We have a local company working up a solar domestic hot water system quote for us that may provide me a convenient opportunity for woodstove heat collection as well.
Currently we have a tankless coil that we use through our cast iron oil boiler.
We are looking at installing 120-160 gallons of water storage tank capacity as part of this system. I have discussed the wood stove recovery idea with the company designing our system. We have an option to install an extra heat exchanger coil into the storage tank that would give us an opportunity to link up to our woodstove to help supplement the solar hot water in winter.
We have a Woodstock Fireview in an installation that does not require a rear heat shield. Therefore, I am considering buying the rear shield for the purpose of sandwiching a simple finned tube exchanger on the back of my stove to trap and capture some heat thrown off the stove. I would use a differential switch to allow circulation when the wood stove is hotter than the storage tank, along with a pressure relief valve for safety in this heat loop.
Based on a quick back of the envelope calculation, I think this may be a fairly useful method even after making what I think are fairly conservative assumptions to not be overly optimistic. I would be interested in input from some of the other folks on the board - especially those who may be using similar setups.
I start out with max rating of stove at 55,000 BTUs hr - we know that is a wild guess at best. Assume we only get 1/3 this output in normal steady use with the surface running 500-600 degrees. I think this is reasonable in that I frequently hear a modern average home requires 10-20,000 BTUs/hr in steady state to stay warm in our area, and we heat nearly exclusively with the stove, so I assume that is about the level of heat we are getting out of it. Then assume the stove heat exchanger sandwiched between the stove rear and heat shield is exposed to about 20% of the firebox area radiating heat. Then assume only half the heat generated in that area actually transfers into the pipe. This puts me at about 1800 BTUs/hr into the heat exchanger:
55,000 * 0.33 * 0.2 * 0.1 = 1800
If I assume I have a solid fire going 12 hours/day and discount the rest of the day when it is coaling and dropping into the 300 degree range, I can get 21,600 BTUs/day. Assuming my hot water has to be warmed 100 F compared to groundwater:
21,600 / (8.33 lbs/gal)*(100 F) = 26 gallons of hot water produced per day.
This would be more than adequate for our household and could quite possibly let me shut down my oil boiler in the winter with the exception of severe cold snaps or travel away from home. Another interesting way to look at this is that capturing 21,600 BTUs/day would require about it would save about 6.2 gallons per month of oil burning at 75% efficiency. At the likely $2.50/gallon we're up to this year, and 6 months of burning, that is not a half bad savings rate of $93/year. That would give me payback in fairly short order - on top of that, I would also avoid a lot of standby losses in my boiler when I have to keep it hot just to make domestic hot water in milder winter periods.
Now obviously there are a lot of assumptions here - interested in other people's thoughts!
-Colin
Currently we have a tankless coil that we use through our cast iron oil boiler.
We are looking at installing 120-160 gallons of water storage tank capacity as part of this system. I have discussed the wood stove recovery idea with the company designing our system. We have an option to install an extra heat exchanger coil into the storage tank that would give us an opportunity to link up to our woodstove to help supplement the solar hot water in winter.
We have a Woodstock Fireview in an installation that does not require a rear heat shield. Therefore, I am considering buying the rear shield for the purpose of sandwiching a simple finned tube exchanger on the back of my stove to trap and capture some heat thrown off the stove. I would use a differential switch to allow circulation when the wood stove is hotter than the storage tank, along with a pressure relief valve for safety in this heat loop.
Based on a quick back of the envelope calculation, I think this may be a fairly useful method even after making what I think are fairly conservative assumptions to not be overly optimistic. I would be interested in input from some of the other folks on the board - especially those who may be using similar setups.
I start out with max rating of stove at 55,000 BTUs hr - we know that is a wild guess at best. Assume we only get 1/3 this output in normal steady use with the surface running 500-600 degrees. I think this is reasonable in that I frequently hear a modern average home requires 10-20,000 BTUs/hr in steady state to stay warm in our area, and we heat nearly exclusively with the stove, so I assume that is about the level of heat we are getting out of it. Then assume the stove heat exchanger sandwiched between the stove rear and heat shield is exposed to about 20% of the firebox area radiating heat. Then assume only half the heat generated in that area actually transfers into the pipe. This puts me at about 1800 BTUs/hr into the heat exchanger:
55,000 * 0.33 * 0.2 * 0.1 = 1800
If I assume I have a solid fire going 12 hours/day and discount the rest of the day when it is coaling and dropping into the 300 degree range, I can get 21,600 BTUs/day. Assuming my hot water has to be warmed 100 F compared to groundwater:
21,600 / (8.33 lbs/gal)*(100 F) = 26 gallons of hot water produced per day.
This would be more than adequate for our household and could quite possibly let me shut down my oil boiler in the winter with the exception of severe cold snaps or travel away from home. Another interesting way to look at this is that capturing 21,600 BTUs/day would require about it would save about 6.2 gallons per month of oil burning at 75% efficiency. At the likely $2.50/gallon we're up to this year, and 6 months of burning, that is not a half bad savings rate of $93/year. That would give me payback in fairly short order - on top of that, I would also avoid a lot of standby losses in my boiler when I have to keep it hot just to make domestic hot water in milder winter periods.
Now obviously there are a lot of assumptions here - interested in other people's thoughts!
-Colin