fresh air kit...good idea or not?

[smokinokie]

I have a new Jotul F100 wood stove coming.

Was wondering if their optional "fresh air kit" was a good idea.

I just read a pretty big thread discussion on here about how air moves in a house when heated with a wood stove.

I am a total newbie to wood stoves but it seems to me that the optimal situation is for your fire to be fed with air/oxygen from the OUTSIDE of your house if at all possible.

That would totally negate the negative air pressire created by your stove sucking up air from the INSIDE of your house (which in turn pulls in cold outside air through leaky windows and doors), would it not?

I am sure that a lot of you veterans who who have been happily heating your homes with wood stoves for years without a "fresh air kit" might have a built-in prejudice against the idea, but seriously would it not be a BETTER situation for your stove to be drawing outside air?

It just seems commonsense to me that the outside air would be better, simply an extension of the fact that a totally open fireplace is a horrible way of trying to heat your home because it is sucking huge amounts of your inside air up the chimney and creating that negative pressure situation which ends up sucking outside air into your house through leaky windows and doors, etc.

Obviously a well-designed wood stove handles the air intake situation MUCH more efficiently than an open fireplace, but alas it still does feed itself with inside air.

The outside air feeding into your stove via a fresh air kit will be much colder than the inside air - does that become a key factor in weighing the worthiness of the idea?

 

[madison]

Search OAK or Outside Air Kit on this site, and you will have plenty of reading til 2011.

 

[smokinokie]

Thanks for that. I just read a bunch of that material and it was very helpful.

I feel much better about the idea of my woodstove sucking up my inside air.

I must say however that one of the big warnings about using outside air in that material concerns what happens when a big exhaust fan like a kitchen range hood is running and competing with the OAK. That doesn't apply to me. Plus wouldn't it affect a woodstove without an OAK as well?

Also the material assumes that the outside air will come from a hole in the wall that is somewhere on the outside of the house, totally exposed to the wind and the varying pressure situations created by windy conditions around your house.

What if the hole in your wall is drawing air from an enclosed (but drafty) garage? What if the hole is in your floor drawing air from a crawlspace? I could install an OAK in either of these situations.

It seemed to me that the author of the material was focused on pointing out scenarios in which an OAK can be harmful, which is very helpful, but was not too keen on discussing an OAK which might be ideally designed and installed.

For example why couldn't an OAK have a valve-like feature which prevented air from flowing OUT of it under certain wind situations where outside air is forced down through the chimney, which is one of the dangerous scenarios the author pointed out?

Maybe some of you experienced woodburners think "...sounds awfully complicated, why bother?", but hey modern woodstoves themselves are pretty darned complicated when you look at all the parts and designs. That complication makes a woodstove a huge technological leap from the open fires used by generations of cavemen, does it not?

Why should we not expect a "complicated" OAK that solves all of the concerns addressed in the material?

Seriously I don't really care whether I have an OAK or not, I just find all of the science behind a whole-system design of an absolutely OPTIMAL woodburning stove fascinating. Truly fascinating.

One thing that really gets my head spinning is the guy saying that by using inside air you are simply using a small part of the drafty air that is naturally coming into older homes anyway and which NEEDS to be coming in just for the sake of freshening things up.

And yet you can't delve for one minute into the subject of "energy efficiency" without an expert telling you to make your old drafty home as air-tight as possible with caulk and new windows, etc!

And honestly the whole deal makes me more convinced that the BEST way to heat your home with wood is an OUTDOOR furnace that doesn't threaten your structure in the way that an inside fire inherently does AND delivers the heat via pipes spread through your foundation just like in a geothermal design.

 

[RRJ22]

For some reason, OAK's seem like politics and religion... everyone has their own idea and want to convert everyone else to their point of view! Personally, I have an OAK, and it makes a big difference in perceived comfort in my old, drafty house. On the other hand, my father heats without an OAK, and his house is also comfortable. Like you, it makes sense to me that if energy efficiency is achieved by sealing up drafts, then an OAK would solve any potential negative pressure situations.

As to smoke going the wrong way, I guess I just don't get how a properly sized chimney and a hot stove could somehow reverse directions and send smoke out the OAK.

Good luck with whatever you decide!

 

[Backwoods Savage]

I have a new Jotul F100 wood stove coming.

Was wondering if their optional "fresh air kit" was a good idea.

I just read a pretty big thread discussion on here about how air moves in a house when heated with a wood stove.

I am a total newbie to wood stoves but it seems to me that the optimal situation is for your fire to be fed with air/oxygen from the OUTSIDE of your house if at all possible.

That would totally negate the negative air pressire created by your stove sucking up air from the INSIDE of your house (which in turn pulls in cold outside air through leaky windows and doors), would it not?

I am sure that a lot of you veterans who who have been happily heating your homes with wood stoves for years without a "fresh air kit" might have a built-in prejudice against the idea, but seriously would it not be a BETTER situation for your stove to be drawing outside air?

It just seems commonsense to me that the outside air would be better, simply an extension of the fact that a totally open fireplace is a horrible way of trying to heat your home because it is sucking huge amounts of your inside air up the chimney and creating that negative pressure situation which ends up sucking outside air into your house through leaky windows and doors, etc.

Obviously a well-designed wood stove handles the air intake situation MUCH more efficiently than an open fireplace, but alas it still does feed itself with inside air.

The outside air feeding into your stove via a fresh air kit will be much colder than the inside air - does that become a key factor in weighing the worthiness of the idea?

It might be better, it might not. We've ran stoves both ways and I prefer to not have the OAK if you can get along without it. Some say it is because without it the draft in the house is more noticeable but we have not found that to be an issue. I will say that the most problem I ever had with back puffing was when we had the OAK. But, they do still have their place otherwise there would not be so many people have them and like them.

 

[LLigetfa]

I will say that the most problem I ever had with back puffing was when we had the OAK.

I am an advocate for OAKs but I always maintain the assertion that an OAK is not a cure for pack puffing. Back puffing needs to be addressed differently and an OAK can in fact exacerbate back puffing.

 

[Backwoods Savage]

Holy cow. Someone actually agreed with me on that point! Thanks LLigetfa.

 

[Hardrockmaple]

I'm sure someone will find fault with my outside air supply idea but, hey, it works for me......

I ran a 4 in. SS line from the side of my house to within 2 ft. from the back of the stove (there is no OAK available for my stove). Because my basement is not finished this was easy. I ran the pipe through the joists, wrapped the first 6 ft. from the wall with insulation, installed a brass register in the floor boot (closed in the summer/open in the winter).

Works well for me. Fire now has its air and I have mine. Running the fan over the kitchen stove (which exhausts outside) makes no difference.

Another idea here.
http://www.condar.com/asv.html

Hope this helps.

 

[LLigetfa]

I'm sure someone will find fault with my outside air supply idea but, hey, it works for me.......

Not finding fault with with the idea per se, only with the nomenclature. What you describe is a make-up air supply and not really an OAK. An OAK connects directly to the stove and forces the stove to use the outside air. Your solution provides the whole house with air, some of which the stove then takes. I advocate both an OAK and make-up air to the home.

 

[Huskyforlife]

My insert draws air from a clean-out in my fireplace, which goes down into the unconditioned basement. It works pretty well, I've never had any issues with draftiness in the room where the insert is.

 

[Hardrockmaple]

I'm sure someone will find fault with my outside air supply idea but, hey, it works for me.......

Not finding fault with with the idea per se, only with the nomenclature. What you describe is a make-up air supply and not really an OAK. An OAK connects directly to the stove and forces the stove to use the outside air. Your solution provides the whole house with air, some of which the stove then takes. I advocate both an OAK and make-up air to the home.

If you read my post closely you will note I never called it an OAK, my term was, "outside air supply idea".

rgds.