"Altered Pellet Stove"

[arnash]

save# said "without that heated draft, the by products of the combustion will accumulate and obstruct the air flow to the point that the stove may not function."
This seems like an assumption that lacks a good basis. "products of combustion will accumulate and obstruct the air flow" How is that not what happens when a stove is working perfectly -over a long period of time? The products of combustion are ash and carbon, -they're produced regardless of the temp in the vent. They are no less likely to accumulate at a low vent temp than at a high temp. The only way to prevent air flow obstruction is the occasional vent cleaning.

"these stoves are very specific about what type of venting material and circumstances for installation are needed for proper functioning." Yes, very specific, but not for proper functioning (except in regard to pipe size/length/angles) but for conforming to government safety codes, most of which are written for wood stoves.

"There is a reason that you need heat in the exhaust. If the temp drop below 200 degrees it will condensate causing creosote to form." I'll believe that's true but I also believe that it's more pertinent to wood stoves than pellet stoves. Pellet stoves, with the combustion air strongly feeding the flame with oxygen, burn at a temperature high enough to burn the substances that could become creosote, so if they are burned they turn into soot at worst, and carbon dioxide/monoxide at best. Lower burn temps. are what's responsible for creosote formation, not lower vent temp. And after all, not everything that burns can form creosote anyway, candles, lamp oil, gasoline, etc. I'm under the impression that the substances that form it are found in the bark of trees -where the sappy substances are. So the question is, do makers of top quality pellets even allow bark into their mix? I would think not because it would also create more ash and wouldn't burn as hot. I think the core wood of trees doesn't contain those undesirable substances. Anyone know anything different?

"I’ve heard of all of the 4 above being done, including removing part of the top of the stove so a fella could cook eggs on the heat exchanger." If by "the heat exchanger" you're referring to the heat exchange tubes of a pellet stove, I would assume that fella removed the top cover of his stove to expose the roof of the burn chamber, not the tubes underneath it. With my Whitfield, it's not possible to remove the stove roof since it's part of the welded-together body. All stoves are probably make like that.

About condensation forming in the vent pipe due to low vent temp., I think that would violate some law of physics. It's COLD metal that causes condensation, like in a cold car exhaust pipe and muffler . So it wouldn't matter if the pipe is only very warm, not hot, it would have to be cold for water to condense on it because only cold causes H2O to change from a gas to a liquid.

 

[SmokeyTheBear]

arnash,

You are the one that really needs a physics lesson.

Remove enough heat from the exhaust system and you'll have cooled the exhaust gases below many of the combustion by product's condensation temperatures. They then condense in the flue.

You do that at your peril.

 

[kinsmanstoves]

Sorry Arnash,

I just made my post up, out of thin air. No proof what so ever. Do what you want and I am sure your insurance company and Fire Inspector will love you.

Eric

 

[TLHinCanada]

In Ontario, Canada during the seventies a number of people died from CO poisoning. The cause was chimney ducting, after the oil embargo the government offered incentives to change from oil. Oil fired homes at the time had clay liners in the chimneys. When the furnaces were changed they were vented into the same chimney liner. Condensation occurred, water froze between funace firings, liners cracked, and people died. Thousands of homes had to retrofitted with double jacketed liners. Sometimes codes exist for a reason. Today I have to have a multi-fuel vent for a pellet stove, its the law. Someone will always think they know better and do silly things; ie: burn something the stove is not made to consume.

 

[checkthisout]

save# said "without that heated draft, the by products of the combustion will accumulate and obstruct the air flow to the point that the stove may not function."
This seems like an assumption that lacks a good basis. "products of combustion will accumulate and obstruct the air flow" How is that not what happens when a stove is working perfectly -over a long period of time? The products of combustion are ash and carbon, -they're produced regardless of the temp in the vent. They are no less likely to accumulate at a low vent temp than at a high temp. The only way to prevent air flow obstruction is the occasional vent cleaning.

"these stoves are very specific about what type of venting material and circumstances for installation are needed for proper functioning." Yes, very specific, but not for proper functioning (except in regard to pipe size/length/angles) but for conforming to government safety codes, most of which are written for wood stoves.

"There is a reason that you need heat in the exhaust. If the temp drop below 200 degrees it will condensate causing creosote to form." I'll believe that's true but I also believe that it's more pertinent to wood stoves than pellet stoves. Pellet stoves, with the combustion air strongly feeding the flame with oxygen, burn at a temperature high enough to burn the substances that could become creosote, so if they are burned they turn into soot at worst, and carbon dioxide/monoxide at best. Lower burn temps. are what's responsible for creosote formation, not lower vent temp. And after all, not everything that burns can form creosote anyway, candles, lamp oil, gasoline, etc. I'm under the impression that the substances that form it are found in the bark of trees -where the sappy substances are. So the question is, do makers of top quality pellets even allow bark into their mix? I would think not because it would also create more ash and wouldn't burn as hot. I think the core wood of trees doesn't contain those undesirable substances. Anyone know anything different?

"I’ve heard of all of the 4 above being done, including removing part of the top of the stove so a fella could cook eggs on the heat exchanger." If by "the heat exchanger" you're referring to the heat exchange tubes of a pellet stove, I would assume that fella removed the top cover of his stove to expose the roof of the burn chamber, not the tubes underneath it. With my Whitfield, it's not possible to remove the stove roof since it's part of the welded-together body. All stoves are probably make like that.

About condensation forming in the vent pipe due to low vent temp., I think that would violate some law of physics. It's COLD metal that causes condensation, like in a cold car exhaust pipe and muffler . So it wouldn't matter if the pipe is only very warm, not hot, it would have to be cold for water to condense on it because only cold causes H2O to change from a gas to a liquid.

Condensate furnaces are called that because they are efficient to the point where the gases leave the stove at a temperature that is too to maintain the exhaust at a temperature that will prevent condensation. These furnaces use PVC pipe as their exhaust vent and then have drain at the base of the exhaust to catch the moisture that runs back down the pipe.

I would also say that the claim that hot intake air maintains a cleaner firepot is one that is most likely correct and makes sense given that at least 1 stove manufacture has holes in their intake plenumn that provides heated air to the intake.

 

[arnash]

"Remove enough heat from the exhaust system and you’ll have cooled the exhaust gases below many of the combustion by product’s condensation temperatures. They then condense in the flue." I have no doubt that that is true, that is if your are referring to a wood stove, but pellet stoves are not wood stoves and unless some expert tells me differently, I will continue to assume that there are no "combustion by-products" in the exhaust gases. If they don't exist (because they are thoroughly burned by the high stove temp) then they can't condense in the vent. The only things in exhaust gas is things that don't condense, i.e. carbon dioxide, monoxide, and carbon, no flammables and no steam. I've held my face close to the exhaust vent and breathed in the exhaust air to see how clean my stove was burning, and could smell nothing. No hydo-carbon by-products.

As for the experience in Canada, that was in the seventies, before pellet stoves were invented, so the stoves they switched to were wood stoves, and the regulations that were adopted because of the problems they created were designed for wood stoves. Later, when pellets stoves came into existence, governments at all levels simply imported the pre-existing regulations and slapped them on the pellet stove industry and the manufacturers had no choice but to pass them onto their products even though they weren't written to address pellet stove issues. There may be no source of heat that is dryer than a pellet stove. I'll bet that the water content of pellets is significantly lower than that of chopped wood. So water condensation is a non-issue. Warm, dry air doesn't contain enough water for condensation to occur, especially against a warm metal pipe. Folks need to distinguish between regulations that were written for wood stoves and ones that were written specifically for pellet stoves, but aside from common sense and common knowledge there's really no good way to be able to know for sure which is which. Following regulations for the sake of obedience to authority is different from following regulation for the sake of safety. Regulations are written by bureaucracies and they like things rigid, simple, and unequivocal. And sometimes don't make any sense. Some people like for things to make sense.

 

[DexterDay]

"Remove enough heat from the exhaust system and you’ll have cooled the exhaust gases below many of the combustion by product’s condensation temperatures. They then condense in the flue." I have no doubt that that is true, that is if your are referring to a wood stove, but pellet stoves are not wood stoves and UNLESS SOME EXPERT TELLS ME DIFFERENTLY, I will continue to assume that there are no "combustion by-products" in the exhaust gases. If they don't exist (because they are thoroughly burned by the high stove temp) then they can't condense in the vent. The only things in exhaust gas is things that don't condense, i.e. carbon dioxide, monoxide, and carbon, no flammables and no steam. I've held my face close to the exhaust vent and breathed in the exhaust air to see how clean my stove was burning, and could smell nothing. No hydo-carbon by-products.

As for the experience in Canada, that was in the seventies, before pellet stoves were invented, so the stoves they switched to were wood stoves, and the regulations that were adopted because of the problems they created were designed for wood stoves. Later, when pellets stoves came into existence, governments at all levels simply imported the pre-existing regulations and slapped them on the pellet stove industry and the manufacturers had no choice but to pass them onto their products even though they weren't written to address pellet stove issues. There may be no source of heat that is dryer than a pellet stove. I'll bet that the water content of pellets is significantly lower than that of chopped wood. So water condensation is a non-issue. Warm, dry air doesn't contain enough water for condensation to occur, especially against a warm metal pipe. Folks need to distinguish between regulations that were written for wood stoves and ones that were written specifically for pellet stoves, but aside from common sense and common knowledge there's really no good way to be able to know for sure which is which. Following regulations for the sake of obedience to authority is different from following regulation for the sake of safety. Regulations are written by bureaucracies and they like things rigid, simple, and unequivocal. And sometimes don't make any sense. Some people like for things to make sense.

There have been many "Experts" that have tried to tell. Several of them. Here is just one of them.

There is a reason that you need heat in the exhaust. If the temp drop below 200 degrees it will condensate causing creosote to form. It is not wasting heat it HAS to be there and they do consider people going over the EVL of their system. The temp needs to be up there.

Eric

 

[TLHinCanada]

"Remove enough heat from the exhaust system and you’ll have cooled the exhaust gases below many of the combustion by product’s condensation temperatures. They then condense in the flue." I have no doubt that that is true, that is if your are referring to a wood stove, but pellet stoves are not wood stoves and unless some expert tells me differently, I will continue to assume that there are no "combustion by-products" in the exhaust gases. If they don't exist (because they are thoroughly burned by the high stove temp) then they can't condense in the vent. The only things in exhaust gas is things that don't condense, i.e. carbon dioxide, monoxide, and carbon, no flammables and no steam. I've held my face close to the exhaust vent and breathed in the exhaust air to see how clean my stove was burning, and could smell nothing. No hydo-carbon by-products.

As for the experience in Canada, that was in the seventies, before pellet stoves were invented, so the stoves they switched to were wood stoves, and the regulations that were adopted because of the problems they created were designed for wood stoves. Later, when pellets stoves came into existence, governments at all levels simply imported the pre-existing regulations and slapped them on the pellet stove industry and the manufacturers had no choice but to pass them onto their products even though they weren't written to address pellet stove issues. There may be no source of heat that is dryer than a pellet stove. I'll bet that the water content of pellets is significantly lower than that of chopped wood. So water condensation is a non-issue. Warm, dry air doesn't contain enough water for condensation to occur, especially against a warm metal pipe. Folks need to distinguish between regulations that were written for wood stoves and ones that were written specifically for pellet stoves, but aside from common sense and common knowledge there's really no good way to be able to know for sure which is which. Following regulations for the sake of obedience to authority is different from following regulation for the sake of safety. Regulations are written by bureaucracies and they like things rigid, simple, and unequivocal. And sometimes don't make any sense. Some people like for things to make sense.

This was caused by a switch to natural gas furnaces. Having to use multi-fuel vent is a regulation that only pertains to pellet stoves. But as always you are free to believe want you want.

 

[SmokeyTheBear]

what is the temprature of the exhuast from a gas clothes drier?

Well let's start here:

3.2.2 Partially-Blocked and 100%-Blocked Conditions

Each dryer design reacted slightly differently when
the exhaust vent was partially blocked and/or 100%
blocked. [...]

Figure 81 shows the range of highest to lowest maximum
temperatures at the intake into the tumbler for each test
condition. The temperature curves shown in this graph
are similar to those for the heater exhaust (Figure
77), except that the maximum temperature measured
when the exhaust vent was fully blocked was lower ?
approximately 400°C.


and then how about every one reading everything on and all links from: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/729373.html

 

[arnash]

"This was caused by a switch to natural gas furnaces." That makes more sense than wood stoves, gas didn't come to mind since I haven't used any in 11 years.
" Having to use multi-fuel vent is a regulation that only pertains to pellet stoves." I don't know what the difference is between a multi-fuel vent and a non-multi-fuel vent. But it sounds odd that if would be required of pellet stoves that basically only use one type of fuel (unless nut shells and corn are a lot hotter fuel and considered to be definitely different from pellets.)

"But as always you are free to believe want you want." I have no preference or bias as to what to believe, I just want to know what's accurate and actual. I look with a little suspicion at absolute pronouncement from Olympus because they are likely to be overly simplistic and not take some significant things into account. The details, the full range of facts are usually more varied than generalities.

 

[checkthisout]

"This was caused by a switch to natural gas furnaces." That makes more sense than wood stoves, gas didn't come to mind since I haven't used any in 11 years.
" Having to use multi-fuel vent is a regulation that only pertains to pellet stoves." I don't know what the difference is between a multi-fuel vent and a non-multi-fuel vent. But it sounds odd that if would be required of pellet stoves that basically only use one type of fuel (unless nut shells and corn are a lot hotter fuel and considered to be definitely different from pellets.)

"But as always you are free to believe want you want." I have no preference or bias as to what to believe, I just want to know what's accurate and actual. I look with a little suspicion at absolute pronouncement from Olympus because they are likely to be overly simplistic and not take some significant things into account. The details, the full range of facts are usually more varied than generalities.

It doesn't matter how dry a fuel is, there will always be water in the exhaust because water is a product of combustion. If your pellet steve burned as clean as it could possibly burn it would produce only C02 and Water.

 

[TLHinCanada]

There could be a number of reasons for allowing multi-vent pipe only: No companies have wanted to pay for certification of other types of vent due to the smaller population base. My favorite reason is that the powers that be know there will always be someone who thinks the operators manual is not for them and use lamp oil to start their stove, (close to #1 fuel, pretty close to jet fuel) or throw pine cones in it, think that because wood chips are make from wood they are the same as pellets. Cresote will require a high tempeture to start burning. Sometimes government with a new product ie; pellet stoves will err on the side of caution knowing that there are people who do things to see what will happen. Personally I don't think any of the above matters, just this, if I do something that is contary to the owners manual and my house burns down will the insurance company still pay out.

 

[SmokeyTheBear]

...
" Having to use multi-fuel vent is a regulation that only pertains to pellet stoves." I don't know what the difference is between a multi-fuel vent and a non-multi-fuel vent. But it sounds odd that if would be required of pellet stoves that basically only use one type of fuel (unless nut shells and corn are a lot hotter fuel and considered to be definitely different from pellets.)

The difference between the two types of venting is in the corrosion handling ability of the metal they are made of, and yes it makes a huge difference.

Even if you burn only wood pellets it is possible to produce enough corrosive condensates to corrode venting that otherwise would have no trouble with just wood pellets.

Please note the word condensate and sort of connect the dots.

Now most of us who are hammering on this don't want folks to get the idea that because you do something and have gotten away with it for the time being it is a safe and sane thing to do.

 

[arnash]

"It doesn’t matter how dry a fuel is, there will always be water in the exhaust because water is a product of combustion. If your pellet steve burned as clean as it could possibly burn it would produce only C02 and Water."
That fact suddenly popped out of my subconscious memory today and the only thing to say about it is that the temp. in the flue should be above the boiling point of water or else condensation will result. THAT would be something to consider when extracting heat from the vent, although I'd think that the heat that the exhaust, combined with the continuous air movement would evaporate all the water by the time the stove shut down. But it probably wouldn't be good to run a stove at the minimum setting for long periods if any heat extraction adaptation is in place.

"Now most of us who are hammering on this don’t want folks to get the idea that because you do something and have gotten away with it for the time being it is a safe and sane thing to do. "
That's certainly true, but a corollary fact is that just because something is *perceived* to be not in the arena of what is safe and sane, it doesn't follow that it isn't. There needs to be some scientific reason why a thing is safe or unsafe. There is zero scientific evidence that lamp oil is unsafe (i.e. highly flammable or toxic). Since I have experience with it, I'm not curious about how safe it is, but perhaps a doubter would be interested in looking for evidence to the contrary. If there's some inconceiveable reason why it's unsafe, it would be good to know what it is.

And I'd like to throw in an insight concerning different perspectives. To have my perspective, you have to have a $50. pellet stove that is maybe 20 years beyond warranty. That perspective tends to inspire ouside-the-box thinking. If I had a stove which set me back $3,000 and was still under warranty, I'd have a very different perspective. As for homeowner's insurance, that has been a concern and remained one for several months, but being home whenever the stove is fire-up, and being awake, and having had it run every which way it might conceivable run, I've gained a fair amount of assurance that it's a very safe device and my system is OK. Also, my set-up is temporary. Next year I'll move my stove to vent into my fireplace. But I'm not expecting "winter cold" to end any time soon. Unfortunately, it will probably endure into May where I'm at, so my grand pellet stove experience will continue for a few more months. Then...out of sight, out of mind.

 

[DexterDay]

"It doesn’t matter how dry a fuel is, there will always be water in the exhaust because water is a product of combustion. If your pellet steve burned as clean as it could possibly burn it would produce only C02 and Water."
That fact suddenly popped out of my subconscious memory today and the only thing to say about it is that the temp. in the flue should be above the boiling point of water or else condensation will result. THAT would be something to consider when extracting heat from the vent, although I'd think that the heat that the exhaust, combined with the continuous air movement would evaporate all the water by the time the stove shut down. But it probably wouldn't be good to run a stove at the minimum setting for long periods if any heat extraction adaptation is in place.

"Now most of us who are hammering on this don’t want folks to get the idea that because you do something and have gotten away with it for the time being it is a safe and sane thing to do. "
That's certainly true, but a corollary fact is that just because something is *perceived* to be not in the arena of what is safe and sane, it doesn't follow that it isn't. There needs to be some scientific reason why a thing is safe or unsafe. There is zero scientific evidence that lamp oil is unsafe (i.e. highly flammable or toxic). Since I have experience with it, I'm not curious about how safe it is, but perhaps a doubter would be interested in looking for evidence to the contrary. If there's some inconceiveable reason why it's unsafe, it would be good to know what it is.

And I'd like to throw in an insight concerning different perspectives. To have my perspective, you have to have a $50. pellet stove that is maybe 20 years beyond warranty. That perspective tends to inspire ouside-the-box thinking. If I had a stove which set me back $3,000 and was still under warranty, I'd have a very different perspective. As for homeowner's insurance, that has been a concern and remained one for several months, but being home whenever the stove is fire-up, and being awake, and having had it run every which way it might conceivable run, I've gained a fair amount of assurance that it's a very safe device and my system is OK. Also, my set-up is temporary. Next year I'll move my stove to vent into my fireplace. But I'm not expecting "winter cold" to end any time soon. Unfortunately, it will probably endure into May where I'm at, so my grand pellet stove experience will continue for a few more months. Then...out of sight, out of mind.

See the difference?

 

[SmokeyTheBear]

Consider moisture, lint and air temperature in the design of the
central duct system. Maximum exhaust temperature of the
dryer will not exceed 200°F (93.3°C) when the dryer is
operated according to the instructions provided with the dryer & at 200 the exhaust dryes the clothes & gets rid of the water produced from burning the gas? what is relative humidity?

From one of many on line sources:

Relative humidity is a measurement of the amount of water vapor in a mixture of air and water vapor. It is most commonly defined as the partial pressure of water vapor in the air-water mixture, given as a percentage of the saturated vapor pressure under those conditions. The relative humidity of air thus changes not only with respect to the absolute humidity (moisture content) but also temperature and pressure, upon which the saturated vapor pressure depends. Relative humidity is often used instead of absolute humidity in situations where the rate of water evaporation is important, as it takes into account the variation in saturated vapor pressure.

BTW this is OT for this thread.

 

[SmokeyTheBear]

"It doesn’t matter how dry a fuel is, there will always be water in the exhaust because water is a product of combustion. If your pellet steve burned as clean as it could possibly burn it would produce only C02 and Water."
That fact suddenly popped out of my subconscious memory today and the only thing to say about it is that the temp. in the flue should be above the boiling point of water or else condensation will result. THAT would be something to consider when extracting heat from the vent, although I'd think that the heat that the exhaust, combined with the continuous air movement would evaporate all the water by the time the stove shut down. But it probably wouldn't be good to run a stove at the minimum setting for long periods if any heat extraction adaptation is in place.

"Now most of us who are hammering on this don’t want folks to get the idea that because you do something and have gotten away with it for the time being it is a safe and sane thing to do. "
That's certainly true, but a corollary fact is that just because something is *perceived* to be not in the arena of what is safe and sane, it doesn't follow that it isn't. There needs to be some scientific reason why a thing is safe or unsafe. There is zero scientific evidence that lamp oil is unsafe (i.e. highly flammable or toxic). Since I have experience with it, I'm not curious about how safe it is, but perhaps a doubter would be interested in looking for evidence to the contrary. If there's some inconceiveable reason why it's unsafe, it would be good to know what it is.

And I'd like to throw in an insight concerning different perspectives. To have my perspective, you have to have a $50. pellet stove that is maybe 20 years beyond warranty. That perspective tends to inspire ouside-the-box thinking. If I had a stove which set me back $3,000 and was still under warranty, I'd have a very different perspective. As for homeowner's insurance, that has been a concern and remained one for several months, but being home whenever the stove is fire-up, and being awake, and having had it run every which way it might conceivable run, I've gained a fair amount of assurance that it's a very safe device and my system is OK. Also, my set-up is temporary. Next year I'll move my stove to vent into my fireplace. But I'm not expecting "winter cold" to end any time soon. Unfortunately, it will probably endure into May where I'm at, so my grand pellet stove experience will continue for a few more months. Then...out of sight, out of mind.

Here are two insights for you to consider:

1: Corrosion perforations in venting leads to CO escaping and CO doesn't care if you are awake or not.

2: Ever hear of negligence as it relates to "unintended" consequences (Take a lot of time and really think this one through.) ?

 

[Snowy Rivers]

reading through all this stuff, Yup, pretty well right on the mark.

The flue needs to maintain a good high temp to stay clean and dry.

I burn nut shells in my two Whitfields. The mods I have made are to add a small spreader bar to the center of the pot that scatters the shells across the fire.

The shells are in small peices and do not roll and fall easily into the fire as do pellets.

The Advantage 2T saw the addition of a 2-1/2" tall stainless steel piece across the front of the fire pot to keep the shells from bouncing off the scatter bar and then out onto the firebox floor.

The other mods are limited to basically adjusting on and off feed motor times to achieve optimal burn with this fuel.

My other changes have been to rewire the controls using industrial timers to control the on and off times.

All original safeties are intact and functioning.

Low temp switch
Vacuum/pressure switch
Two high temp switches

The industrial control modules are simple Mosfet timers that allow adjustment of the feed motor on time from .3 seconds to 5 seconds with optimal at the original factory time of aroun d 1.8 seconds

The off time (burn rate) is adjustable from 1 second to 10 seconds with about 7 being a perfect setting for this stove/fuel combination (I rarely change the setting)

If the outside temp gets too cold, I start a second stove.


The stove startup is handled by a "one shot timer" that is set to 20 minutes and allows the stove to heat up and the low temp switch to activate.

The room air (convection fan) is powered through the main power switch and the speed is adjustable using a Triac (CasaBlanca fan controller)

I have the fan control inside the mechanical cabinet and the fan speed set to a comfortable speed level that we dont change.

The fan speed is not full speed but slightly above half way.

A great setting thats not too noisy and yet moves the air well without having any worries about overheating the stove.

I did wire in a high temp overide snap switch that will set the room air fan to high should someone set the feed rate on a higher setting.

I normally run the feed at 7 seconds off time.

Running this stove at a 2 seconds off time will make a HUGE fire that requires more blower.

The factory controls had basically the same adjustments and same times.

The factory control board was tired and the Triac had died.

The timers I used can be wired into any Pellet stove (non auto light)

This is very basic wiring 101 stuff
The timers are rated at 10 amps so there is absolutetly no issue with overloading them.

The only thing runing through the timers is the feed motor.

The draft fan is controled by the main power switch through the main fuse in the panel.

Originally the draft fan (exhaust fan) speed was varied slightly with changes to the fuel feed rate.
Higher fuel rates would see slightly faster exhaust fan speed.

I electted to run the fan at full speed and tweek the draft damper slightly to place the airflow in the sweet spot.

Since the stove is run in one setting 99-100% of the time, there was not reason to worry about that slight fan speed change.

The shells like a tad more air flow anyway to burn well.

To watch this stove running, you would not know that it was not running on pellets.

The only visible difference is the GRAY ash and of course to look in the hopper.

Keep it safe and all is well.

My exhaust vent pipe (horizontal only) runs at about 150-160F surface temp on the room side of the pipe.

The inside is always very dry and collects ash.

I have not taken a exhaust flow temp reading, but its a good guess that its 250F + where it exits the atove.

Now burning what I do (Shells) there is no creosote, but there is/are some materials that could condense out just the same.

Always ways to make the mouse trap better.

Snowy

 

[TLHinCanada]

I going to guess that the whitfield are multi-fuel. It reads like as parts wore out you replaced them with equivalent or heavier spec parts. Its quite the list, keeps you busy I'll guess.

 

[Wachusett]

Now these are altered stoves! Been following this thread and just came upon this craigslist ad (broken link removed to http://nh.craigslist.org/hsh/2289356346.html) .
The link in the ad is broken try: Crosslinkconversions.com

 

[DexterDay]

Now these are altered stoves! Been following this thread and just came upon this craigslist ad (broken link removed to http://nh.craigslist.org/hsh/2289356346.html) .
The link in the ad is broken try: Crosslinkconversions.com

I seen something similar on Youtube last night. Well the piping and stuff looked the same. Instead of heating water, The guy on Youtube was burning waste vegetable oil in his pellet stove.. Looked completely unsafe. Fire got so BIG one time towards the end of the video, that I was scared for the Mans safety. Some people do some crazy things.

 

[arnash]

Here are two insights for you to consider:

1: Corrosion perforations in venting leads to CO escaping and CO doesn't care if you are awake or not.

2: Ever hear of negligence as it relates to "unintended" consequences (Take a lot of time and really think this one through.) ?

I suspect that you're under the impression that humans can't sense when they're not getting enough oxygen, but they actually can, that is if they are awake. As far as I've ever heard, the danger and deaths from CO come when people are asleep, -they die in their sleep (which almost happened to one of my sisters). CO alarms are meant to wake you up so you don't die in your sleep. If you're awake, you'll feel the effect and open the doors and windows. So it's a mistake to say, " CO doesn't care if you are awake or not".

As for negligence, it relates not to "unintended consequences" but to foreseeable or unforeseeable consequences. If unforeseeable consequences occur, then negligence can't be asserted, although there is a huge gray area in which judgements about discretion can be argued from opposite views.

 

[TLHinCanada]

As little as 30 ppm is enough to effect people with heart or breathing problems. It is colorless, odorless, and tasteless. Unless your not human the only sure way not to end up with brain damage or worse dead is to have a working detector. It is irresponsible to say if your awake you will notice.

 

[SmokeyTheBear]

Here are two insights for you to consider:

1: Corrosion perforations in venting leads to CO escaping and CO doesn't care if you are awake or not.

2: Ever hear of negligence as it relates to "unintended" consequences (Take a lot of time and really think this one through.) ?

1a: I suspect that you're under the impression that humans can't sense when they're not getting enough oxygen, but they actually can, that is if they are awake. As far as I've ever heard, the danger and deaths from CO come when people are asleep, -they die in their sleep (which almost happened to one of my sisters). CO alarms are meant to wake you up so you don't die in your sleep. If you're awake, you'll feel the effect and open the doors and windows. So it's a mistake to say, " CO doesn't care if you are awake or not".

2a. As for negligence, it relates not to "unintended consequences" but to foreseeable or unforeseeable consequences. If unforeseeable consequences occur, then negligence can't be asserted, although there is a huge gray area in which judgements about discretion can be argued from opposite views.

2a. Just because you don't foresee something doesn't absolve you of negligence if your actions lead to consequences that are detrimental to others or yourself.

1a. Humans have been misleading themselves in regards to that matter to the point of dieing every single year, want to be next?

 

[SmokeyTheBear]

is it possible that a pellet stove leaks smoke within the house with no smell?

Aromatic hydrocarbons and CO are two different matters.