustion w/ full primary air.  I don't damper down until after about 2 minutes or until I'm positive that reducing air wont stall.  Shoot for a really aggressive fire on full air, get a bunch of gases building up before closing the bypass.  Granted, a lot of the gasesare shooting up the bypass before it closes, but the instant you close it, there should be a whole bunch in the firebox that now have to reverse direction through the coal bed and jump start the secondary.  The danger of the above process is that is you have really seasoned wood, cool outdoor temps, good drafting, etc, it can lead to a run-away (thermonuclear) almost immediately.  I judge based on the intensity of the rumble.  If it's REALLY loud, I damper down instantly after closing the bypass and secondary combustion nearly always continues properly.

Definitely agree that varying quality of wood (species, dryness, etc) will influence the chances of achieving good secondary combustion, but other factors (especially drafting) seem to play a greater role w/ this stove.  An insufficient draft means less air is being pulled in, and that can be the same as dampering down too early and starving the fire, causing the infamous stall.  Since draft is related to outdoor temperature, I'm coming to the conclusion that this design of downdraft doesn't work unless outside temps are below freezing.


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 20, 2007)

Another difference we have in perception - I've always thought "thermonuclear" was the goal, not something to avoid!   
I don't consider going "thermonuclear" the same as "run away".  Basically what I mean by thermonuclear is CONTINUOUS, uninterrupted, sustained, secondary combustion which is also always accompanied by a high but stable internal flue temp of around 800 F.  It should not (and does not on my stove) keep climbing to higher temps than that (can be higher at first but should settle down quickly, within 15 minutes or so).  If temps keep climbing I'd say it was strong evidence of a leak in your stove (probably a loose door gasket).

As for Elk's comment "all stoves stall  secondary combustion when the temperatures fall below the ignition point of smoke" - yes, of course, so the question is, where should secondary combustion occur for optimal overall results?  Are you going to get higher temperatures inside the firebox or higher temperatures in a secondary zone OUTSIDE of the firebox?  Hmmm, this is a good question - I assume VC has done the research, something to ask your chief engineer contact.  Of course there are some benefits (at least in theory anyway) to the downdraft design - specifically the "horizontal combustion" idea which should give you longer burn times.  The theory sounds good, but I'd love to see some scientific data to support the claims...

It would probably be best to get the down drafting design + cat, the advantages of horizontal combustion (long burn times) and secondary combustion happening at 500 degrees instead of 1100 degrees.

As for the guy who doesn't care about emissions - yea, sad truth is that you are probably like the majority of stove owners out there.  But the fact is, lower emissions = more BTUs captured from the wood = more heat.  So its NOT only about the environment.  But to me anyway, the environmental impact is very important.  You apologized to the birds - what about your neighbors?  What about the people that get ticked off by a lot of smoke in the air they are breathing and then they organize political campaigns to take away your right to burn?  Also, even though you might not smell it, you are breathing those emissions you are dumping out all around your house, if you can smell it when you go outside that means any air coming into your house (EVERY house has SOME ventilation) is also carrying at least some small amount of those emissions.


----------



## dtabor (Nov 20, 2007)

Tradergordo et. al.,

I should apologize and clarify.....I was spouting off more than anything. I have been working with others on the board here since before I even had my stove installed to learn ahead of time the proper procedures and to now get MY VC Everburn to work properly. I purchased it before I found this site. I certainly care about the environment and want my stove to work as it is intended. The more bang I can get from my wood the better! I was more adding to the comment by Mike about the majority of the owners out there. Its not that I dont care about emissions, but as I said, I dont have the time to stand and babysit. I work the procedure the best I can and hope for the best and once Im in bed or gone to work, it is what it is. When Im home on weekends and can be around to watch it, I work with it.

But, to comment on your statements about neighbors, where Im from here in VT you go down the road to work and almost all of the houses have a wood chimney spewing smoke  and more and more Im seeing now have the outdoor wood boilers just chugging out the smoke as well. You go out for a walk in the woods or out hunting and you can tell when you are close to a house or camp as you pick up the smell of wood smoke right off. Really, the only people that complain about such things around here are the transplants from the cities who came from the smog and pollution in the first place!


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 20, 2007)

I'm gathering information  Can you supply your burn times with these stoves  based on a full load of wood and also the model and fire box size if you know it.
 also indicate the type of wood and guesstimate its seasoning / dryness


----------



## mikeathens (Nov 20, 2007)

Regarding stalling and problems associated with the everburn system:  When the everburn "stalls", it smokes profusely.  When a catalytic "stalls", it backpuffs into your room, letting you know there's a problem (but still gives you smoke-free stack).  My Heritage - it doesn't stall, you just burn it a little hotter, and it gives you relatively smoke-free emissions.  My point:  temperature and pressure differentials associated with spring/fall conditions has only been an issue with the everburn stove, none of the others.

I have had three different stoves on the exact same chimney.  The only one that gave me consistently poor results was the everburn.  I am talking aobut being user friendly, efficient, and environmentally friendly.  The everburn wasn't any of these - with all of the smoke going up the chimney 80% of the time, you're also losing the high claimed efficiency.  So, that said, what's up?  I remember the VC tech support guys telling me the "rumble" was overfiring.  The manual was no help.  I couldn't find ANYONE that knew how the stove was supposed to operate - dealers, manufacturer, etc.  The people who knew weren't accessible.

I feel bad for those going through this.  It was initially a challenge, and then after three months, I decided it wasn't worth it, traded my DW NC on a heritage, and now my wife, two cats, and dog can operate it.  My heritage doesn't care if the wood is seasoned for 6 months or 3 years - it STILL works fine.  I find it hard to believe that VC people still apparently aren't really trying to help people figure this stuff out.   What's up??


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 20, 2007)

Mike the same burn technology is being employed in the harman oakwoood and now 2 or more lopi stoves the first was the Lopi Leyden.
 Its not just Vc but how to deal with the technology of these stoves, how to simply and get consistent results
everburn is Vc coin for the technology fire dome is Harman I don't know what Lopi is calling it. All three companies licensed the use of this technology


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 20, 2007)

elkimmeg said:
			
		

> I'm gathering information  Can you supply your burn times with these stoves  based on a full load of wood and also the model and fire box size if you know it.
> also indicate the type of wood and guesstimate its seasoning / dryness



Under optimum conditions:

Dutchwest 2479 (largest DW non-cat)
10-12 hour burn times (10 is closer to the average)
firebox is 24"W x 13"D x 15"H (about 6 medium or 4 large splits on top of a coal bed)
outside air connector not connected (but is 2' from abundant fresh air source)

Fuel:
seasoned hardwood (red oak, ash, and some maple)
about 12-24 months of seasoning in racks (mix from multiple piles)
average log length 20", longest is 22" (stove accepts 24")


----------



## mikeathens (Nov 20, 2007)

I find it hard to believe (I haven't personally looked) that all of these companies are using the EXACT same design.  My guess would be that there is some variation between them.  So...maybe one works better than another?  Maybe one of these companies actually responds to and takes care of its customers?  Hopefully, this technology will pan out and provide simple, efficient, consistent results.  Either one of these companies will get it figured out, or this technology is just a dead end, time to start looking at another way.


----------



## swestall (Nov 20, 2007)

U G H H H !  That's the point, after all. Many of us who moved to the "new and improved Vermont Castings/Consolidated Dutchwest  large stove line" did so because they wanted to purchase a superior product that worked better than the CAT models. What we got was not that. We got pretty units that work really well when you stay close to them, check every 20 minutes or so to make sure you are getting ready for secondary burn, and when you finally get there after a few false attempts/stalls you look up at the stack and no smoke. Who knows what happens later, you are exhausted, its about an hour and a half past bedtime and you fall off quickly. You didn't get to talk to your family because you spent all your time with your Neverburn....

I acutally got a good burn last night (not considering the above mentioned ordeal) To answer the question posed, this is a Defiant NC. I had it 3/4 loaded and it burned down to 3//4 inch coals in 8 hours - once I got good secondary burning I did close off the primary air to about 1/4 set.

I'm not going to keep this up. I will go through this season just to see what happens with the really cold times. But after that, I'm off to a company that makes a product that works. I don't have a problem with Non CAT stoves, Just he Vermont Castings Defiant and its Neverburn system of creosote manufacturing technology.......

I am going to add that outside air kit and drop it into my basement leve so it can sipon in all the fresh air it wants. This because I did notice a bit better burn when I left my door cracked a bit, as suggested by another post yesterday. But, having said that, the Defiant CAT stove worked very well for years in exactly the same location , the next stove will certainly do the same. 

I was foolish enough to think this VC product would be my last new stove...so much for that....


----------



## dtabor (Nov 20, 2007)

Elk et al,

Just for clarification for the new burner (ME), what is considered "burn time"? From light up to coals that are able to re-light? Actual fire? 

D


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 20, 2007)

Burn time producing real heat say stove top above 300 At 300 there should be ample coals to establish a load without  too much fiddling with kindling


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 20, 2007)

Mike from Athens said:
			
		

> I remember the VC tech support guys telling me the "rumble" was overfiring.  The manual was no help.  I couldn't find ANYONE that knew how the stove was supposed to operate - dealers, manufacturer, etc.  The people who knew weren't accessible.
> 
> I feel bad for those going through this.  It was initially a challenge, and then after three months, I decided it wasn't worth it, traded my DW NC on a heritage, and now my wife, two cats, and dog can operate it.  My heritage doesn't care if the wood is seasoned for 6 months or 3 years - it STILL works fine.  I find it hard to believe that VC people still apparently aren't really trying to help people figure this stuff out.   What's up??



Ahhhh, but they supposedly just created a DVD that explains the technology and how to properly operate a stove equiped with said technology!  So I ask tech support today how I can obtain this DVD, not surprising, they had no idea such a thing existed and couldn't help me.  Nothing like keeping everyone on the same page!  

In all seriousness though, most of their tech support people don't sound like they've used an everburn stove before.  So if VC wants some more constructive criticism, this is another thing they could definitely improve on.  Their support people need to know what is or isn't overfiring, how to get a clean burn on the stove, what that "rumble" is, what temps are considered normal for stove top, external flue, internal flue, etc.  Of course it would be even better if this was all in the owner's manual too.


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 20, 2007)

May I ask who you talked to? was it the chief  combustion engineer I gave you the phone number too?


----------



## mikeathens (Nov 20, 2007)

Ahhhhhhh...I think I'll just kick back and watch the nice smoke-free fire in my Hearthstone.  I might even decide to fall asleep in front of it...


----------



## BJN644 (Nov 20, 2007)

I sold a Hearthstone to buy my Oakwood, WTF?


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 20, 2007)

elkimmeg said:
			
		

> May I ask who you talked to? was it the chief  combustion engineer I gave you the phone number too?



Christopher in technical.
Shouldn't the guys fielding questions directly from customers be "in the know"?


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 20, 2007)

BJN644 said:
			
		

> I sold a Hearthstone to buy my Oakwood, WTF?



Don't want to veer too far off course but I think its a relevant question - one guy in the thread dumped his downdraft stove for the same stove that you dumped in exchange for a new downdraft stove.  What didn't you like about your Heathstone that made you want to get rid of it?


----------



## BJN644 (Nov 20, 2007)

tradergordo said:
			
		

> BJN644 said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I had a Phoenix, it took 2 hours to throw any heat out of it from a cold start and the way the roof of the firebox was set up it would smoke you out when you opened the door. Other than that it was a clean burner, I never had to clean my chimney in 3 years ! I can see that's not going to be the case with the Oakwood.


----------



## LarryD (Nov 21, 2007)

Elk,

When we were burning our DW 2479, the best burn times we got (by your definition, which I am adopting!) was about 5-6 hours.  That was with the fire box "freighted" and following the aformentioned everburn process.  Our wood was generally 12-16 mos seasoned, which I've learned "aint" enough for Red Oak.  I also think we were over drafting and that contributed significantly to our feelings about the stove.

The polarity to that is our Quadra Fire "Isle Royale", same "chimney" but with a butterly damper up near the first 90 degree elbow and single wall pipe up to that same elbow.  Wood is 2 years plus seasoned.  At this point I've been burning mostly Maple.  Last night I loaded all Red Oak at 8:00pm and at 6o am the stove was at 375 degrees (stove top) and a very nice bed of coals.  Best burn time yet!  I think the damper makes all of the difference.  right now it is about 40 degrees out and I hav the damper about 1/2 way and the stove is performing very nicely.  I am still learning the stove, but seem to be getting much more consistant results.  I did clean the chimney prior to installing the stove, I am going to bring one of my bucket trucks home and clean/inspect again in a few weeks.     

Larry D


----------



## swestall (Nov 21, 2007)

Hi Elk,
Today's story. My daughter burned the VC/NC all day today with the bypass damper open; I told her to just keep a couple of splits on it. So, I came home and there were coals. We went out for a short time and I put on a few more and left it open. (this stove burns pretty clean that way) When I got home I slowly filled it up. It wasn't hard to get my stack temp up to 600, a little rumble and stall, then 700 a little rumble and stall. So I opened it up again, stirred things up, moved the splits around so I had a little air path from the dorrs to the secondary input and tried again. I let it go up to 550 this time, closed it down and rumble, then that slowly dropped down to a slight wooshin sound. But, I can see the input to the secondary chamber and it is fired and glowing. but there is smoke out the stack. Once again, raise the temp to 600, close and maybe. You pointed out to me that it might be steam, perhaps. I can see the secondary glowing and hear a bit of rush here. Last night, I had a great burn. That little rumble looked to me to be the intermittend combustion of wood/gasses within the stove. The rush is the secondary pulling air past the siphon holes and (I guess) burning smoke while it is at it. Its pretty easy for me to get to the top of my stack and look. Last time there was black sticky creosote at the top. Next time its clear, I'll take a look and see if that has burned off or gotten worse.
All in all, I can say that when you pay a top dollar for a product like VC, you should get a top dollar product. One that works in a straight forward fashion without constant attention. How may cars would a company sell if one had to constantly stop on the way to work to check the plugs, see if there was enough air in the tires, double check the oil, etc. It would make a 1 hour drive take 5 hours: and that is my problem here: this stove is a beautiful but high maintenance knock out.


----------



## webbie (Nov 21, 2007)

I'm sorry and a little disappointed that the folks with these stoves (so far) do not seem to be pleased - in other words, the stoves are not performing to their satisfaction. 

As far as this forum, I have no problem with folks posting updates to their experiences after a few weeks, and other such stuff. I also hope some additional users will show up as the season progresses.

However, I do not want the forum to become the focus group for VC, Harman, Lopi or any other manufacturer. The local dealers and the manufacturers and reps should be contacted and your opinion should be made known. Also, folks should post reviews on our rating section so as to inform others of their experiences.

I certainly hope these initial problems are no indicative of all the installations of these newer models - but if they are, I think it is not good news for the makers or users of these models. Perhaps most wood burners are looking for simple "set and forget" operations as opposed to cars with 8 gears and a split shifter.....only time and additional experience will tell.


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 21, 2007)

I'm looking back to the post last Feb where these stoves were being complained about but not being able to control them they seemed to over fire Fast forward to early to mid Nov and people can't get secondary burns Larry d could not control his stove he gets rid of it purchases an Island royal but add an in line damper. His draft s was so strong he needs an inline to control it

  initially it was the stove fault but using an inline to control the next stove tell it all.  he is using that damper half closed


 What else is different here. Is FEB a bit colder than early unseasonably warn Nov?  Lowest here has been only 26  FEB happened to be bellow normal. I hit below zero 3 times in FEB

 we are getting mixed results on opposite ends of the spectrum  non preforming  and slowing down performance


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 21, 2007)

So Elk, when do you expect to have your new down drafting stove installed and burning?
If in fact its outdoor temps to blame, shouldn't all designs be equally affected?  Are you having a lot of trouble with your cat stove right now?  Are the guys that dumped their downdraft stoves and bought different stoves having a lot of trouble right now?  The three I can remember off the top of my head who got rid of their everburn stoves and bought the hearthstone, PE, and the Isle Royale have seemed to suggest they aren't having trouble getting clean burns and excellent burn times right now.  If that's not the case I would hope they'd be honest about it.

I never had a problem with too much secondary combustion on my stove.  I think that would be a much better problem to have than too little secondary combustion...


----------



## webbie (Nov 21, 2007)

I agree with you in general, Gordo, the only exception being when stove shops and manufacturers educate customers and steer them toward a certain stove for a certain use. We did that for decades, like "this one takes a long time to heat up" or "this one heats quickly, but has shorter burns"....even "hey, if you are going to burn 2x4's, you'd be better buying this one (usually steel)".....

As much as I respect Elk's knowledge, I cannot and do not expect a "consumer reports" style report because he is already burning 100% VC and does have an axe (however you rate it) to grind with them. Only by burning a bunch of other newer stoves - almost at the same time (or at least in the same winter) could even a rough comparison be made. 

I am fairly certain that Elk will get those new VC's running like a charm. That is not the question. The question is whether my wife can get it running like a charm - no, Webwidow will not take offense at that because we often work out a technology test where if SHE can use and understand something, we consider it user-friendly.

We KNOW the stoves work. That is not even a question given EPA testing and field testing (which is usually done by employees of the firm).  The only questions seem to be how user friendly the design is COMPARED TO OTHER MODELS and throughout various flue, weather and wood conditions. Only a bunch of users in the field can "rate" that.

My best example is the mid-size Avalon stove- we sold thousands of them. We never took one back. I may have visited 5 customers out of a 1000+ stoves and told them how to burn it. In the ten years after sale, I would guess that we sold an average of less than $50. in parts to each user (we started selling them in 1986)........

That is a pretty high standard, in my book. And, yes, a steel unit can tend to need fewer parts and service. 

There are all sorts of perceptions at work here. There is always the said or unsaid "I paid a lot, so this stove should dance through hoops".....well, that simply is not true in the stove biz.....never has been. You pay more for style, weight, more parts, etc......but as I said in my little "choosing" article, money does not equal happiness (nor the lack of it) in the purchase of a stove.

There is also "I bought the best brand, it should work the best".....hmm, maybe that is why I have been trying to tell people there is no BEST brand, there is the best stove for a given situation and person.

On a slightly more technical note, I am as confused as everyone else because the technology certainly looks like it should work - and I loved the Acclaim (other than the fact that the early models fell apart from too much heat). It may just be one more case of trying to tune something up too high. Perhaps the designers and makers could have compromised more in terms of NOT designing for EPA, but for the average user.

In the end, the customer perception is everything. If 1/4 or 1/3 of the users end up unsatisfied, that is WAY too high of a %%%.


----------



## mikeathens (Nov 21, 2007)

I do not have nearly the experience that many people in these forums do.  But I will say that as some who takes pride in my work and in my ability to make things work, the “downdraft” design was way too much hassle.  Out of the three models of stoves I have owned and operated, that one was a nightmare.  I started with a VC Dutchwest small catalytic.  I decided when I needed a larger stove for my new house, I wouldn’t even think of going with anything other than a VC stove.  I stuck with the DW line, and went with a NC model due to the claims of high efficiency and ease of operation -  plus I wouldn’t have to replace my chimney with an 8”.  I spent A LOT of time with this stove, and, as I’ve seen others say, there appear to be so many critical variables in operation that it’s hard to consistently duplicate a successful burn.  The lower barometric pressure differential associated with warmer spring and fall days I’m sure plays into the stove’s performance, like with any other stove.  But, start looking at other minute operational details that don’t have a real noticeable effect on the majority of other stoves – these are the ones that apparently combine to make consistent operation of the downdrafts a real nightmare.  There appeared to be no reason whatsoever for it to work one minute and then not the next.

I am fascinated with all of this even though my VC Dutchwest NC is history.  I am hoping someone will come up with a real simple fix to all of this that will make me say “DOH”.  Maybe Elk, maybe someone else.  I have a feeling, though, that there are going to have to be some major design modifications to this stove.  Either that, or these stoves will only be available to certified operators who have had 40+ hours of one-on-one training with NASA scientists and Army Rangers. 

I am a bit fuzzy on all of the testing that goes on to be able to make the claims of such high efficiency.  Do manufacturers simply have to get secondary combustion started, and then take an instantaneous stack sample, or does testing go on over a period of two or three reloads?  Is this like EPA testing of industry, where the stack test is observed by EPA officials, or is it up to the manufacturer to be honest?

I’m really curious where the particulate emissions data provided on the label comes from (is it the lowest observed level of emissions, or an average, or what)?


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 21, 2007)

Mike I will post a separate post detailing EPA testing procedures instead being buried on page 5 in this post.  what is done is filters are placed in the chimney and monitored then removed and weighed for particulate matter. You could be right the design is to sophisticated for the common user.  or too many variables exist with these users their drafts systems the wood supplies and the operators.  I do know I never use the 12 buttons on my dish washer.  I place the dishes in add soap and turn it on. I also never programed my old VCR 24 days in advance to record a show

 The only time I used all my horses in My LT! Vette, was when I did time trials. I never used them going to the grocery store  590 ponies at once is a lot to get moving

 I never use basic language to navigate on my computer any more. I don't have a lawn sprinkler system that most can't seem to program right that still fire off during torrential rain storms.

 I know a lot of people that put wood in a steel box and light a fire and get heat and are quite happy being warm. Never see too many stoves getting 12 hour burn times without achieving secondary dampered down opperations.  Something there must be working

 I had a guy working for me that cut the same piece of 2/4 short 3 times  finally I climb down the ladder and he asked me to point out the 9/16 mark on his ruler sufice to say his
 employment was brief.  and that I found he was better suited with a shovel and rake.


----------



## mikeathens (Nov 21, 2007)

I don't know if you're lumping me in with your expert framer or not - regardless, my bachelors and masters degrees in civil engineering, i would think, might suggest that I am not a "common" user.  Nor, would I place anyone taking the time to post experiences with these stoves on this web page in that category.  If by "common user" you are talking about people who take time to read instructions, call manufacturers, study the designs and concepts of the stoves that are supposed to make them work, make an effort to use well dried wood, observe temperatures - need I go on - then yes, I am a common user.  However, these stoves appear to need some trained to operate them SPECIFICALLY and put 1/3 of their waking hours into their operation.  I guess I'm just not one of theose people.  I have a family.  A house that needs work.  And I need down-time.  I'm not going to keep saying it.  But Elk, best of luck with your setup.  Hopefully, if you experience the same things, you won't be too proud or too embarassed to post something on this page saying you were wrong.  If you are successful in operating one of these, maybe you can enlighten us "common" users.


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 21, 2007)

Can someone explain what is so sophisticated about a stove with two controls?  It has an air control and a damper.   Is it the damper that supposedly makes this so much more confusing than a say a steel box?  I don't think its particularly sophisticated at all.  

Or are you talking about "sophisticated" as it relates to all of the hoops you have to jump though to make it burn optimally?

As for EPA testing - I want to know more about how they do it also.  The EPA doesn't do the testing themselves, and the manufacturers don't do it.  A handful of independent labs do the testing, they are:
http://www.epa.gov/Compliance/monitoring/programs/caa/whlabs.html

Craig, it would make for a great podcast if you could arrange an interview with someone who actually does the testing!  Phone numbers for all the labs are listed on that page.

Some questions I have:
1) I've heard they use lumber - how does the fuel used compare to seasoned cordwood?  How do the test results differ when using cordwood?

2) What involvement does the manufacturer have in the actual testing?  Do they specify operating procedures?  For example with the everburn stoves, would they build up a huge coal bed possibly using multiple loads of wood, before dampering down?

3) Do they use the AWES emission sampling system or something else?  At what intervals are sampling done?  And what duration of the burn cycle (for example are they sampling from startup to cold stove?)  How exactly do they determine when to start and stop sampling?  

4) How many times is each stove fired for testing and which results do they keep vs throw out?


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 21, 2007)

EPA Method 28 testing criteria for wood burning appliances:

http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m-28.pdf


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 21, 2007)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> EPA Method 28 testing criteria for wood burning appliances:
> 
> http://www.epa.gov/ttn/emc/promgate/m-28.pdf



Thanks, I had searched for that document but couldn't find it.  Based on the description of the testing in that document.  My biggest concern is the use of the Douglas fir lumber 2x4s and 4x4s - even though it can't be kiln dried, it's moisture must be between 16-20% (wet basis) that is definitely on the low side, and WHO THE HELL burns Douglas fir in their wood stove?  Doesn't this stuff burn faster and hotter than hardwood?  The low moisture softwood lumber they use for the test HAS to have a major impact on emissions.

And does anyone know where you could find the specifics of a particular stove's test?  For example the document says the tester must:
_"Record all adjustments made to the air
supply controls, adjustments to and additions or
subtractions of fuel, and any other changes to wood heater
operations that occur during pretest ignition period.
Record fuel weight data and wood heater temperature
measurements at 10-minute intervals during the hour of the
pretest ignition period preceding the start of the test run."_

and

_"In addition, some wood heaters (e.g., high mass units) may
require extended pretest burn time and fuel additions to
reach an initial average surface temperature sufficient to
meet the thermal equilibrium criteria in Section 8.3."_

and 

_"Record and report any other criteria, in addition to those specified in this section, used to determine the moment of the test run start (e.g., firebox or catalyst temperature), whether such criteria are specified by the wood heater manufacturer or the testing laboratory. Record all wood heater individual surface temperatures, catalyst temperatures, any initial sampling method measurement values, and begin the particulate emission sampling."_

I'm very interested in this information (what was recorded) for the everburn stoves because it should show exactly what they did to establish the coal bed before the test, and what CFM/VC specified for the test, as well as finally giving us some "official" surface temperature data.

But the fact is they burn for a MINIMUM of one hour before performing the actual test.  SO yes, considering they burn for AT LEAST an hour with this dry pine lumber I am not at all surprised that they would get a nice big coal bed well suited for good secondary combustion on the everburn stoves.  They are also allowed to rake the coalbed as much as they want, up to 15 minutes before doing the test.

I also find it interesting that they can leave the stove door open for up to 5 minutes AFTER loading the stove and AFTER the test has started:
_"The wood heater door may remain open and the air supply controls adjusted up to five minutes after the start of the test run in order to make adjustments to the test fuel charge and to ensure ignition of the test fuel charge has occurred."_

If that's part of the actual EPA test, I guess that means its appropriate to crack that ash pan door after loading afterall...


----------



## mikeathens (Nov 21, 2007)

Why doesn't some try to replicate the test with some DRY douglas fir?  I'll bet you'd be able to get pretty good results (I'm imagining a fire buring with kiln dried 2X4s, and I'll bet that thing will touch of secondary combustion in no time).  Has anyone posted on here claiming consistent good results with one of these stoves (of course, there are always those "rare" events where nothing seems to work)?  And I mean 40 minute start-up, load the stove,, burn another 15 minutes, shut the damper, adjust air, and forget about it for the next 6 hours.


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 21, 2007)

Mike from Athens said:
			
		

> Why doesn't some try to replicate the test with some DRY douglas fir?



Because if you burned the way they do in the EPA test you would void your warranty.


----------



## swestall (Nov 21, 2007)

Hi Mike, I don't think any comments were directed to you.
I have a great idea, why don't we get UCLA to put together a course on how to use the Everburn technology and then we can make a deal with Home Depot to provide delivery of dried douglas fir that isn't usable as lumber and then we can call NASA and get them to change the weather so the atmospheric pressure is constant and then we can....oh heck; let's just use different stoves.
On a serious note I went out today and looked at the Harman, it has a larger secondary chamber opening; but the dealer said they are also touchy.
We also got into a discussion on the EPA sandards. He thought that (Elk you most likely know about this) the EPA was going to continue to stiffen standards and that as an industry we are going to have to move toward something that performs better than burn tubes. That is where CFM VC/DW must be trying to go. I am not sure they will get there if they don't take care of folks like you and me. Its the old thing, please someone and they'll tell 10 people, provide a bad product and worse support and that same person will tell everyone forever. 
I'm going to hang on to this thing while Elk is doing his testing, and I'm going to participate to the extent I can. I love the "look" of this stove. But, like you I'm not going to spend all my waking free time futzing with it so I get a clean burn. I am all about heating with wood and not getting creosote in my chimney; I can burn a little more wood if I need to, or a little less as long as it is clean and hot that's fine.
CFM-VC/DW owes us all (who purchased this technology) a fix for this problem. As you pointed out, and Elk intrinsically knows, the fix is most likely a tweak here and there. But, they need to figure it out, now and get it to all users of the stove. Or there won't be any question about their long term viablility. The cash they have will be taken away by class action   ;-)  and their future sales will be ended by their own inaction. 
In the meantime, you have the best of all worlds. You can watch it happening and at the same time, you  don't have to live with it.


----------



## James04 (Nov 21, 2007)

Mike from Athens said:
			
		

> Why doesn't some try to replicate the test with some DRY douglas fir?  I'll bet you'd be able to get pretty good results (I'm imagining a fire buring with kiln dried 2X4s, and I'll bet that thing will touch of secondary combustion in no time).  Has anyone posted on here claiming consistent good results with one of these stoves (of course, there are always those "rare" events where nothing seems to work)?  And I mean 40 minute start-up, load the stove,, burn another 15 minutes, shut the damper, adjust air, and forget about it for the next 6 hours.



If I were to use dried DF 2x4's and I have. I would have no trouble archiving your above goals. In fact I am sure I could do it in less than 40 min. startup time. Trouble is I would quickly run out of 2x4 scraps. As soon as I get a splitter I am going to be making as much kindling/small splits as I can. I think that will put my troubles to bed. 

By the way. My stove will rumble If I get the chimney good and hot but as soon as it starts to cool down the rumble goes down proportionately until you can no longer hear it. That will typically take less that 10 min. However I will still be getting a clean burn. I can sustain the rumble as long as I like by burning the stove very hot (over 575). But it will gobble up my load pretty quickly above those temps and shortly blow me out of the room.

James


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 21, 2007)

The new standards of GPh are already set. Non cat from like 7.6 to 4.6 gph and cat from 4.2 to 2.5 about a 40% reduction. These standards have already been adopted in the state of
 Oregon


----------



## Gooserider (Nov 22, 2007)

Hmmm...  I don't know what the results would be, but if the stove is EPA certified, then the test records SHOULD be publicly available - I wonder what would happen if one were to submit a FOIA (Freedom of Information Act) request to the EPA asking for the test records...  I'm NOT volunteering to do so, but it might be worth it for one of those more involved.

Gooserider


----------



## webbie (Nov 22, 2007)

Trader and others....

I have posted this before, but it is my understanding that most EPA tests are performed at the manufacturers facility using the manufacturers technicians. It is witnessed either directly (attended) or by a video and perhaps data hookup.

Among the reasons that the Labs (the white papers, etc.)  say EPA numbers do not reflect the real world:
1. Douglas fit 2x4 and 4x4 with spacer nailed around them is the fuel
2. The technicians tending the fire are VERY familiar with the stove and have flexibility in exactly how to stir the coal and place the new wood.
3. The technicians have burned the exact stuff in "dummy" tests for weeks or months, so it is certainly different than you or I or anyone else loading it.
4. There is also flexibility with the air control settings, such as how long they can be kept open after reload, etc.
5. The BTU range a stove is tested at can also be set by the maker, as long as there are 4 burn levels and the lowest is below a certain threshold.

Goose, the records and logs will do you no good at all, because I do not think the problems lie with fraud, but with the above allowances. 

If a bunch of engineers, computer programmers and other logical and smart folks cannot learn it, I'm not even gonna attempt to test it on my wife!


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 22, 2007)

I'd be pretty shocked if the EPA testing was done at the manufacturers facility using the manufacturers technicians - that can't be right.  But the EPA procedure doc does say the manufacturer can specify a LOT of operational detail to the test lab.  That is one reason I want to obtain the full test report - it has to include all of this operational detail from the manufacturer, plus it will contain stove surface temp data for the duration of the test - this info should offer at least of glimpse of what CFM intends for real world operation even if no one in the real world is burning 2x4 dry pine lumber nailed together with spacers for perfect air flow 

I will definitely follow up with the EPA to obtain those documents and report back here what I find.


----------



## swestall (Nov 22, 2007)

Thanks, that info will be really insightful. Elk's effort (I hope to help too) to work on a real world situation should also lend insight. I've pretty much made up my mind to hang in there iwth the Definat NC just for this effort. I am honestly hoping that working with the CFM folks will net a fix for the problem.  Next year, we'll see. If my liner gets too laden with creosote, I'm going to line it with SS which is a good idea for the long run anyway. 
The big thing here is "have the stoves with ceramic secondary chambers been engineered for everyday use by everyday people with everyday conditions?" Honestly, I think we know the answer; but what the heck, a little activity is always fun. 
As for the secondary tube type stoves, I've no personal experience but have spent some time looking at them. They seem to work far more efficiently and reliably. Yesterday I was watching someone using a Jotul; straight forward, warm clean burn and the secondaries engaged instantly when the lever was flipped. 
Well, here in CT is it 60 and we don't have a fire going. I'm going to take a moment to clean it out, take a quick look at the stack and forget it for today.
I have a lot to be thankful for today and wish you:
Happy Thanksgiving Day to one and all!!


----------



## webbie (Nov 23, 2007)

tradergordo said:
			
		

> I'd be pretty shocked if the EPA testing was done at the manufacturers facility using the manufacturers technicians - that can't be right.
> 
> I will definitely follow up with the EPA to obtain those documents and report back here what I find.



Whether the final tests are performed and witnessed at the makers or at the test lab, here are some selected conclusions of the EPA's own contracted studies. Please remember that the test lab works for and profits from the manufacturer, NOT from the EPA. Even in my limited experience, these lab technicians are more than willing to "work" with the companies that hire them! 

Quoted materials all below:
Performance of the EPA NSPS wood stove operating procedures has been *described as an art.*  A technician, skillful in manipulating parameters within the specifications of Method 28, can *influence test results significantly*. 

1. It is also generally recognized that with the current Method 28, there are many ways to affect burn cycle patterns and results while staying within the required Method 28 operating and fueling 
specifications.  These  include: 
Using higher or lower average moisture content fuel loads ranging from 19% to 
25% (dry basis) to increase or decrease burn rates and/or emissions rates, 

Placing higher or lower moisture content fuel pieces at different locations within 
the firebox (e.g., bottom/top or back/front) to control the timing, location, and 
temperature regimes of pyrolysis products and volatile gas releases into secondary 
combustion zones, 

Placing higher or lower fuel density pieces at different locations within the firebox 
to control the timing, location, and temperature regimes of pyrolysis products and 
volatile gas releases into secondary combustion zones.  There are no Method 28 
fuel density specifications and Douglas fir wood densities vary up to 60% from 
low to high density fuel pieces, 

Starting the test at the high or low end of the allowed coal-bed size range (i.e., 
20% to 25% of the test fuel load weight) to affect the start-up pattern and the 
ultimate average burn rate and emissions characteristics for the fuel load, 

Starting the test at high or low average firebox/stove temperatures which also 
affects the start-up pattern and ultimately the average burn rate for the fuel load. 
The desired relative firebox/stove temperature can be obtained by both managing 
how much of the coal bed is present at test start-up and managing how the stove is 
operated before the required one-hour, no-adjustment pre-burn period is started, 
and, 

Using fuel load weights at the high or low end of the Method-28-allowed fuel 
weight limits (i.e., 7 pounds per cubic foot of firebox volume, plus or minus 10%). 
Fuel load weight differences of 10% can affect burn rates and measured emissions 
rates.  *It is well known that smaller fuel loads produce lower emissions rates at any 
burn rate.* 

Conclusion:

The EPA NSPS wood stove operating procedure (i.e., Method 28) does not represent 
the“real world” use of wood stoves. Wood stoves are designed, out of necessity, to pass 
the certification test and consequently, their design is not necessarily optimal for low 
emission performance under actual in-home use.  Similarly, the emissions values obtained 
from EPA NSPS certification is only roughly predictive of emissions under in-home use.


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 23, 2007)

Webmaster said:
			
		

> The EPA NSPS wood stove operating procedure (i.e., Method 28) does not represent
> the“real world” use of wood stoves. Wood stoves are designed, out of necessity, to pass
> the certification test and consequently, their design is not necessarily optimal for low
> emission performance under actual in-home use.  Similarly, the emissions values obtained
> from EPA NSPS certification is only roughly predictive of emissions under in-home use.



Yea, I noticed all of those ways of manipulating the results when I was reading the Method 28 doc.  There definitely seems to be some conflicts of interest between the test labs and the manufacturers (which has actually led to outright fraud in the past but hopefully that was an isolated incident).  

I think the test is _close _to being reasonable, they just need to tweak a few things, they need to burn a type of wood that is commonly used in the real world, with very tight specifications on moisture content (which should also be representative of real world burning) and charge load weights, and they should also be more specific when it comes to pre-test burning and the ratio of initial coal bed weight to test charge weight.  And of course they need to find a way to eliminate the conflicts of interest.  

Its not like they are doing thousands of tests, how many new stoves come out every year?  I don't see why the EPA couldn't handle the testing themselves, using less biased technicians, and supplying the test wood themselves with near perfect uniformity in density, weight, and moisture (it would be stored in humidity controlled environment until used).


----------



## webbie (Nov 23, 2007)

The above is true with everything from medications to medical "boards", etc.

EPA really does not know much. Instead, they hire "experts" that include the same engineers who design the stoves....and the trade groups, etc. - They all sit around and argue about what is cool until they come to a settlement. That is how most regulation works these days.

Yes, they could radically change the procedure by simply not testing at the manufacturers test lab and having a non-technician do the loading and coal stirring, with only basic direction from the lab folks. 

The amazing thing is that all this crap (above) did not really come up too much as long as stoves performed well in the field. That is what people really care about. So I am starting to put together (in my head) the concept of a "test lab" that DOES NOT try to duplicate EPA, but rather uses both instrumentation AND user experience to "rate" wood stoves. I use the word "rate" in quotes because it would be the rating of two or three people who fiddled with the stoves, but at the same time I think that having installed and sold over 10,000 units over almost 30 years, I do know what is "good" and what is "not so good". 

After all, what the heck am I going to prove by burning 2x4's with spacers?


----------



## swestall (Nov 23, 2007)

AMEN..to all of that, the point is we need stoves that work in real world conditions, are safe, emit little and Look Good, Work Fine, Last a Long time.... Perhaps when this type LAB becomes standard, Product designers will have to respond because if they don't they will be with some of the units we are now trying to use now: unemployed....


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 24, 2007)

caLL THIS EQUAL OPPERTUNITY IF WE CAN DISCUSS tHR VARIABLES IN TESTING SO CAN THE ENGINEERS AND TESTING TECHS (SORRY HIT CAPS)
  I call this a level playing field.. Each manufacture has the same regs to work with same variables of loading and spacing and moisture contain. So why does stove test below one GPH and another test above 3.5 or more? Each has the same fudge factors.  Each can have the test preformed in their own labs, with their own techs. If their tech can't tweak lower  GPH's then what chance do we have in the field? Another error the test have to be witnessed in person by a qualified agent certified by the EPA. There is no video videoconferencing test. Where did that come from? I'd like the person that came up with that, supply concrete evidence this has occurred.  I still have a few contacts in the EPa. I would forward this info. I am sure they would be real interested  investigating that.  So my point remains the same, if their own techs can't make their stove burn cleaner,  then us user can't either.


----------



## webbie (Nov 24, 2007)

elkimmeg said:
			
		

> So my point remains the same, if their own techs can't make their stove burn cleaner,  then us user can't either.



I'm trying to get that point.........

The material quoted is FROM the EPA. THEY are the ones that say that the test is an "art", not a science. They say it is subject to manipulation by folks who are "practiced" technicians. So, you are saying that means the customer should be assured this results in an easy to use stove?

Sounds like that TV commercial where a doctors is giving instructions to a fella on how to remove his own appendix!
 :coolgrin: 

The proof is ALWAYS in the pudding, and the pudding is the stove in the customer house(s).

We are all very easily fooled. Back in the early days when stove makers were popping up every week, I visited a new company about 10 miles from my house that made fireplace inserts. I bought a few of them to sell, and installed one into my fireplace. I really WANTED to like it, but it didn't seem to put out any heat! So I worked carefully with it - and within a week or so I had convinced myself this was a decent unit. I was sticking my face about 1 foot in front of the blower output and it felt really warm!

Bottom line, as folks can guess, I yanked the thing out after a couple weeks. I had already had "real" stoves like the Upland 107 in my fireplace, and this thing just was not going to do the job!

I don't want to go back to the EPA debate, because we have expended thousands of words on that, and it does not help these folks at all with the burning of their stoves. But I hope we can all agree that there is a need for more types of real world testings, including both cordwood and "destructive" tests. That is the opinion of EPA as of now, and it is an opinion I share. Stove makers will fight it, because any regulation means more $$ spent for them....so it may have to be done independently.


----------



## elkimmeg (Nov 24, 2007)

The Epa is not concerned about destructive testing that is the Job of UL I witnessed a 3 lb steel ball smacking into the glass  door I would call that one example of destructive testing  EPa is only concerned about efficiency and clean burning Two different agencies governing stove testing.  Again if you have concrete evidence of videoconferencing in results please provide them.


----------



## webbie (Nov 24, 2007)

Read the documents. The EPA is VERY concerned about destructive testing because the stoves in the field perform worse and worse as baffles, bypasses, cat holders and other stove parts age. This is their conclusion, and also their summary.....that stoves actually degrade much faster than they should (the EPA parts). 

The EPA claims that there is no impetus (reason) for manufacturers to do more destructive testing since only brand new models are tested to the EPA spec.


----------



## tradergordo (Nov 25, 2007)

elkimmeg said:
			
		

> I call this a level playing field.. Each manufacture has the same regs to work with same variables of loading and spacing and moisture contain. So why does stove test below one GPH and another test above 3.5 or more?



I believe I read a while ago (would have to hunt for the source) that the margin of error is something like 3 g/hr (might even be higher than that) so statistically speaking you can't really say the stove that showed 3.5 g/hr is definitely less clean than the one that tested at 2 g/hr.  But even ignoring that - I disagree with you that its a level playing field.  What if one particular design happens to get an exceptionally low emissions number when you've piled up a huge coal bed (completely IGNORING ALL EMISSIONS while you build this coal bed!) and you are burning dry douglas fir.  Another stove gets pretty good emissions too burning dry douglas fir, but its a totally different design, does not require two hours of dirty pre-test burning, and it burns much cleaner on average in the real world with mixed hardwoods of 20-30% moisture content when the other stove with the lower official EPA emissions number tends to have significantly higher % of "dirty" burntime.  Is this really a level playing field?  

Should all the stove manufacturers adopt the design that gets the lower official EPA g/hr test result even if the stove doesn't get the best real world emissions?

This of course is all hypothetically speaking as no one is actively measuring real world emissions so we don't really know which stoves have the best numbers OR how those real world numbers compare to the EPA test numbers.  Closest thing we have to this is a very small, not particularly well controlled, and now somewhat out of date study from Omni test labs.


----------



## begreen (Nov 25, 2007)

Same as with cars, EPA tests are just a guideline, not gospel. Your mileage may vary.


----------



## Gooserider (Nov 25, 2007)

I tend to agree...  There may be a value in the "level playing field" Douglas Fir test, but IMHO there should also be a "Real World Test" requirement - I'm not sure just how to design it, but I would probably attempt to say something to the effect of 

1. Using cordwood* cut and split to the dimension specifications given in the owners manual, plus tinder or other fire-starting materials as specified in the manual, and following the procedures in the manual,  a test technician, (NOT a manufacturers employee) shall build a fire in the stove, and prepare it for a maximum length burn.  ALL fuel loading and stove adjustments shall be completed within one hour from the time the cold stove is first fired.  NO PROCEDURE NOT SPECIFIED IN THE OWNERS MANUAL (or other instructional material supplied with the stove) MAY BE USED!

2. The heat output of the stove and the time from the last addition of fuel until the stove temperature (monitored at the point specified in the owners manual) drops below 300*F shall be monitored.  The stove must deliver at least ##% of the heat output specified in the stove literature or manual, and burn for ##% of the time advertised. (They may exceed the manual specifications)

3. The emissions from the stove shall be monitored from 90 minutes after the test starts until the end of the test as specified in #2.  They shall not exceed the emissions recorded in the Douglas Fir test by more than ##%

4. There shall be two? series of tests, each series shall consist of not less than eight, or more than ten test fires.  If more than eight test fires are made, the manufacturer may optionally discard the results from the worst, and / or the best test performance.  The remaining eight tests shall show no more than a 5% variation in results.  One series shall use a hardwood fuel, and one series shall use a softwood fuel.

*The cordwood should be a defined species - perhaps Red Oak and some flavor of Pine, with a moisture content of not less than 18% nor more than 25%, bark not removed (OK if it falls off?)
##'s are variables, I'm not sure just what they should be, but it should be close.

I figure that this should keep everybody fairly honest - #1 gets rid of the skilled operator factor, and ensures that the manual contains good instructions.  It also requires that the process not require a great deal of babysitting - you have one hour to get the stove in shape for a long burn, then walk away and watch...  #2 Gets the advertising claims under control - the stove has to deliver what it claims for both heat ouput and burn time - Since the manufacturer is going to want to maximize those numbers, they will need to stuff the firebox - this discourages under-loading to get the emissions down.  #3 keeps the emmissions side honest - you have to put out a real world result that matches what you get in the test lab, so no more tuning for the test load...  4. Says you have to be able to be consistent, but also allows for unusually bad (or good) results...

What do you think?

Gooserider


----------



## Gooserider (Nov 25, 2007)

BeGreen said:
			
		

> Same as with cars, EPA tests are just a guideline, not gospel. Your mileage may vary.



The difference is that while EPA car tests don't match reality, we DO have a pretty decent idea of how to "map" EPA results to the "real world" such that we can look at a car's test results and say "EPA says X mpg, I should really expect to get Y mpg" and then find that what you see at the pump matches your expectation within a mile or two...  You can also tell very easily what your actual mileage is - a lot of modern cars will even figure it out for you  :coolhmm:  Most modern cars also do a pretty good job of monitoring their emissions and will tell you if they get to far out of spec...

But with stoves, other than the comparatively crude measurements of "how much wood do I put in" - which I doubt if anybody measures all that closely, I know I don't, and "What do I see coming out the chimney" - again, no real instruments, and no really constant monitoring - how many of us can see what the stack is doing from inside the house? We have NO WAY of telling what our "mileage" is...

So how do I tell if my stove's mileage is varying when I can't even determine what it is to begin with?  Some ways I'm glad they don't, and I probably shouldn't say anything that would give the EPA any ideas, but it would seem like it ought to be possible to instrument a wood stove to some degree the same way they do our cars - if the stove is properly setup, you have a known number of places where air goes in, why not put a flow sensor to monitor air consumption, and an O2 sensor (or something like that) at the flue outlet to see what's coming out the exhaust...  Just as long as they don't give me a "Check Stove" light!    

Gooserider


----------



## BrotherBart (Nov 25, 2007)

Gooserider said:
			
		

> ...O2 sensor (or something like that) at the flue outlet to see what's coming out the exhaust...  Just as long as they don't give me a "Check Stove" light!



You guys are just begging to have to haul your stoves to a test station once a year for emissions testing!


----------



## iceman (Nov 25, 2007)

BrotherBart said:
			
		

> Gooserider said:
> 
> 
> 
> ...




LOLLOLOLOLOL!
i know up here in MASS that would definitely happen
haul your stove in pay 75 bucks to get a meatl sticker on it!
and every 2yrs check the stove for safety 
imagine failing????   i can see a lot of stoves getting left


----------



## swestall (Nov 25, 2007)

OH My GOD, it is getting very complex. How about: Stove manufacturers are required to provide clean burning stoves, xxxx GPH which must function in a straigh forward manner; testing technicians will be 17 year olds.(they are usually the first home)
 LOL


----------



## BurningIsLove (Nov 25, 2007)

> LOLLOLOLOLOL!
> i know up here in MASS that would definitely happen
> haul your stove in pay 75 bucks to get a meatl sticker on it!
> and every 2yrs check the stove for safety
> imagine failing????   i can see a lot of stoves getting left



Just what I need.......yet ANOTHER Massachusetts inspection that costs the consumer money yet doesnt really tell you much because the testers dont give a whoop and the administration responsible for overseeing the tests are full of corruption.  Thank goodness this is MA and not CA, those people are just plain crazy (referring to the lawmakers, not the residents, no offense intended).

The last time I brought in my 1979 Bronco for inspection, the guy did no tests outside of me honking the horn, no emissions, reverse, or other tests.  His response  "Well, it drove in here under its own power, didnt it?  It passes"    Just like airport TSA screeners, it's not about consistent policy, it's whatever they feel like testing, not what they are supposed to.


----------



## LouDee (Dec 17, 2007)

I just purchased this stove and I seem to be finding your procedure alot and I would like to try it but I have a few questions.  Thank you in advance if you have the time to answer them.

Here is the procedure that I follow once the stove (Dutchwest 2479 everburn) is up to temp and needs to be reloaded: 

1) Open bypass -  What is the Bypass?
2) poke residual logs to collapse into coals (if necessary).  Needs a good 2+” of coals, so plan accordingly 
3) load fresh splits (see note below on orientation) 
4) open air inlet 100% for about 10-15 minutes or until fire is very active (about 475 on the flu connector magnetic thermometer) -  So does this mean the air inlet is closed when you load the wood?
5) Damper down to about 1/3 air and let burn for another 10 minutes.  This reduces wasteful burning that is just rocketing right up the chimney, but is necessary to pre-heat the new splits on the top - How can you "damper down" to 1/3 when the damper is either open or closed?
6) Open air inlet to 100% again for about 2 minutes to get an active fire again  - Open air inlet to 100%, when do you close it?
7) Close bypass/engage everburn. -  What is the bypass? the damper or the air inlet lever or something else I don't know about?
8) If rumble persists, temps are good, smoke-free at the top of the stack, I damper down to about 3/4 then 1/2 then 1/4.  -  How, by damper down, are you talking about the damper or the air inlet lever?

If the everburn “stalls”, it means that the coals weren't oriented right, there weren’t enough of them, or the fresh splits weren't ‘ready’ for that stage yet.  All the above assumes dry, seasoned hardwood.  Also, I have a thick masonry chimney which has to be properly heated before it drafts well enough to use everburn.  This takes about 2 hours in my set up. 

Also, when the drafting is good and outdoor temps are low, lately I’ve been experimenting with the following to reduce ‘thermonuclear’ incidents.  A freshly loaded stove holds about 6 medium sized splits on top of the coal bed.  I have been putting two less-seasoned splits on the top row.  That way they bake for a while and dry out before the splits below them reduce to coals.  I don't mind the extra energy required to heat the water in the unseasoned splits because this stove throws more heat than I need when everburn is working properly.


----------



## webbie (Dec 17, 2007)

Bypass - lets the smoke go directly up the flue instead of down through the coals - the big damper door you see in the rear of your firebox top!

I think that is what you are calling the damper. I'll let others answer the rest.


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 17, 2007)

Bypass=damper=big opening on the top of the firebox you control with the lever at the top/side of stove.  The primary air control is the small lever on the bottom/side of the stove.

The instructions for reloading from the owner's manual are:

*Reloading and Reviving the Fire*
Reload your stove while it is still hot and there are
plenty of embers to re-kindle the fire quickly. Include
some smaller pieces of wood in the new load of fuel to
help the stove regain high temperatures quickly.
Follow this procedure when you reload the stove:
• Open the damper and move the primary air lever to
the “HIGH” position.
• Open the front door and check the ash level on the
grates and in the ash pan. Clear excess ash from
the grates, particularly at the rear area. Level the
ember bed. Empty the ash pan if necessary. _[Me: brush away all ash from around and in the shoe, don't empty the ash pan all the time, let it fill up, the ash acts as insulation.  I also think its better to pile the hot coals up against the shoe, cover the throat opening if you can, forget about leveling the coal bed like they say here.  Put smaller splits and/or some pallet wood towards the back, they will burn hot ensuring good secondary combustion]_
• Replace the ash pan and close the front door.
• Load wood, smaller pieces first, and close the loading
door.
• Allow the stove to regain its “thermal momentum”
before closing the damper. This may take 15-20
minutes.
• Close the damper and set the air control lever for the
desired heat output.
NOTE: If the charcoal bed is relatively thick and your
fuel is well-seasoned, it is possible to add fresh fuel
(smaller pieces first), close the door and damper, and
reset the air control within five minutes.

_ME: Like Burning said, you should know somewhat quickly if you've got a good secondary burn or not.  If you don't have a good coal bed, you can forget about dampering down, just burn on high until you've got a decent amount of coals in front of the throat opening, and you should be good._


----------



## BurningIsLove (Dec 17, 2007)

Think tradergordo answered most of your questions already, but just for sake of completeness:



> 1) Open bypass -  What is the Bypass?



Uppermost lever that controls whether the gases are going into the 2ndary combustion chamber (lower-back of the stove) or straight up the chimney (no secondary combustion).  Aka you are "bypassing" the 2ndary chamber (everburn)



> 4) open air inlet 100% for about 10-15 minutes or until fire is very active (about 475 on the flu connector magnetic thermometer) -  So does this mean the air inlet is closed when you load the wood?



The air inlet setting is more or less inconsequential when you are loading fresh splits, as one of the doors is open letting in way more air than the air control does when the doors are closed.



> 5) Damper down to about 1/3 air and let burn for another 10 minutes.  This reduces wasteful burning that is just rocketing right up the chimney, but is necessary to pre-heat the new splits on the top - How can you "damper down" to 1/3 when the damper is either open or closed?



Use the air inlet valve.  "Dampering down" means closing (choking) the air inlet valve nearly/all the way.  On DW stoves, turning the air inlet all the way clockwise (horizontal) is 100% open, whereas turning it counterclockwise is closed all the way, aka dampered down.



> 6) Open air inlet to 100% again for about 2 minutes to get an active fire again  - Open air inlet to 100%, when do you close it?



Close it when the stove is operating/burning well and you dont need that much heat (e.g. once the room is up to desired temp)

7) Close bypass/engage everburn. -  What is the bypass? the damper or the air inlet lever or something else I don't know about?
8) If rumble persists, temps are good, smoke-free at the top of the stack, I damper down to about 3/4 then 1/2 then 1/4.  -  How, by damper down, are you talking about the damper or the air inlet lever?


----------



## webbie (Dec 17, 2007)

Wow, you folks certainly save me a lot of typing!
Besides that, you know a lot more about this particular stove!
Thanks.....


----------



## BurningIsLove (Dec 17, 2007)

Beats 'work' on my nearby laptop.


----------



## cmcramer (Dec 18, 2007)

Greetings, once again!  I'm the guy who reported a glowing red flue collar on my new downdraft stove last year winter, and I figured it was time for an update! Actually, it was not the flue collar, but the part the flue collar bolts to -I think it would be the 'fireback' - and it glowed red almost everytime I used the stove. Closed air control would not prevent it.

As I reported, VC Field Tech visited after my complaint, checked for loose gaskets, found the gasket on hinge side of ash pan to be loose, so he unbolted the hinge and hammered it tighter. (Yes, I should have checked the hinge side...but didn't.) At about the same time I added a damper in my flue pipe that connects to 22-24 feet of straight 8 inch stainless! I burn year old hardwoods.  Some observations after watching this stove like a hawk for a year:

a) Never, ever had a stall. As was discussed last winter, my 22 straight feet of 8 inch stainless, interior chimney, gives me way too much draft. I installed a flue damper to slow the dang stove down, and it's usually set at 45 degrees.

b) A very hot stove and chimney - 550-600 stove top temps for an hour or so - burns in a predictable manner. Lower temps are too unpredictable, so I work to get my stove....it's cast and its ceramics....and my stainless chimney .....all up to temp. I can feel and smell when it's hot enough. (Some lavendar on the stovetop helps!)  When it's burning good and hot - almost no emmissions from chimney....a pretty neat site.

c) This one I do not understand, but it's true: A really hot stove re-loaded full tends to overfire, while a really hot stove re-loaded small does not. And a stove with 6-8 inches of glowing coals does not! But if I fill the dang thing with new seasoned wood......I have to close the flue damper as much as possible and close the air entirely to keep it from over firing.....and glowing the fireback. Can't explain it.

d) longest burn times only about 6 hours - disappointing.

I'm getting the hang of this stove....and it does maintain a very consistent burn temp once the whole thing is good and hot.....but it just isn't a 'set it and forget it' type of stove.


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 18, 2007)

I suggest you check those gaskets again, and do it right this time (i.e. every square inch of every gasket).  It should also be noted that there is a known problem with some of the earliest built stoves that they did not tighten the interior bolts down enough, causing leaks (saw that info posted on hearthtalk.com).  22 feet straight up is NOT that unusual, and in fact 8 inch diameter will give you LESS draft than 6 inch.  There is no doubt in my mind that you still have a leak in your stove, absolutely no doubt.  You should be able to do better than 6 hour burn-time with seasoned hardwood on a full load, and overfiring should be impossible with the primary air off and damper closed.

p.s.  Its been a while since I measured it, but I think my own flue+chimney is also 22 feet, straight up, and mine is 6 inch, with no added damper.  All else being equal, I should have more draft than you do.


----------



## chaynes68 (Dec 18, 2007)

Does having the stove in Everburn mode improve burn times or does it just produce more heat?  I'm having issues getting Everburn to stay lit and can only get 4 hours burn time on a load wondering if this will improve once I master the black art of Everburn?


----------



## webbie (Dec 18, 2007)

chay, it should do BOTH, and by a very wide margin!

Consider the updraft mode as being idle in a car - does not matter how much you step on the gas, it does not go anywhere! Any newer stove is really made to ONLY put out the heat while in it's closed mode (cat or internal damper engaged if it has one)....

I have heard about some magic powder you can sprinkle on.....
 ;-) 
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6044687244477384979


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 18, 2007)

chaynes68 said:
			
		

> Does having the stove in Everburn mode improve burn times or does it just produce more heat?  I'm having issues getting Everburn to stay lit and can only get 4 hours burn time on a load wondering if this will improve once I master the black art of Everburn?



There should be a HUGE improvement in burntime in "everburn" mode vs. open damper.  The reason is that when you are dampered down (downdrafting/everburning) the flames are not consuming your load of fuel all at once.  I have been experimenting with extended burns.  BurningIsLove says he has gotten a good 12 hour burn (still producing usable heat and big coals after 12 hours).  My best with the same conditions are more like 10 hours.  Last night for example I had a good 9 hour burn, bedroom (upstairs from stove) was 72 in the morning, 20 outside, pretty big coal bed still left, was reloaded and everburning again in about 15 minutes.  That is basically the ideal situation and what I try for on a regular basis although it doesn't always work out that well.  I really have to pack the stove with wood to get those long burns.

If your wood isn't seasoned, this stove can be impossible to burn cleanly (sustained everburn) - when you damper down it will easily stall.  It can also stall if you do not have good draft for any of the reasons affecting draft (flue/chimney configuration, size, height, outside temps, atmospheric pressure, home ventilation, etc.)

When you say 4 hour burn time - is that dampered down with air down too?  And what kind of wood (soft/hard, how seasoned?)?  Normally I'd say if you are only getting 4 hour burntime with seasoned hardwood, and dampered down with primary air down, then you probably have a leak somewhere.  These stoves are now, in my personal estimation based on my own experience and the posts from other owners, notorious for having poor gasketing from the factory (if they aren't loose to begin with, they will be after your first couple fires with the gasket sticking to the curing paint its pushed against).  I've replaced all of my door gaskets, and you might have to do likewise.  I also don't like the rutland gasket cement (used at the VC factory, and I've also used it myself) I think straight silicone works better and other stove manufacturers are now using silicone only.

Now some people might be thinking - if there was a leak, shouldn't that actually help the everburn stay lit because you'd be burning hotter?  Not necessarily.  Leaks around the ash pan and doors can cause the fuel to burn faster and more from the top down (which is not really what you want).  When the everburn is going well, there is a siphon affect which pulls air into the main firebox via the small holes in the shoe at the lower back center of the firebox - this helps keep secondary combustion going.  If you damper down and cut the primary air off, you should see very little "flame activity" in the firebox.  If you see fire dancing around in the firebox then you almost certainly have an air leak.


----------



## chaynes68 (Dec 18, 2007)

My 4 hour burns are with the top damper closed and the primary air closed.  I did tighten up the doors a little and looked for leaks.  I don't think my stove is leaky (and I could be wrong) but I seem to have excellent control of the fire with the primary air control.

The wood I am using could be my trouble (think its cherry?  harder than birch softer than oak...dont know)....buying the stove was a last minute decision for me so I am not prepared in the wood dept.  Last night I ran 2 tests...the first one I used a small amount of pallet wood and had a nice fire going and obviously have everburn going I was actually able to see the jets of hot gas coming out of the holes.  Once that burned down I pushed those coals in front of the throat and loaded up with 4 splits and 4 biobricks on either side of the splits.  For the first time I was able to get the stove temp up tp 500 degrees with stack temps less than 700.  Thought for sure I was gonna get Everburn to light with a full load.  Tried it 5 times and it stalled each time after 2-3 minutes.

My  stove dealers advice was to have the stove temp to 600 degrees before trying for everburm mode.  Now that I have some experience with the stove I think I can get it that hot with fear of burnin the place down.  I also have a stash of some really dry oak that I need to cut to size, also have a pallet of biobricks coming.  I feel like I'm getting close to a breakthrough....


----------



## dtabor (Dec 18, 2007)

chaynes,

After advice from people here, I wait til my stoptop temps are 650+ before trying to damper down. Its still hit or miss on whether it will stall but under that temp its a guarantee stall or no rumble at all.

D


----------



## BJN644 (Dec 18, 2007)

The key on my Oakwood is the thick bed of coals, if you don't have that forget it nothing will make the secondary burn. I can also say that I rarly get any "rumble" from it, usally on a fresh chared up load she will rumble for about 30 seconds. I know I'm getting secondary burn because I can easily get 10 hour good heat throwing burns, and the inside of the stove is clean and not black. I can get up in the morning stir up the thick bed of coals that are left add some wood and have her burning in no time.

I have come to the conclusion that the Oakwood is a 24/7 burner, and I would guess the Everburn's too, and it shines when used this way. Early season cold starts are a royal pain, but the stove really performs when I need it the most, when it's freaking cold out ! like right now.


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 18, 2007)

BJN644 said:
			
		

> I have come to the conclusion that the Oakwood is a 24/7 burner, and I would guess the Everburn's too, and it shines when used this way. Early season cold starts are a royal pain, but the stove really performs when I need it the most, when it's freaking cold out ! like right now.



YES.  Absolutely.  In fact if you live in one of those borderline climates or a place like the pacific northwest where it's mostly 30-40F all winter and high humidity, I wouldn't even think about using an everburn/downdraft stove, it will just drive you mad.  Buring 24/7 in cold weather (under 25F seems to be the sweet spot at my house) is definitely where it does best.  And yes again, to the thick bed of coals being key.

chaynes68 you said something about a test load where you started with a small amount of pallet wood.  I don't know if you can get a big enough bed of coals from a small pile of pallet wood, and the pallet wood, while great for burning hot and getting your other stuff burning, isn't the best for building that coal bed you need!  Also it doesn't sound like you are really filling the firebox with fuel - the long overnight burns require a full firebox.  I would also recommend trying to get your temps up even higher before dampering down, and if the everburn stalls even then, don't cut the primary air all the way back.  If your fuel isn't well seasoned, you are going to have to run it with the primary air up, which will also mean shorter burntimes.


----------



## webbie (Dec 18, 2007)

More theory here - but this stove might be VERY sensitive to OVERDRAFT (and underdraft, of course)...

In the case of overdraft, the deal is this. As our combustion engineers will tell you, there are three T's

Time
Temperature
Turbulence

Assuming VC tested the stove on a relatively perfect chimney - for EPA purposes, they would have no reason to check what happens when the draft is 50% or more stronger than that! (same goes for other makers, but more important with a new technology).

OK, so "time" if the wood gases are pulled past the hot zone too quickly, they don't have the time to burn.
The also need the temp, which related to that. Too much air flow past the shoe will cause problems
And turbulence is the mixing of the air and gases, and also the "swirl" that hopefully makes the gases hang around.

Just a slightly educated guess. The way to check this? It would be to install a barometric damper in the stove pipe and try various settings to see if spoiling some of the draft helps things burn longer and better.


----------



## swestall (Dec 18, 2007)

Craig: Draft is exactly the issue here. Most of us have figured out how to get coals, position them, do the hoochie coochie and go into Secondary Burn mode on these stoves. But, what you said about the draft is exactly the issue. The stove seems to have been developed to provide optimum performance (through the siphon mechanism) when the design point draft is present. I think that is why some of us have problems getting hot enough (weaker draft) some go into thermonuclear burn (over draft) and some think we are crazy because it works OK for them (design point draft).
I figured out that I have underdraft as my stack is an 8X12 clay flue. What I've been doing is getting it to work for me by getting the coals I need and getting it hot (650 stovetop/550+stovepipe) then engaging. I also need a medium load, too much mass and I can't get it going. And, I find that a clear air path on one side of the stove (front to back) is also a big help. Finally, I need to leave the primary air open to give it more, since I am compensating for an underdraft. 
We've all shared other's experience about having to install secondary dampers, etc. They are trying to get less air in. Since the siphon mechanism is an open vent into the stove: if it can suck it will. (LOL)
Later, I'll correct my drafting issues with a solid SS liner. Right now, I'm out of luck as there is a bunch of snow on the roof and I'm not big on falling off the roof. 
So I think this puts a fix on one of the big points of Everburn, and perhaps the other companies that license the technology. Extreme sensitivity to draft with no adjustability to compensate for differing draft/stack situations. And, a secondary burn mechanism that requires a specific draft velocity to work in design point. 
Between us all, we are finding ways to work with it but for most, very labor intensive. 
The one pressing question I can't figure out is whether or not there is some way to get the Everburn siphon to work with differing draft condtions and if there is more to it: that is more resistance to air input to the secondary burn cycle than that provided by the siphon mechanism. Perhaps I'll figure it out later when I take the entire thing apart in the spring.


----------



## LarryD (Dec 19, 2007)

Having moved on to another type of technology (burn tubes) with the same class A chimney, I think I can confirm some of the thoughts expressed in this thread.

Quality of wood is absolutely critical.  If your wood isn't thorougly seasoned.  Forgedaboudit!  You will pull your hair out.

Draft managment is critical.  I have installed a butterfly damper, we now burn an Isle Royale, and it gives us the range of control we need.  When the temps are high (above 38* F) and the pressure is low, we run the damper wide open.  As the pressure rises and the temps drop we need to close up damper or our stack temps (probe thermometer) sky rocket in an matter of 2-3 minutes!  Yes, all of the gaskets are doing there jobs.

The rub is knowing which is the issue!

My wife is a stay at home mom and runs the stove while I'm at work.  She commented this morning that if we had the quality of wood we have this year and the damper that the DW would be "doable".  I think that this is a bit of a stretch (she wasn't the one getting up every night at 2:00 am) but the interesting thing is this.  She is a stove user by default.  She runs the stove because I'm not around.  I think her comments substantiate the above thoughts.  With those two changes, the IR is a dream to run.  As good as it is, I don't think it is all the stove.  We have exceptional wood (99% Red Oak seasoned 2+ years) and a means to stifle our finnicky draft.

I do appreciate the fact that this "conversation" has continued.  I do realize that this stove has been an issue before I brought up my problem a month or so ago.  The drama and egos were quite a distraction.  I did burn this stove for two years and now burn another, I might have more insites as time goes on.

I wish you all luck

Larry D


----------



## webbie (Dec 19, 2007)

Thanks, Larry, good point(s), and I also support the "design point" theory is accurate. This all goes back to a point I made 11 years ago (and longer, and since) that it is a bad move for stove manufacturers to play the game of trying to highly tune their product in order to claim the lowest "numbers". We knew that (or heard it from others) back in 1988-90 when this whole thing started! There is a sweet spot, probably at about 4 GPH, where you have more flexibility in stove design for real wood and real chimneys. These same issues came up even as early as 1984, with the first cat units. The holy grail has always been "the perfect chimney".


----------



## LarryD (Dec 19, 2007)

Webmaster said:
			
		

> Thanks, Larry, good point(s), and I also support the "design point" theory is accurate. This all goes back to a point I made 11 years ago (and longer, and since) that it is a bad move for stove manufacturers to play the game of trying to highly tune their product in order to claim the lowest "numbers". We knew that (or heard it from others) back in 1988-90 when this whole thing started! There is a sweet spot, probably at about 4 GPH, where you have more flexibility in stove design for real wood and real chimneys. These same issues came up even as early as 1984, with the first cat units. The holy grail has always been "the perfect chimney".



The perfect chimney, you are correct sir!

Have you ever thought about having a rating on chimnies like you do for stoves?  That way people that are going to install something new or are having issues have a place to start.  It isn't always the stove!

I have learned an expensive lesson about chimnies.  I thought it was the stove and it turns out that my overdrafting class A chimney was the culprit.

I actually can't remember off the top of my head where the IR is "rated" as far as GPH.  We produce so little visible smoke, my neighbor asked if we were burning this year.  I'm proud of that. :cheese: 

Larry D


----------



## James04 (Dec 19, 2007)

Wow! It sure seems that there are allot more users of the Everburn technology that are having difficulty than I had previously thought. Perhaps VC has really stepped in chit this time. I hope I am wrong. After all the are an American made product. Lets cross our fingers and hope that the they will chime in on some of these issues before these users forget they ever existed.

James


----------



## webbie (Dec 19, 2007)

It is a Canadian company, one which apparently took over the (other Canadian) company to avoid losing even more than they already lost! 
http://www.cbc.ca/money/story/2004/12/03/cfm-banks041203.html
Basically, the shareholders all got taken for a ride....

I wouldn't hold my breath. Although I'm certain they want things to work, you are dealing with a lot of history. The company went south (under) in 2005, and we have to assume that most of the current stoves were designed under the leadership (a questionable one) of the old guard. Because of EPA and UL....and the difficultly of changing castings and moldings, it can be real tough to change models which are in production. That would even assume that all the current right hands and left hands were all in sync (that there was good management, and that they knew what they were doing, and that they had the money and reasons to do it, etc.)......so there are a lot of open questions. 

Bottom line...chances are that a lot of you know more than a lot of them. It's a long way from there to a completely re-engineered stove line. Although folks here tend to think that the stove biz is booming and these companies are flush, the exact opposite is true. The lack of new construction is a big hit - and I would guess the Canadian US trade rate hurts too.


----------



## mikeathens (Dec 19, 2007)

With my Hearthstone, I noticed that my chimney damper also plays a big role in it's operation - I have it at 45 degrees during my burns, and it allows for more primary air, better secondary combustion, and lower stack temps - with no smoke.  Seeing this latest point makes me wonder, too, if TOO MUCH draft might have been the culprit in making my everburn stall ALL of the time!  I am much happier with the heritage - it is much more user friendly and all you have to do is look through the window to see that you are getting good seconday combustion.  A big difference between going in and out of the house multiple times to check the chimney with the DW NC.  Even with catalytics, there is a catalyst thermomer to look at to confirm secondary- plus, you can look in to see the catalyst glowing red as a second confirmation.


----------



## chaynes68 (Dec 19, 2007)

I'm really getting frustrated with this stove.  Last night I spent about an hour and burned quite a lot of wood to get the stove surface up to 625 degrees.  I engaged everburn and had the rumble for 10-15 minutes thought I was gonna get a nice overnight burn, but the load was basically burned down to 2 mostly consumed splits 3 hours later.  This thing ate a firebox full of wood in 3 hours AND the stove is not exactly what I would call blazing hot...in fact it was not hot at all.

The only thing I have left is to do is eliminate my firewood as the source of the problem.  Tonight I'm gonna get some coals established with some small splits and pallet wood then load the thing up with biobricks.  can anyone give me some stats on burn times with a load of biobricks?  (ex. I loaded n biobricks stacked like so and got a burn time of x hours).

This thread has been super helpful....thanks all.


----------



## mikeathens (Dec 19, 2007)

Maybe people are on to something with the overdraft issue.  Maybe test your draft and compare to those whao are having acceptable results?


----------



## James04 (Dec 19, 2007)

chaynes68 said:
			
		

> I'm really getting frustrated with this stove.  Last night I spent about an hour and burned quite a lot of wood to get the stove surface up to 625 degrees.  I engaged everburn and had the rumble for 10-15 minutes thought I was gonna get a nice overnight burn, but the load was basically burned down to 2 mostly consumed splits 3 hours later.  This thing ate a firebox full of wood in 3 hours AND the stove is not exactly what I would call blazing hot...in fact it was not hot at all.
> 
> The only thing I have left is to do is eliminate my firewood as the source of the problem.  Tonight I'm gonna get some coals established with some small splits and pallet wood then load the thing up with biobricks.  can anyone give me some stats on burn times with a load of biobricks?  (ex. I loaded n biobricks stacked like so and got a burn time of x hours).
> 
> This thread has been super helpful....thanks all.



Chaynes,

I do not know your stove. However If you have a leak (too much air) or your stove is over drafting. The Bio's will burn really hot and possibly over fire your stove. What kind of wood was it that was gobbled up in three hours? How thick were the splits? What was your primary air set to? Do you feel like you may have an overdraft? What is your chimney setup? This info will help the guys with your stove help you.

James


----------



## chaynes68 (Dec 19, 2007)

My setup is a mostly indoor 15  foot steel chimney straight up only 3 ft of it pokes up thru the roof (12ft class A and 3 ft of double wall pipe).  I have a surface temp probe and a stack probe 18 inches up from the collar.  How could I possibly get a more textbook installation for a stove...15ft straight pipe all inside!

I doubt that I have an air leak...I have checked the seals real good.  Some anecdotal evidence that I do not in an overdraft condition is that I have burned some pallet wood and can keep the stack temps under 800 degrees with the primary air fully closed and top damper open.  If I opened the primary air full with pallet wood I'm sure it would get super hot.  I did a warm the house up burn last week with 6 biobricks and the stack temps were lower than I was getting with pallet wood.  

Honestly I don't know very much about this...my conclusions could be wrong.


----------



## James04 (Dec 19, 2007)

Sounds like overdraft would be ruled out. So what kind of wood was it and what were the settings? I would be interested in knowing how you make out with a load of bricks. I tried I think twelve and it was not enough to equal my usual overnight burn. If tonight is cold but not overly cold I may try 16.

James


----------



## webbie (Dec 19, 2007)

chay, your chimney is very similar to EPA test stacks, so it would seem fairly ideal. Just FYI.

Just for fun, one of us should manufacture a couple dozen EPA test 4x4 and 2x4 (with spacers) and see how they burn. I'm not kidding. It would tell us something....


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 19, 2007)

What reason did you go with all double wall & class A for the 12 foot indoor section?  Based on what you've said so far, it doesn't sound like you have a leak, but it does sound like you have excessive draft, which may be the result of this flue/chimney.  Single wall pipe would put a lot more heat into your living space and reduce draft, I highly recommend that with an everburn stove mostly because the design puts so much heat straight up the stack (see my previous comments about heat exchange, or lack thereof with this design).  I probably get as much heat from my flue as I do from the stove!  By the way, I think 650 stove top might be too high as an indicator of when to damper down.  When my flue probe reads 800, the stove top is usually 5-600, maybe a little hotter around the flue collar.  I'm thinking excessive draft + most of the heat going right out your chimney would give the results you describe.  Adding a damper like others here have done may help - but its not as good as replacing the flue with single wall pipe if you can (if its just a few feet though, it might not make much difference).

And I'm still a bit perplexed about why excessive draft would cause the everburn stalling (this has been reported by multiple people, so I assume it's true).  Anyone have theories?  It has to be burning hot if the short burn times are true.  Maybe so much combustion is happening in the main firebox that there isn't enough for secondary combustion?  But then you wouldn't see much smoke out the stack...



			
				chaynes68 said:
			
		

> My setup is a mostly indoor 15  foot steel chimney straight up only 3 ft of it pokes up thru the roof (12ft class A and 3 ft of double wall pipe).  I have a surface temp probe and a stack probe 18 inches up from the collar.  How could I possibly get a more textbook installation for a stove...15ft straight pipe all inside!
> 
> I doubt that I have an air leak...I have checked the seals real good.  Some anecdotal evidence that I do not in an overdraft condition is that I have burned some pallet wood and can keep the stack temps under 800 degrees with the primary air fully closed and top damper open.  If I opened the primary air full with pallet wood I'm sure it would get super hot.  I did a warm the house up burn last week with 6 biobricks and the stack temps were lower than I was getting with pallet wood.
> 
> Honestly I don't know very much about this...my conclusions could be wrong.


----------



## webbie (Dec 19, 2007)

Trader, the EPA setups I have seen have single pipe going up 15 feet...as long as it is interior, it should work fine for most setups. Straight up chimneys that are interior usually work very well - I have had Avalons draft great with 12 foot (total) straight ups.

The over draft is just one theory - see my post about the three T's needed for combustion. Just like a candle goes out in the wind, too much air flow can "blow out" the gases too fast from the fire, they they are not burned. In the software world it would be the equiv of a script that didn't wait for one thing to be done, before trying to work on the result of that one!


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 19, 2007)

I might have been confused, I thought chaynes68 didn't have ANY single wall but I could be wrong.  I have 8-9 feet of single wall coming straight up from my stove and I think it works well. I think if I had all double wall it might overdraft and I know for sure I wouldn't get as much heat into my living space.



			
				Webmaster said:
			
		

> Trader, the EPA setups I have seen have single pipe going up 15 feet...as long as it is interior, it should work fine for most setups. Straight up chimneys that are interior usually work very well - I have had Avalons draft great with 12 foot (total) straight ups.
> 
> The over draft is just one theory - see my post about the three T's needed for combustion. Just like a candle goes out in the wind, too much air flow can "blow out" the gases too fast from the fire, they they are not burned. In the software world it would be the equiv of a script that didn't wait for one thing to be done, before trying to work on the result of that one!


----------



## chaynes68 (Dec 19, 2007)

my setup has no single wall pipe....


----------



## James04 (Dec 19, 2007)

Gordo,

I think the overdraft could cause a stall or prolong the warm up time before secondary burn. This would be due to (at least on my stove). The fresh air being drawn through the refractory will cool it down below the needed temps for secondary burn. I got this idea because I noticed that there were black soot deposits just around the small holes in the refractory but all other parts were clean (hot). Once up to temp the rings disappeared. I hope I am explaining this rite. Does that make any sense?

James


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 19, 2007)

James04 said:
			
		

> Gordo,
> 
> I think the overdraft could cause a stall or prolong the warm up time before secondary burn. This would be due to (at least on my stove). The fresh air being drawn through the refractory will cool it down below the needed temps for secondary burn. I got this idea because I noticed that there were black soot deposits just around the small holes in the refractory but all other parts were clean (hot). Once up to temp the rings disappeared. I hope I am explaining this rite. Does that make any sense?
> 
> James



That was my first thought, but then I was thinking "can too much air cause LESS combustion?" at first it seems crazy, because if, for example, you crack open the ash pan door you get a "blast furnace".  But that is air fed directly to the firebox.  It makes sense that excessive amounts of air fed directly to the secondary combustion chamber could actually cool things down and cause stalling.

A very simple idea that people with excessive draft can try - just reduce the size of your secondary air intake.  For temporary experimentation purposes, I bet you could just wrap tin foil over the flange and poke a hole though it (so you don't completely cut off secondary air).


----------



## webbie (Dec 19, 2007)

tradergordo said:
			
		

> That was my first thought, but then I was thinking "can too much air cause LESS combustion?" at first it seems crazy, because if, for example, you crack open the ash pan door you get a "blast furnace".  But that is air fed directly to the firebox.  It makes sense that excessive amounts of air fed directly to the secondary combustion chamber could actually cool things down and cause stalling.
> 
> A very simple idea that people with excessive draft can try - just reduce the size of your secondary air intake.  For temporary experimentation purposes, I bet you could just wrap tin foil over the flange and poke a hole though it (so you don't completely cut off secondary air).



Trader, you are right that there could be at least two distinct "too much air" scenarios.

One is the "speed" of the smoke going past the holes - that was my guess.
Yours is the amount of air needed to make the combustion happen.....

Yours could be tested for in some way as you mention, mine could be tested only by slowing the flue from above - i.e damper in pipe, rock set into stove pipe (horizontal pipe).....obviously some of these are very temporary.

One indication of an overdraft is that the stove would alway be extremely easy to light in updraft mode, and would not tend to smoke at all out the doors or top when loading.....of course, a perfect chimney would act that way too!


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 19, 2007)

If the primary and secondary air both come from the same single flange (bottom rear of the stove), and you covered it over, and the stove was airtight, shouldn't that have the same result as an inline damper in the flue?   Both block the flow of air though the stove &  flue.


----------



## mikeathens (Dec 19, 2007)

I think the damper in the flue allows MORE combustion air for primary and secondary, and sort of "dams" up the flow (I think it would provide for a positive pressure situation in the stove, too) - slowing flow from the inlet will choke off the amount of air available and cause a negative pressure situation in the stove (or maybe "less positive" pressure)?

In my heritage, the flue demper seems to allow for more air for combustion, and less flow out the stack, sort of giving smke more residence time (and more air for combustion) in the stove


----------



## swestall (Dec 21, 2007)

ONE thing you may not be aware of: you do not have to hear the rumble to have the secondary burn functioning. I still have a hard time believing it, BUT, there are times everything seems to be OK but no rumble. So, I go outside and look at the stack, no smoke. Obviously everything is OK. Other times, no rumble = smoke and everything isn't OK. This thing needs a green lite on it...(LOL) Anyway, if you are not checking, then perhaps you might do that for a bit and see what's up. Another thing is that it takes the secondary mechanism a bit to actually start burning clean from the time you close the damper, not a great time, but some time. Hope that stuff helps you.


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 21, 2007)

swestall said:
			
		

> ONE thing you may not be aware of: you do not have to hear the rumble to have the secondary burn functioning.



I disagree, but maybe that's because I know how to listen for it.  If my stove has secondary combustion, I can always hear it, I never said it was always loud though - you might have to stick your ear right up to the secondary air intake to hear it...


----------



## dtabor (Dec 21, 2007)

Ive had the dancing northern light style "flame" and no sound whatsoever but I didnt check the chimney. I'll have to do that the next time and see.


----------



## chaynes68 (Dec 21, 2007)

Update for you all.  Last night I burned only with biobricks in an effort to eliminate firewood from the equation.  

Started a fire with 4 biobricks (took a while) and repositioned them in a single row in front of the reburner.  Once the stovetop reached 400 I added 2 more (6 bricks in a single layer on the floor of the firebox) and got the pile flaming pretty good then engaged everburn mode.  I got the rumble, stack temps went up to about 500 stovetop was 425-450.  Everburn stayed engaged for at least 45 minutes.  While it was engaged I could hear a small amount of rumbling and smoke was clear and I was seeing "northern lights" etc.  At the 1 hour mark everburn stalled when the bricks shrunk away from the reburner.  The bricks in front still burned pretty well but it was not everburning since I was seeing a small amount of smoke out the chimney.  All said I got 3 hours from six biobricks.  Considering that I got 3 hours from a stove FULL of wood earlier in the week I would say  that this is progress! 

Once I had a  nice pile of biobrick coals I thought that I could keep everburn mode longer if I stacked all my bricks right in front of the reburner.  So I loaded her up with 8 bricks and waited for temps to stabilize so I could get to bed.  Welllll the stack temps got to 700 degrees in about 15 minutes and showed no signs of stopping.  Everburn was really rumbling at this point!  Since the stove was 100% closed up and it looked like stack temps were headed to 1000 I used my newly installed pipe damper to slow things down. With my damper 90% closed the stack temps reached about 800-820.  As the pile began burning out the stack temp seemed to want to creep up again.  Being tired (from messing with the stove all week) I needed to get to bed so I repositioned the bricks to the front of the stove to cool things down.  I was not 100% comfortable with how stable the fire was, and I was not going to bed with it like that. 

It would seem that firewood is the most likely cause of my troubles.  I am a little troubled with how hot my stack temps got during this little test (stove temps were 500 max BTW).  Is this normal for this stove?  I don't have enough experience with bios and everburn to know how hot is too hot....figure its better to be safe at this point.

Progress is good...any suggestions?


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 21, 2007)

Congrats, you are well on your way to understanding the best ways to operate the stove.  I would not worry about those temps you saw, they are normal (for very dry wood) and safe.  I'd be worried if it stayed over 1000 for more than 15-20 minutes, but anything less than that is fine (I am talking about internal flue temps).

As you discovered on your own - to get a long sustained everburn, you need to put some fuel where it is going to end up as coals in front of the throat opening.  There are lots of ways to do this - pile it high, lean it against the back, etc.  

I've also been finding that if your coal bed is a little weak, sticking a piece of pallet wood right in front of the throat opening upon a reload seems to help.  That piece of wood ignites fast and burns hot, and is quickly reduced to coals right where you want them as wood around it and above it ignites.

Last night the house was already pretty warm, so I didn't want to fully load up before going to sleep.  I had a good coal bed, I threw two small pieces of pallet wood on the coals, and just ONE single split (not even a huge one, but it was pretty big).  The new thing for me, was that this split had been sitting at the edge of the hearth pad for a full week - it was "kiln dry" like I've never seen before.  I knew it was dry, so immediately after I threw it in I dampered and cut the air off 100%.  It started everburning immediately, and the stack temp went straight up to 900.  The house was soon 80 degrees, had to shut the bedroom doors.  I really didn't think an overnight burn would be possible with one split, but in the morning, 9 hours later, I had a very nice coal bed, the house was still 71 degrees (26 outside) and I was able to get the fire going again and everburning all within 20 minutes.  

So in conclusion - dry wood is critical for success with this stove in my opinion.  If you have super dry wood it can be very easy to operate and I have been extremely pleased with the long burntimes I've been getting this year (thanks BurningIsLove for the tips).  But good draft is still important (outside temps <30 and high pressure are a big help).


----------



## swestall (Dec 21, 2007)

Trader, I will concede to you that there is actually some "rumble" in the burner if you get close enough to hear it. What I meant to say is that you don't have to hear that loud blast furnace type rumble for the secondary combustion to be working. Thanks for the clarification.
Over the past few months, I've learned to make it work; and you also seem to be getting it down. Others among us are also learning to make it work.
BUT, I still think it is a lot of work and very time intensive. I am very jealous of those folks that have Quads, Hearthstones, Jotuls, and others that are far less labor intensive. 
Admittedly, I need a better draft and am compensating for that in my installation until I can get up on the roof to install a new liner in the clay flue. (Don't forget, the VC CAT stoves worked on this same flue for 20 years.)
I applaud your effort to help people understand and work with what we have. It has bee of tremendous help to me and I see that it is to others. 
So, Thank You.  -   Steve.


----------



## BurningIsLove (Dec 21, 2007)

sorry,been away on biz the last week and havent been able to participate.  Very happy to see others are getting better use out of their downdrafts.  

Has anyone tried the tin foil trick or other methods of reducing air intake during excessive draft conditions?  While I wouldnt advocate that as a long term fix, it would be interesting to see the results and if that answers some of the open questions/theories.


----------



## bobinmd (Dec 21, 2007)

I've been lurking here for about a month trying to understand my new VC Defiant NC and have learned much from you all - thanks so much. While I'm still frustrated ~30-50% of the time with stalls and babysitting it, last night I was able to get a lasting secondary within 5 minutes of a completely cold start and the stove griddle temp at 100, so I wanted to share how I did it. My setup is a 6" flu that runs horizontal for 2' to a T, then into a flex liner with insulation packed around it in a clay tile lined chimney for about 15' with 2, 45 doglegs up the chimney, then into a triple wall metal chimney for 12'.  So, 27-29' tall stack.

I placed 1, 2" tall piece NS on each side of the combustion chamber entrance to create an elevated area right in front of the chamber and loaded several 1" pieces in the back to build a coal bed at the throat. I opened the ash pan for a few seconds to get it going initially, then closed the ash pan, but left the front doors ajar. It was going quite well so I figured, what the heck, and closed the bypass - liftoff. I kept the front doors unlatched but closed (I was babysitting it) and it continued to rumble along for 30 minutes consuming all of that smoke and gradually increasing in temp while I sat there amazed. I suspect it would have stalled had I latched the door and shut down the air flow, so I left it cracked. Then I added larger splits and the secondary continued - that is, until the load shifted a few minutes later and it stalled....However, I was able to burn all of that initial smoke from a cold start. 

My experiences are similar to everyone else - importance of good draft, hot coals in the throat, dry wood, etc. But the one thing that seems to be most important with my burns is the geometry of the air path to the combustion chamber. There has to be an easy path for the smoke to get to the back or I'm in for a long battle. I've had the stove at 600+ and no secondary (smoke puffing out chimney - very irritating) only to have the secondary take off when the load shifts slightly. I've also had stalls from a strong secondary when a log shifts. My stove typically hums along at 450-550 when in secondary and climbs to 600-700 after it stalls - I have a leaky door gasket. Also, it's rare for me to get more than 2-3 hours out of the secondary without pushing more coals into the throat, but I can get 8-10 hours of burn time out of a fully packed stove and leaving it alone after secondary is engaged.


----------



## mikeathens (Dec 21, 2007)

Bob in MD said:
			
		

> I placed 1, 2" tall piece NS on each side of the combustion chamber entrance to create an elevated area right in front of the chamber and loaded several 1" pieces in the back to build a coal bed at the throat. I opened the ash pan for a few seconds to get it going initially, then closed the ash pan, but left the front doors ajar. It was going quite well so I figured, what the heck, and closed the bypass - liftoff. I kept the front doors unlatched but closed (I was babysitting it) and it continued to rumble along for 30 minutes consuming all of that smoke and gradually increasing in temp while I sat there amazed.



NOW...all you need is a rubber chicken, some incense, and a book on witchcraft.  Too bad the ancient Mayan culture is gone.  I'm sure with a few sacrifices and some fancy pyramid building to the right god, we'd all be in everburn heaven.


----------



## tradergordo (Dec 21, 2007)

Those temps definitely should not rise on a stall, get that gasket fixed.  I think you are figuring this out already, but you kind of have to plan your fuel loading so that wood is going to coal over in front of the throat as I described before.  And yes, cracking the ash door can do wonders for getting temps up and small stuff to coals in a hurry.  You just have to be real careful about it, I think its a good idea to ONLY stick enough wood in there for your coal bed "starter" when you do the cracked door thing - that way its real hard to overfire.  Once the starter coals are good, you can fill the firebox and damper down pretty quickly.  This is the method I have been using for restarts in the morning, and in preparing the long overnight burns as well.  It's been working great.




			
				Bob in MD said:
			
		

> I've been lurking here for about a month trying to understand my new VC Defiant NC and have learned much from you all - thanks so much. While I'm still frustrated ~30-50% of the time with stalls and babysitting it, last night I was able to get a lasting secondary within 5 minutes of a completely cold start and the stove griddle temp at 100, so I wanted to share how I did it. My setup is a 6" flu that runs horizontal for 2' to a T, then into a flex liner with insulation packed around it in a clay tile lined chimney for about 15' with 2, 45 doglegs up the chimney, then into a triple wall metal chimney for 12'.  So, 27-29' tall stack.
> 
> I placed 1, 2" tall piece NS on each side of the combustion chamber entrance to create an elevated area right in front of the chamber and loaded several 1" pieces in the back to build a coal bed at the throat. I opened the ash pan for a few seconds to get it going initially, then closed the ash pan, but left the front doors ajar. It was going quite well so I figured, what the heck, and closed the bypass - liftoff. I kept the front doors unlatched but closed (I was babysitting it) and it continued to rumble along for 30 minutes consuming all of that smoke and gradually increasing in temp while I sat there amazed. I suspect it would have stalled had I latched the door and shut down the air flow, so I left it cracked. Then I added larger splits and the secondary continued - that is, until the load shifted a few minutes later and it stalled....However, I was able to burn all of that initial smoke from a cold start.
> 
> My experiences are similar to everyone else - importance of good draft, hot coals in the throat, dry wood, etc. But the one thing that seems to be most important with my burns is the geometry of the air path to the combustion chamber. There has to be an easy path for the smoke to get to the back or I'm in for a long battle. I've had the stove at 600+ and no secondary (smoke puffing out chimney - very irritating) only to have the secondary take off when the load shifts slightly. I've also had stalls from a strong secondary when a log shifts. My stove typically hums along at 450-550 when in secondary and climbs to 600-700 after it stalls - I have a leaky door gasket. Also, it's rare for me to get more than 2-3 hours out of the secondary without pushing more coals into the throat, but I can get 8-10 hours of burn time out of a fully packed stove and leaving it alone after secondary is engaged.


----------



## webbie (Dec 21, 2007)

Mike from Athens said:
			
		

> NOW...all you need is a rubber chicken, some incense, and a book on witchcraft.  Too bad the ancient Mayan culture is gone.  I'm sure with a few sacrifices and some fancy pyramid building to the right god, we'd all be in everburn heaven.



I was sorta thinking the same.....but, on the good side we have folks making (what seems to be) a bad situation just a little better. This particular thread may be one for the record books in terms of pages and time!


----------



## swestall (Dec 22, 2007)

I've been thinking about the front to back airflow thing since I started with this MONSTER. I think I am going to go out to the shop and take a piece of box metal stock, 1x3, and fashion an air channel that goes along the bottom front to back and feeds into the shoe area. I have noticed that when I can't get the secondary burning, If I make an air path on the side of the stove so there is flow from front to back (under or around splits), I can get and keep the secondary burn going, even when it won't go the minute before. I have an old stove in the shop that uses this type of channel to feed fresh air, perhaps the same thing will work going from the lower front center to the rear center shoe feed. 

But, Craig, the whole thing about black magic, the hokey pokey dance around the stove and so forth may also just be the trick. The point is we shouldn't need a trick. 

As far as overdrafting on these stoves is concerned, chime in Trader, I think if you have that condition you are just siphoning in so much air into the secondary chamber that you are getting a blast furnace effect that doesn't level out until the draft is sucking to its potential. And, the temp is going to normalize at whatever level the secondary burns at for that particular air siphon volume. So, it would seem logical that anyone with the problem of a runaway type secondary burns on these stovesd needs to reduce (or control) the siphon draft. A manual draft control would seem to be in order under those conditions. And, I'd say get one with the least amount of holes in it so you have real control over the situation.


----------



## webbie (Dec 22, 2007)

I can fully understand the concept of these stoves (or any stove design) needing to be used hard - like for instance the original VC stoves (Vigi, Defiant) were somewhat the same - made for heavy use, and that is one reason why they were never as popular down south and out west. Too much stove!

But these things seem to have a tough time with even being run hard......at least by our small sample. Does it seem that folks out west (any regulars who used softwood in their downdrafts) might have less fiddling to do? 

It is interesting that stove designs has went off into various directions. for instance, it could be said that the very basic type of PE setup - started with the Kent in 1984. Very similar. It works well, and usually needs no bypass, etc.

Basic cat models have usually worked well also. I remember selling a lot of certain Russo models that had cats in them - very basic, more similar in setup to early (and present?) Dutchwest cast models with the cat right above the firebox. The only slight problem such designs has was "flame impingement", which meant that the cat might get shocked and crumble before it's time. But considering they were relatively cheap and under prorated warranties, it was not too bad.

VC was known in the early days for "over-engineering" stuff, and it seems as if they still have that tendency. The result might be a better stove (in theory), but the jury is out as to whether it translates to the actual in-the-field experience. I guess they never wanted to fall into the "me too" trap of same-old stoves (as everyone else)....

Anyway, I am glad to see folks getting the hang of them to whatever degree. And I am certain that they (VC and others)  will take user experience into account on future changes to this design.


----------



## Gunner (Dec 23, 2007)

Regarding air flow to the shoe...has anyone tried cutting some splits short and running a load N/S ?


----------



## chaynes68 (Dec 24, 2007)

Had a decent weekend burning my stove and I learned a couple things that I thought might be helpful to others.

I had excellent success getting an everburn fire by starting it using a lot of pallet wood.  I used the thin strips to get a small bed of coals then added the thicker inside pieces of the pallet to create sort of a "pallet wood goulash".  Once that was going well, I made sure there were some half burnt pieces in front of the reburner and loaded up with small splits and opened the primary air.  After the splits were charred I closed it all up and had a really loud everburn rumble that kept going for at least an hour or more and I got a 6+ hour burn from that load.  

NOTE: While preparing my "pallet wood goulash" I had to keep the primary air closed so things would not get too hot.  When I added splits I opened it up fully which produced a really hot bed of coals which the reburner liked based on the noise it was making 

Another thing I learned this weekend is that if you dont have coals within 4 inches of the reburner your not gonna keep it going.  I had an instance this weekend where wood in front of the reburner was consumed but the logs above failed to drop down...when they did the everburn rumble came back by itself.  I made it a point to stack wood in front of the reburner in a manner that allows it to drop straight down without getting hung up.  I noticed several times this weekend that when the pile would shift I would get a fresh loud rumble and a the temps would go up for a few minutes.

Another thing that seemed to help me since my wood is not very dry was to split it into smaller pieces (2-5 inch).  With each new load I would add a biobrick or a couple thick pieces of pallet wood to provide some fuel to help dry things out.


----------



## mikeathens (Dec 24, 2007)

chaynes68 said:
			
		

> I used the thin strips to get a small bed of coals then added the thicker inside pieces of the pallet to create sort of a "pallet wood goulash".



All of this everburn stuff is making me hungry.  I'm glad I don't have my DW anymore because I never would have been able to find the time to go to culinary school to learn how to operate it properly...


----------



## BJN644 (Dec 24, 2007)

I just went down to the basement and looked up my chimney with a mirror and it's still very clean. I have gone through a good 1 1/2 cords of wood so far with my Oakwood and I think it's burning cleaner than I thought after looking at the chimney.


----------



## webbie (Dec 24, 2007)

That's quite good, BJ.

With older stoves, I have seen folks really muck up their chimneys with that amount of wood!

We can't forget that there are many levels of burning "clean".....or I should say, many levels of burning dirty!

The old "creosote hogs", IHMO, were more than just bad stoves - in fact, some of them were not too bad. It was the combination of chimney, operator, wood AND stove (lack of education about the subject) which caused the first rash of chimney fires. 

So, if nothing else, this and other similar threads are helping folks to pay attention to how their stoves are burning.


----------



## Stan70 (Jan 19, 2008)

Forgive my noob perspective but I suppose it's possible that I don't know if the "Everburn" (hereafter referred to as downdraft as per a previous post) is actually working on my VC Encore NC but I can tell you what it does and why I believe it is working.  I too get the stove, as measured via stove top thermo only, up to about 450 before engaging the damper.  I always do so with the primary air wide open and only after I have vigorous flames (if I didn't I wouldn't get to 450 to begin with, at least on the initial loading).  I get the usual wooshing sound that eventually dies down.  Just because I don't hear it after that however, doesn't mean it isn't working.  In fact I suspect it still is because the behavior of the fire is quite different than when the bypass is not engaged.  When it isn't engaged, there is a much more bright orange (I'm assuming due to the oxygen rich nature of the fire) and much less of a tendency to produce coals as quickly.  I suspect that the wooshing sound has to do with the changing flow rate of the smoke as it burns and the subsequent change in temperature/flow characteristics, but that's just conjecture on my part.
I agree with Elk's post on about the second page of this thread where he states that he believes the real problem may be that many people simply aren't using their stove properly (no offense intended).  I also agree that it may be very dependent upon the variables of each installation but I can tell you that mine is far from ideal.  I have a 45 degree shot straight out of my stove to the wall to a 6" Excel chimney which runs straight up the outside of our house (about 21' high) and only about 10 feet or so away from a nearby tree.  That having been said, I'm sure that some of these problems might be QA related on the part of VC.  All I can attest to is that I personally don't have this issue.
What I'm actually interested in are the burn times.  When I purchased this stove, only about 2 weeks ago, I was sure that just like automotive gas mileage among other areas, the manufacturers overrated heating areas, heat output in BTUs, etc. What I wasn't really prepared for however, was what I consider to be a severe overrating in burn time.  
I'm burning Norway Maple, seasoned 1 year.  Although I don't have a moisture meter yet, by the condition of the wood, I believe it to be sufficiently dry (yes this isn't a valid scientific method but I'm at least in the ballpark).  I can't get anything close to the 9-10 hour burn times VC states is possible.  
My technique is to get the stove up to temp, engage the damper, and after a few minutes, 10 at most, turn the primary air all the way down.  It turns into a bed of coals very nicely, and puts out an appreciable amount of heat, burning steadily for about 4 hours.  At the end of that time, I've got only about a half inch or so of coals left.  Plenty to stoke up a new fire easily and rapidly (certainly not anywhere near enough to achieve the secondary downdraft type of burn without a sufficient preparation period).  But I tend to like to sleep more than 4 hours a night without getting up to tend a fire.  If I wait until about 5 hours, it's almost just like a cold start except the stove temp is till at least 100 degrees or so and the stack is warm so it's not necessary to restart the draft, that is I don't have to prime the chimney since it's still somewhat warm.  I was wondering if anyone has experienced this short burn time, and if so, have you managed to fix it?  Any input would be greatly appreciated.  
I'm reasonably sure that I don't have an overdraft condition as I'm actually using a 6" ID insulated chimney with the 6" adapter (not the oval to round kind) and stove-pipe as opposed to the 8" that comes standard on this stove.  Just like an internal combustion engine, a stove is also really just a glorified pump so the more it's throttled/choked on the back or front side, the less it should put out, and the longer it should last (in terms of burn time).   I suppose it's possible that I'm simply not loading it high enough as I don't like to stack wood up until just under the griddle top.  I suppose it's possible that another small log on top could make a little difference but not  2+ hours.
By the way, I have two friends at work who burn old non-EPA rated stoves and from their experiences, I honestly believe that the downdraft type of burn really results in a much more consistent burn with a mildly decaying temperature profile.  Although I haven't instrumented my stove with thermocouples yet, I believe that this is in sharp contrast to their experiences where their stove top temperatures seem to fluctuate wildly from really hot (I can't get my stovetop temp over 550) to relatively cold.


----------



## Gooserider (Jan 19, 2008)

FWIW, I load my Encore CAT model 2550 to just below the griddle - I try to see how much I can get in and still close the lid!  This will give me a 10+ hour burn with the stove at minimum air, with the CAT engaged, ranging down to about 6 hours if I'm cranking the stove hard.

Gooserider


----------



## swestall (Jan 19, 2008)

My DEFIANT NC stove was the biggest mistake I ever made, just because I believed VC's marketing hype. After two months of EVERBURN my chimney was caked with stage 3 creosote (shiny black) in the top 6 feet of the stack and I had gone through twice the wood of my DEFIANT CAT stove. I was so dissapointed with VC that I went out and purchased a Hearthstone Mansfield. The Mansfield has operated flawlessly since installation, uses half the wood that the VC CAT stoves do and is providing a nice clean burn while keeping the house very comfortabl (70's) with no effort. 
I hope everyone who has a VC stove does not have my terrible experience with the Everburn; as far as I am concerned it was a very expensive ($2400+) mistake. I had VC CAT stoves and they are great; but I will never do business with VC again and don't recommend them because they put this product out.
Good luck to those who can get it to work correctly: but you have no idea what you are missing with stoves that actually work simply and use a lot less wood while doing it.
After much review my take on what makes them work is if you just happen to have the proper balance of draft to enable the air siphon for the secondary burn to function as designed. BUT, chimneys vary from house to house; so results are going to be mixed. Eventually this will affect sales and VC will pull back or modify the design in use now; that will render these units obsolete. Glad I've taken the hit now and don't have to live with it any longer. 
Also, this will be my last post about the VC NC stoves, I've said all I have to say about it. I will be happy to help anyone who has one but am not going to present my thoughts beyond saying these devices are not recommended by me.


----------



## cmcramer (Jan 19, 2008)

Norway maple is not the best wood. I use the same stove, but burn year old ash / beech, I can get 6.5 hour burn with nice bed of coals left to re-lite new wood.

Much less than advertised....that's for sure. And, no, I do not think I have have an air leak....although others sure do!

When damperd down and with minimal air....all I see in the firebox are the 'dancing northern lights' type of bluish flame.  Wouldn't an air leak result in some orange flame?


----------



## tradergordo (Jan 20, 2008)

Smang, welcome to the forum.  To both of you guys that just asked about burntimes, let me just say that I do think the VC published number is misleading, however I can say that I can now consistently get solid 8 hour burns with nice big coal bed and usable heat at the end of those 8 hours, and I can stretch that to 10 hours with a smaller coal bed at the end but still good enough.  It took more than a full year to figure this out along with tips from another owner.  

First, you really MUST do the dollar bill test, ALL along every square inch of all gaskets.  These stoves are notorious for having gasket problems straight from the factory or after the initial burns.  Fix any problems by replacing gaskets, adding silicone sealant, and/or tightening door latches. You won't get 10 hour burns with air leaks.

Second, seasoned hardwood is an absolute must.  Smang you said your wood was seasoned for a year, but was it split over a year ago?  Has it been under cover for a year? For what its worth, I found that my wood this year which was stored in a woodshed with no sides burns considerably better than my wood did last year which was covered with tarps over the top.  I think having a nice big air space over the top helps.

Third - you need a big red hot coal bed.  It has to be 2-3 inches thick and covering most of the bottom of the stove.  You are going to rake this toward the shoe (back center).  You can pile it right up there, but first clear all the ash away from the shoe and the air holes along the bottom back of the firebox (by raking everything temporarily forward and sweeping away the ash).  The stovetop, as measured around the flue collar, should be 550+F (internal flue temp should be 700+), if its not, then add some small wood and/or crack the ash pan door to bring the temp up before proceeding.

Fourth - fill the firebox with wood, starting with smaller splits on the bottom.  If you use pallet wood, put a piece right on top of the coals in front of the shoe.  Add big splits on top, as much as you can get in.  Then fill in any gaps that are left with smaller wood, 2-4 inch diameter unsplit branches are great.  Fill right to the top of the firebox (which isn't the griddle I might add, there is a double top on these stoves).

Fifth - IMMEDIATELY CLOSE THE DAMPER AND CUT THE AIR BACK 100%.

If your wood is good, it will start everburning immediately, you will hear it.  For me this procedure pretty much guarantees an 8-10 hour burn every time, with a big coal bed and usable heat still being produced in the morning.  It is then ready for new everburning within 15-20 minutes after a reload.  My upstairs bedroom is still 70 degrees in the morning (8 hours later) even with temps in the teens outside.  

Like I said, it took me a long time to figure this all out.  Last year I thought I had to let all the wood get engulfed in flame before dampering down, but that is a guaranteed way to get a 6 hour burn.  I found myself getting up in the middle of the night to add wood.  That is all a thing of the past now.

My morning routine is that I come down stairs immediately after I get out of bed in the morning, I add wood, if the coal bed is big, I just keep it undampered and air up, if coal bed is smaller, I also crack the ash pan door.  Then I go take a shower, get dressed, etc. 15-20 minutes go by from when I reloaded, and its back up to critical mass temps and ready for dampering down again (but usually with air at least 20%).  This routine has been working very well for me for several weeks now and I feel like I've finally got this stove mastered even though I still think its not a very user friendly design and I probably wouldn't recommend this model to friends and family.  That said, I'm heating my house well, and with less wood and longer burntimes than a couple of my friends with other designs of stove.  So who knows, maybe the story isn't over yet on everburn, but I can't help but feel this design will just frusterate most people.

I can't emphasize enough how critically important it is to have very dry wood.  I stack about a day's worth of wood around the stove, so that it gets "kiln dried" so to speak. I think this makes a difference.  

-Gordo


----------



## swestall (Jan 20, 2008)

Hey Trader and all,
I cc'd the below from another thread post, which I did earlier. 
I have the greatest respect for Trader's efforts to help all user's of this device get the most out of it. He has developed a way of dealing with the monster that keeps it at bay and , I think, gets the best performace out of it.
The other thread is concerned with burn times. I was getting a bit more than the 6 hours that post talks about; I could often get up to 9-10 hours with lots of coals left and heat still being produced. I think that poster is dealing with over draft vs. design point. 



> jpl1nh - 20 January 2008 11:04 AM
> 
> Diabel - 20 January 2008 09:34 AM
> Yes, it is 95% maple around here. But I also will pick out cherry from my wood pile & load the stove with that...same result 5-6hrs burn!
> ...





> You would have to exchange stoves to get a cat because you can’t convert a non cat burn system to a cat.  If VC stops selling cat stoves they lose one of their competative niches.  If they are banking on their new “neverburn” technology inthe future then it won’t be long before they stop selling stoves period!



YES, and that is exactly what I fear. The can’t see it, the CAT stove is the best product that they have, the only one in fact. So when they stop selling it, the will be done. 

Don’t let them tell you this is normal. Even if you have to call CFM customer service over and over, it is a possibility they will give you a CAT stove to replace the NC. . The dealers and CFM do have some interest in having people think its OK to have to manage the stove; but having to babysit a stove constantly is rediculous. 

I sincerely hope you are able to get this thing working for you; at least to the point that you can heat with it and it doesn’t take too much of your time. BUT, you really have to keep an eye on the smoke coming out the stack because it equals creosote. 

As Craig emphasized, you need to get your draft as close to the factory design point to have this thing work optimally. 

Regards, 
SW


----------



## Stan70 (Jan 20, 2008)

After speaking with the dealer, doing some thinking and searching on this issue, and doing a bit of reading I decided to check a couple of areas and experiment a little since I have a few days off.  Since the stove is hot and I can't currently do the dollar bill trick, I got a good fire going and then closed the damper and throttled the stove back.  I then took a lit match and moved it around the outside of the door in the vicinity of the door to stove interface gap.  I could clearly see a difference in the flame at some locations around the door.  A smoke tester would be more ideal for this but itconfirmed my suspicions, brought about by trader's post, that there might be an air leak or two around the door (particularly since they removed the doors when the brought the stove into my basement).  As can be expected, the match flame changed from calm burning to erratic as I approached areas I suspect to be leaking air.  I suspect that either the gasket is defective or more likely, that the door merely needs to be adjusted to obtain a better seal.  This makes sense since A) the doors were removed and installed cold and B) when things are heated they expand which could further exacerbate any leaks.  In addition what I did was to check the air intake hole on the bottom rear of the stove.  When the primary air was fully open, I could feel a large volume of air rushing in obviously, but when it was closed, I could still fill a large flow rate of air, although not as much as with the primary air wide open, entering through this hole.  This is in fact the point of this opening as the stove has to get oxygen to burn with the fuel from somewhere.  I then stacked a series of ceramic plates up to block this hole until I had gone too far (as judged by my inability to have any effect on the flame via the primary air flow adjustment lever) at which point I backed off a bit.  Essentially I wound up choking the fire, albeit relatively briefly, by starving it of enough oxygen to burn properly (although it never went out it just died down a bit and I was unable to effect it via adjusting the input air).  I noticed that after I backed off, and reduced the air flow restriction that I had induced, the primary air flow lever provided more instantaneous response of adjustment.  I then went outside to check the exhaust coming out of the stack.  There was little difference that I could detect from when there was no obstruction in the air inlet.  With the damper engaged and the primary air throttled completely back, there was only a very little bit of smoke coming out while the stove top was at a temperature of 380 degrees F.  It wasn't fully loaded or I suspect it would have been higher.  Furthermore, I seemed to be able to induce the downdraft burn at a lower temperature and it lasted for much longer and didn't stop making the wooshing sound nearly as soon as I thought it did previously.  Or at least I didn't notice it if it did.  
So what I'm thinking is that the mechanism that adjusts the air is out of alignment or adjustment.  I won't be able to do anything with it immediately but at my first available opportunity, I will try to adjust it to reduce the air as I've obviously been burning in an overly oxygen rich environment.  I wonder if this is a common malady with these stoves and merely an adjustment that needs to be made on the part of many users?  An unfortunate circumstance, given the high price of these stoves, but not one that is the burden that many people on this forum have made it out to be (at least making an adjustment to the air inlet mechanism isn't a big deal to me if I can do it once and be done with it).  
Today, while I'm awake and in the immediate vicinity, will be my first test of this and its effect on burn times.  I'm really hoping that it will help me increase the burn times to at least 6 or so hours as that will be a much more manageable time frame for me to have to feed this stove.  That is hopefully I won't have to wake up every four hours to do so.
One last comment regarding my wood.  Yes, it has been split for a year.  I finished splitting the wood by the end of January and it has been up on pallets with a tarp that only slightly covers a little bit of the sides.  So in other words, with the exception of the top layer of wood which is covered by a tarp, the old adage applies in that "the spaces between the wood are only large enough for the mouse to run through (and I do kill mice in the wood pile continuously) but not enough for the cat who's chasing him!"  Furthermore, I received my moisture meter yesterday and all that wood (i.e. one year seasoned maple) is registering between 19 and 20% as opposed to the fresh pine that I'm still splitting which is 30% or more.  I hope to do exactly as you mentioned trader, and build a semi-permanent cover where I can remove the tarps and allow more air to circulate over the top layers of wood.
Finally, although it is not the holy grail of hard woods (this, I think, belongs to shagbark hickory or apple) there is no way that the difference in energy densities between ash, hickory, and maple can account for a lack of achieving a burn time closer to 8 hours than 4.  Yes it could make some difference but not that much so I seriously doubt that is the issue.  I suspect that fuel air ratio and flow rates have much more to do with burn times than energy density. 
Thanks for the input trader, especially on the stacking for a more optimal burn.  I'll post again later, hopefully with positive results.


----------



## tradergordo (Jan 20, 2008)

Your wood sounds OK.  I just burn a mix of hardwoods (Ash, oak, maple, hickory, yellow poplar).  But a high BTU hardwood can burn about a 1/3 longer than a low BTU hardwood, that's the difference between 6 and 8 hours right there.  Regarding moisture content - one thing you can try, if even just as a one time test, is to put a bunch of big splits around your stove for a few days (up to a week) to super-dry them.  Then see if this makes any difference when you burn it. But it sounds like you are OK there.  The air leak thing is a biggie.  I doubt there is any problem with your air control mechanism, and the rear bottom air inlet is for secondary combustion, I would not mess with that.  If you want the 8-10 hour burn you really do need to pack it tight with wood... based on the temps you mentioned, I think you are not burning the stove hot enough personally, anything in the 300 range stovetop is not going to give you good secondary combustion (if any at all).


----------



## Diabel (Jan 20, 2008)

Hi SMang & all, 

We really have to define "burn time". I believe some of us read it differently. When my griddle temp is 450 & flue (outside) temp is 275 & there are hardly any coals left, it is then time to reload. And that is usually 5-6 hrs. Today I am trying well seasoned elm (3yrs), I loaded the stove up at 3pm with it. It's six pm (est) now my griddle reading 600 & flue 325. At this rate I believe I have about 2-3 hrs before reload. 

Couple of members here suggested that overdraft might be my problem...well if that is the case I should not be getting yellowish/blue dancing flames at this state of the burn (3 hrs in). Also, when I engage the damper I cut air to 95% closed I loose all the flame for at least 1hr. (pretty boring fire my wife claims). If I had overdraft I would be seeing lots of flame right....

Cheers


----------



## swestall (Jan 21, 2008)

Primary air is controlling a flap over the front windows, when the stove cools down, look up above the windows with a flashlight and you will see the flap moving. It is a direct linkage from the lever to the flap. This is fed by the air input hole in the back bottom.
Secondary air is a direct input from the same air input hole in the back, the amount of air that comes in once the large damper is closed is controlled by the amount of draft your chimney has, too little hard to get the secondary to go or continue. Too much draft and hard to keep the burn rate down resulting in less burn time. These are not adjustable at all. At least not without major modification to the air siphon mechanism on the secondary burn; which will void any useless warranty that CFM provides.
If you have too much draft, you can slow it down a bit with a damper; that's about it.


----------



## Diabel (Jan 21, 2008)

Hey swestall, 

What was the chimney height used with the nc defiant? I believe you did not have enough draft to engage everburn. If the ideal VC testing conditions called for a 15' chimney why do the installers play with that height i.e. mine is 21' & my installer claims..it is perfect height!! 

btw it is 5.5hrs after I reloaded with well seasoned elm my flue temp reads 200 & griddle 475 with some coals left...enough to restart! Craig mentioned earlier (or maybe in a different post) that he get 8hrs + from his acclaim with 30% smaller firebox! Something is just not right...I am tempted to remove a 4' chimney section & see what happens


----------



## swestall (Jan 21, 2008)

I had the same chimney with the Defiant NC, but, for the Mansfield I lined it with a 6" SS liner. (For the Defiant I was running into the clay 8X12 flue which worked like a champ for the Defiant CAT stove)  I was going to line it with 8" for the Defiant (that is what is optimum) but since I hated the Defiant anyway I decided to do it all at once.
From what I could tell VC seems to have used the 15-16 foot stack at 8" as the design point. The draft is pulling on the Everburn siphoning air in through those holes in the refractory assembly. Too much draft, more pull, less burn time. BUT most likely clean and hot.
I would definately try removing a section to see if it slows it down for you and still engages the Everburn consistently.


----------



## Diabel (Jan 21, 2008)

Someone here said that putting a rock in the flue pipe might work...I am not sure if I feel comfortable with such method. Time to reload!


----------



## swestall (Jan 21, 2008)

I think a couple of folks said that...And Craig verified it. That's a cheap way to go. A small damper plate would be too. But, I like take off a section and see what happens.


----------



## Diabel (Jan 21, 2008)

I will try the rock first, then once we get a warn spell (-10f outside at the moment) I will remove a 4' section..it looks like a pretty easy job.


----------



## Gooserider (Jan 21, 2008)

The only concern with removing a section of fluepipe is if that would leave you in violation of the Codes on height requirement - specifically the 10-3-2 rule (3' above the roof penetration point, 2' above anything within a 10' radius) - This is usually the minimum needed to get a clean drawing chimney and it is rare to see a chimney built taller than needed to comply with this rule unless there is a specific other reason to do so. Shortening the stack is likely to cause other drafting issues, so I would be far more inclined to try the "rock in flue" method, or install a damper plate before removing a pipe section.

Gooserider


----------



## Diabel (Jan 21, 2008)

Thanks Goose, I will check the distances once it warms up. Again, thanks it seems like you're always looking out for everyone here in terms of "code" it's good!


----------



## tradergordo (Jan 21, 2008)

I'd rather try a flue damper than a "rock in the flue".  But really those are last resort options in my opinion.  And I doubt shortening your chimney will make a big difference.  Strong draft is usually a good thing, and short burn times are more often the result of an air leak and/or sub-optimal operation of the stove.

I don't know if I was clear in my recent procedure post.  With these down drafting stoves, if you operate them right, the horizontal flame path allows only the bottom of the wood load to burn.  When you are dampered down, you should see very little flame activity, sometimes you'll see no flame activity at all, just an orange glow, and if you've got wood piled up towards the front, you might not even see the orange glow!  Someone posted the comment, "a boring fire" - YES, it is supposed to be if you are operating it right.  This is the key to long burn times.  If you want a lively fire, you can operate it with the damper open (but the fuel will disappear fast).

From an old VC manual: "The logs on top are dried by heat, and fall into the flame area as those below are consumed.  Thus a full wood load can provide heat all night long.  The use of horizontal combustion allows for us to place the fuel in a magazine where the fueling of the fire is automatically accomplished by gravity".

You should try to keep the coal bed big, this will keep the momentum going for easy clean burns on any reloads.  The secondary combustion chambers have to be seriously hot to work optimally (producing no visible emissions).  If necessary, reloads can be done in two steps - a few small splits on the coals, undampered for 15-20 minutes to get things rolling (very hot) followed by the addition of fresh (bigger) splits on top of that when it reaches the point that you know you can damper down and get good secondary combustion.  This keeps the top of your fuel load (the magazine) from being consumed all at once, and ensures a long burn time.  You can stuff in huge logs for the top, which will get you the longest burn times, basically there is no such thing as "too big" a split, as long as you can manage to get it though the door and into the firebox!  But if the huge split(s) are not very dry, they are just going to smolder and possibly even put out your fire.


----------



## Diabel (Jan 21, 2008)

Trader, 

That is exactly what I get (btw how do you quote here?) the boring fire! For the first two hrs or so I can not see a thing in the firebox (black). The secondary is going because I can hear it, no smoke at the stack & the flue (outside) temp sits at a nice 500-600. After about two hrs I start to see glow at the back of the box, some small flame on either side of the firebox & the rumble is much quieter. At times the rumble will get too quiet & I will see those fireball explosions in the firebox & on occasion a puff of smoke through the griddle...time to open the air a bit. Burn time still max 6hrs!


----------



## tradergordo (Jan 21, 2008)

OK - well it sounds like you are on the right track.  Does NOT sound like you have an air leak.  I doubt its an overdraft problem either.  I think the issue is either the wood, or the way you are operating the stove.  Have you tried loading it the way I described?  Put some small splits on, let it burn undampered for 20-30 minutes, get it super hot, then load it as full as you can, with the biggest splits you can fit though the door, stuff it full, and then IMMEDIATELY damper down and cut the air to zero.  If you still only get a 6 hour burn, I'd say its probably due to low BTU wood although I guess it could be some kind of overdraft issue in which case a flue damper might help.




			
				Diabel said:
			
		

> Trader,
> 
> That is exactly what I get (btw how do you quote here?) the boring fire! For the first two hrs or so I can not see a thing in the firebox (black). The secondary is going because I can hear it, no smoke at the stack & the flue (outside) temp sits at a nice 500-600. After about two hrs I start to see glow at the back of the box, some small flame on either side of the firebox & the rumble is much quieter. At times the rumble will get too quiet & I will see those fireball explosions in the firebox & on occasion a puff of smoke through the griddle...time to open the air a bit. Burn time still max 6hrs!


----------



## James04 (Jan 21, 2008)

Diabel said:
			
		

> ...time to open the air a bit. !



Perhaps this is were your trouble is. That and considering that the burn has ended with stove top temps still at 475. Perhaps below 375 but 475 is still pretty hot!

James


----------



## webbie (Jan 21, 2008)

Diabel said:
			
		

> Trader,
> 
> That is exactly what I get (btw how do you quote here?)



Hit the Quote button instead of the reply button


----------



## webbie (Jan 21, 2008)

Diabel said:
			
		

> I will try the rock first, then once we get a warn spell (-10f outside at the moment) I will remove a 4' section..it looks like a pretty easy job.



Just to clarify, rocks and turn dampers are "experimental"  - and possibly a way to see if you have over draft. Once that is determined, you can then take steps - which might include a turn damper or trying to button up the stoves primary or secondary air to some degree.


----------

