A lot for my pea brain to digest here..... Like all people of limited capacity I am going to break it into chunks....
I agree, a couple thoughts I had
- the draft combined with the area of the EPA holes will set the amount of air delivered. Actually to be more precise... it would be the draft minus pressure drop through the cat /secondary. If the secondary is really hot, pressure drop will go up thus reducing the amount of primary air delivered. (I am assuming constant draft as measure at the stove exhaust)
- You explanation made me question.... what creates fuel for the cat? It is heat, which of course stems from the air flow, but can also be provided by a bed of coals (for some period of time) I see you specified "steady state" so I agree with your statement but I think it might be oversimplifying. Cat fuel can also be provided for some time with zero air via the stored thermal energy in the stove and coals..... but that is transient and outside of what you specified.
I am struggling to understand the theory here.....
- Fuel does not flow through the little holes (I have 8 btw) that is all air.
- Where doe the large increase in secondary air come in? The secondary holes are relatively small and a tiny change in draft is not going to change flow through them much....
- If you add more fuel and air to the cat the flame temp does not necessarily go down, if you add them in the same proportion the flame temp is unchanged. If you change the proportion of fuel / air then temp change depends on which side of stoich we are on.
Here is what I think the design intent is, maybe we are in agreement. All else being equal / constant.....
- Increasing fuel/ smoke to the cat will increase cat temp (I am assuming lean operation here)
- That increases draft which induces an increase in secondary air flow and lowers cat flame temp.
- Increased draft also increases primary air flow (unless the pressure drop through the secondary also increases, then maybe not)
- By plugging the secondary holes I think we are pushing the burn to the rich side of stoich and thus temps are reduced, but all the fuel is not burned because we have limited air. So it reduces temps but at the cost of lower efficiency and higher emissions.
Not sure why you think that. My flue does move, it tracks with cat temp. Maybe point to an example that caused you to think it did not move.
That's correct, the incoming air is preheated by heat from the secondary and primary burns through the cast iron.
On my stove the primary flapper is closed at about 40% travel with stove hot (griddle = 450). Just checked it again....
All the bimetal does is close the air down when the stove is hot, you as the operator can only introduce a bias to the flapper control, as the stove gets hotter the bimetal closes down the air. The lever controls the flapper position but the bimetal has authority. For example with a hot stove (say 450 griddle) the flapper might be closed with the lever at 50% (straight down). If you move the lever forward the flapper will open increasing the temp of the stove, as the stove temp increases above 450 the flapper will begin to close gain, maybe now it is full closed at griddle = 650 (making up numbers here)
I have diligently set it this way, earlier in my career I did not have it set this way. I learned through experience, to set it according to the manual. I do not think the setting is that critical because the bimetal helps correct any small errors in the adjustment. I the stove gets too hot it closes the flapper more.... Certainly there will be some effect on the temp it controls to, but I think pretty small.
Now if the flapper is hanging up that would be a much bigger affect, that would completely remove all bimetal control at lower air settings, or with the stove hot and cruising. In the past I tried adding a rubber band (spring) to the cable to provide some seating force for the flapper to overcome any friction. As I recall it was not effective, but I may need to try again. It certainly biases the temp control to the cold side which I have to compensate for with lever positioning.
One thing you did not mention that I have been thinking about for years..... what id the secondary air does not all go to secondary combustion. What if some of it also supported increased primary combustion. It would give you the same kind of affect, runaway at temps. If you look at the older stove designs they way they bring in secondary air makes it almost impossible for it to increase the primary burn. In our stoves it is pretty easy to envision how the secondary air could support primary combustion.
In conclusion...... Far be it from me to argue with Mr. Spock, the great analytical thinker of our time, but that quote was stolen directly from the great Sherlock Holmes as best I recall...... The trues for of flattery is imitation....
This was a lot of critical thinking for me.... I need a nap.