Some said the "Denniswood" was 6% or less last fall. We did not notice any problems when it was placed in two different stoves.
moisture content makes such a difference.
- Thread starter valley ranch
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
- Status
Just one more case of different readings different folks come up with using the same piece of wood. Surely makes one think strongly about the MM's and their readings.
Several tested it with MM and then Battenkiller went to work with his "scientific analysis. There were some interesting results if you care to go back and read the posts. Some MM could not get a reading. Some got 6% some got higher, etc. I simply said it was dry and would burn nicely.....and it did.
Did you click the link I posted, BK checked with with a MM and also weighed it and it was not 6% by any means.cptoneleg said:
krex1010 said:
From my experience, I'd have to call BS on that. Sorry, but it's that far astray. Try as I might, and I try mightily, I've NEVER been able to get any wood too dry. The drier it gets, the quicker it lights, and on refills, the quicker it settles down to a throttled burn that will not have flames go out. Maybe you're basing your numbers on a particular stove or stoves that can't properly control primary draft?
Most splits I bring in are around 15%, and I roast them down some near the stove. Some really close to zero on my MM, probably ~5%.
Cooking water vapor to go up the pipe never seemed to be a great idea, since water is a really crappy fuel.
Do you have any reference for your allegations, that can be corroborated? (Yes, I've heard what BK alleged, and did not find it had "legs." And it was easy to provide counter-examples here.)
I get it BWS, you hate MM's and nothing isnt going to change your mind, when a new wood burner comes on here and needs to find some of the dryest wood he can as quick as he can a good bit of advice is a MM, they work well as most posts about them agree, not sure what you are talking about with the bad readings. So we like to give good advice to newbies and all your doing is raining on the parade. As far as this subject is concered I'm out.Backwoods Savage said:
CTYank
Wood cannot be too dry to burn, yes wood that has under 5% mc will take off and burn like a freight train. The issue with super dry wood is that it doesn't burn clean. Off gassing occurs so quickly that secondary combustion cannot keep up and gas and particulates are forced up your flue. Those gasses and particulates are potential fuel that is lost. Yes those lost btus will have to be weighed against the btus required to vapors the moisture in slightly wetter wood. But that slightly wetter wood ( and I am talking about wood in the 8-20% mc range) will have a more complete combustion and will foul your chimney less than wood with mc close to zero. Super dry wood also greatly increases the risk of overfire in your stove. I believe most manufacturers warn against burning the amounts of super dry wood. I will look for some documentation to back up what I am saying.
Wood cannot be too dry to burn, yes wood that has under 5% mc will take off and burn like a freight train. The issue with super dry wood is that it doesn't burn clean. Off gassing occurs so quickly that secondary combustion cannot keep up and gas and particulates are forced up your flue. Those gasses and particulates are potential fuel that is lost. Yes those lost btus will have to be weighed against the btus required to vapors the moisture in slightly wetter wood. But that slightly wetter wood ( and I am talking about wood in the 8-20% mc range) will have a more complete combustion and will foul your chimney less than wood with mc close to zero. Super dry wood also greatly increases the risk of overfire in your stove. I believe most manufacturers warn against burning the amounts of super dry wood. I will look for some documentation to back up what I am saying.
Came in handy for me this year. Everyone I supply was about out of wood, and I got a late start splitting and stacking for this season. I cut mostly dead or dying trees, and the meter allowed me to separate drier sections of the trees into stacks for 2011 and leave the rest for 2012 and beyond. Trying to separate all of that stuff by feel is harder to do and the sound can fool ya sometimes...oldspark said:
cptoneleg said:
I have a cabin and we store wood inside around our stove all year long( which I hate doing but other guys bring it in) I checked a piece of wood once, was seasoned two years outside and then spent a year inside, and the mc was 8%. So I don't believe that three weeks inside will get wood to 0%.
oldspark said:
There is very little in this world that I hate and MM is not one of them. I just happen to think it is just another toy that too many people put too much faith in and it really irks me when someone "tests" their wood with a MM and are dumbfounded because they get so much creosote in their chimney. But go ahead and give the advice to others if you feel it necessary.
In now way do I feel I am raining on anyone's parade. Not even trying to take candy from a baby. What I am doing is what I feel is the very best way to make sure you have good wood. If I burned wood and then cleaned creosote from the chimney and had problems getting fires to burn right then that would convince me that I was doing something wrong. I had never even considered anyone might use a MM to check firewood! That tool I never knew would get used in this way. I learned many moons ago that if you want good firewood you simply cut it ahead of time and just allow it to dry. Notice I did not say "force" it to dry like some claim to do by stacking wet wood near the stove so it can dry.
If I am giving advice to a new wood burner then I plan on giving advice so that he gets the best knowledge on how to do things. I do not believe in shortcuts when it comes to wood burning and teaching folks that they can burn green or even marginal wood is wrong in my book. I could come up with many analogies but won't because I am certain many have enough intelligence they can come up with their own. Naturally the one that comes up most is putting poor fuel in their car or tractor or truck or whatever engine. Poor fuel equals a very poor burn there and will produce the very same thing in a wood stove. Therefore I will continue to give the advice that I feel is the best. In addition to teaching them right, they won't even have to spend extra dollars on a meter.
Not sure why recomending a MM equates to burning green wood but if it makes you happy I am all for it.
Please do not stretch it any more. Just read what was written and what has already been posted on this forum many times. What has been written is already enough and we do not want this to turn into a pissing match nor do we want the moderators closing this thread. They already have twitchy fingers.
They just spent at least $2000 on a stove and chimney, they'll just have to wait an extra day to break even burning wood. :smirk: Or they might save themselves a lot of headaches that first year by using the meter to obtain some burnable wood. They might even be able to find some dry dead wood that they can use and avoid buying as much the first year, recouping the outlay for the meter. I'll still use mine to see if I can burn stuff that I've just cut, even though I already have dry wood for next season, in case it's something different (what's the hearth record for different species burned in one season?) :cheese: And I'd like to see how good I can get at estimating dryness in different woods, as I cut them or in the stack. :coolsmile:Backwoods Savage said:
I can send you a PM but I am not stretching anything and I think my posts bear that out.Backwoods Savage said:
Since this post is about moisture content making such a difference I want to add that for the person who buys firewood (we have all read the horror stories) and the person who has just installed his new wood burner and has no wood, you cant go wrong with using a MM for just those two reasons. Might save some posts about "my wood burner wont work" and I have this wood that is "seasoned" for a year. Stick a MM in it and go from there.
Sorry Dennis, but I gota agree with oldspark on this. A MM is the best tool I know for measuring the moisture content of wood, period. Just like a stove thermometer is the best tool I know of for measuring the temperature of your stove. Sure they both cost a few dollars, and neither one is totally accurate, but they are accurate enough for our purposes, and they certainly help newbies (or anyone) gauge what going on with their stove, and their wood. (How's that for an "analogy"?)
I'm sure everybody would love to be 3 years ahead in their wood supply as you advocate, but that's not realistically feasible for many people, especially those who live on small lots (like me), or those just getting into the game, or people who move frequently, or rent, etc.... Not everybody is privileged or stable enough to have their own wood lot, and own acres of land to store years and years worth of wood, so they have to find other means of securing dry wood, and in that quest for dry wood many wood burners would benefit having whatever tools are available to them, whether they are buying wood, or scrounging it, or whatever.
You stated " I do not believe in shortcuts when it comes to wood burning and teaching folks that they can burn green or even marginal wood is wrong in my book".
That statement really sounds like you equate the use of a MM to some kind of "shortcut" to proper clean wood burning, and yet, having a MM and understanding how, and why, to use it could (would) prevent a lot of people from burning wood that is green or marginal.
To touch back on my thermometer analogy, if someone has a thermometer on their stove, they are going to look at it, and when they do it won't take them long to realize there is a "correct" temperature range in which their stove should be burning at. Too high a temperature and they could damage their stove and flue, too cold a temp and they won't get a clean burn, leading to excess creosote in their chimney. I'm sure you or I could easily burn clean fires in our stoves without our thermometers now that we have years of experience, but that's not the case with new wood burners or someone buying a new stove. I've been contemplating getting a catalytic stove (never had one before), if I do get one I know I'll want to read the stove manual and have a stove thermometer on the stove to get an accurate handle on things until I'm sure I'm doing it right.
The same goes for firewood, there is a "correct" moisture range that the wood should be in order to have clean burns, a moisture meter is going to help people see if the wood they have, or are about to acquire, is within that range. Applying that knowledge is what will prevent them from burning "green or marginal wood".
Think about it, it's generally the people who are oblivious to the moisture content of their wood who are the ones burning green or marginal wood, not the ones armed with the proper tools and knowledge. Wouldn't you agree?
I'm sure everybody would love to be 3 years ahead in their wood supply as you advocate, but that's not realistically feasible for many people, especially those who live on small lots (like me), or those just getting into the game, or people who move frequently, or rent, etc.... Not everybody is privileged or stable enough to have their own wood lot, and own acres of land to store years and years worth of wood, so they have to find other means of securing dry wood, and in that quest for dry wood many wood burners would benefit having whatever tools are available to them, whether they are buying wood, or scrounging it, or whatever.
You stated " I do not believe in shortcuts when it comes to wood burning and teaching folks that they can burn green or even marginal wood is wrong in my book".
That statement really sounds like you equate the use of a MM to some kind of "shortcut" to proper clean wood burning, and yet, having a MM and understanding how, and why, to use it could (would) prevent a lot of people from burning wood that is green or marginal.
To touch back on my thermometer analogy, if someone has a thermometer on their stove, they are going to look at it, and when they do it won't take them long to realize there is a "correct" temperature range in which their stove should be burning at. Too high a temperature and they could damage their stove and flue, too cold a temp and they won't get a clean burn, leading to excess creosote in their chimney. I'm sure you or I could easily burn clean fires in our stoves without our thermometers now that we have years of experience, but that's not the case with new wood burners or someone buying a new stove. I've been contemplating getting a catalytic stove (never had one before), if I do get one I know I'll want to read the stove manual and have a stove thermometer on the stove to get an accurate handle on things until I'm sure I'm doing it right.
The same goes for firewood, there is a "correct" moisture range that the wood should be in order to have clean burns, a moisture meter is going to help people see if the wood they have, or are about to acquire, is within that range. Applying that knowledge is what will prevent them from burning "green or marginal wood".
Think about it, it's generally the people who are oblivious to the moisture content of their wood who are the ones burning green or marginal wood, not the ones armed with the proper tools and knowledge. Wouldn't you agree?
- Status
Similar threads
