Fuel quality/consumption: Everyone's arguments regarding fuel and its calorific content are consistent with facts/statistics/science.....I'll be the first to admit that I'm bucking the tide on this issue.....Hopefully, the design/construction of the rocket unit will get me close to that "1/4 cord goal"....The 20% duty cycle I mentioned is an absolute worst case scenario....Previous test firings indicated that the heat banks (primary and secondary) effectively retain/radiate for almost 3 hours once the fires are extinguished.....After 2 hours of downtime, the outer casing of the rocket unit registered 250 F in an ambient environment of 75 deg. F.....How this will all shake out remains to be seen....For testing, the heat will be force-ducted from the test cell (10' X 15' plenum chamber) into my 750 SF office area which is moderately insulated....I plan to have Bermuda shorts as well as my woolies and a parka handy during the testing phase just to cover all the bases.
Best regards to all,
chief72
I think you might be missing jebatty's point. No matter how long the metal of the stove feels "hot" after the burn, at 1/4 cord over 6 months his calculated 1400 btu/hr is all he heat you are delivering to the room. I know SC is a very mild climate but even there I dont think 1400 BTU is going to come anywhere close to enough for 750ft2. That about as much heat as your typical home theater setup or powerful desktop PC throws off!
The laws of physics still apply, this thing cannot deliver any more heat to the room than what is liberated from the wood fuel burned, and a quarter cord is very little fuel.