RE: FirefighterJake screws up . . . and breaks one of Brother Bart's Cardinal Rules . . . which is w
- Thread starter firefighterjake
- 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
Flatbedford said:
The thing isn't adding a split or two along the way. It is having a load of hot coals and packing a fresh overnight load on top of them in a five hundred or so degree stove. The immediate outgassing drives the stove temp to the moon.
Flatbedford said:
I do the same. I add splits to maintain temps when I want to. I don't burn 24/7 or in cycles. I don't know if there is anything really wrong with doing it that way, but I haven't had any major problems so far.
OK I have my stove in my garage, which I run 24/7 and only a couple times did it get a little hairy for me (i am a new burner on my 4th year now - still learning) I have about 5 or 6 large fire extinguishers with in easy grabbing distance as well as my water hose...
If things got out of hand, what would happen if i hit the stove with cold tap water? Of course I wouldnt be standing right next to it, but in a 'emergency' outside of calling 911.. what would happen?
A couple people have said that the stove could explode....
If things got out of hand, what would happen if i hit the stove with cold tap water? Of course I wouldnt be standing right next to it, but in a 'emergency' outside of calling 911.. what would happen?
A couple people have said that the stove could explode....
Ducky said:
A lot of steam and a very real possibility of cracking the stove. You need to take care of what is happening in the firebox. Not outside of it.
I like the idea of reduceing the secondary air but not totaly closing it off, pulling oxygen down the chimney and the stove gases ignite scares the hell out of me, maybe cover the secondary air 3/4 or so makes more sense?
Ducky said:
If it is cast iron like mine, it would crack like an egg and then smoke and steam would fill the house, or garage in your case. Also, you would have a new set of clearances for combustibles that would come into play. A steel stove would warp due to uneven thermal contraction. Cold water and hot metal don't mix.
The key is to slow down the combustion in the firebox without damaging the stove. If you have an abundance of fuel and heat, then you have to kill the oxygen. That is why folks are talking about stuffing alum foil in the air intake.
Flatbedford said:
In my old cat stove, I used to top off a hot stove regularly before turning in for the night. Most of the time, I was OK. I think because I could shut down the air completely, and I did use marginally seasoned oak. The new EPA non-cat stove, you do not have control of the secondary air, short of stuffing an alum foil ball in the secondary air intake or OAK, if you have one.
But the last year of my non-cat stove, I do remember a situation where the stove was heating up even though the air was completely shut down. I think that this was an indicator that my cast iron plates needed to be resealed, i.e., it was not close to being an "air-tight stove."
Reloading in mid-cycle was a bad habit I had to break when I got the new stove. Funny thing is that the guy at the stove shop said that I should not worry about over-firing the stove. He said the only way to do that would be using the ash pan door for air for too long (no-no to use ash pan door at all) or filling it up with kiln dried 2x4s. I think reloading a hot stove in middle of the burn cycle is pushing the limit.
Tin foil with a hole or 2 in it?oldspark said:
Dammit this thread is making me want to find the 2'ndary air inlet in my Regency I-2400 insert. Since it must require removing either the surround or the blower I doubt i could do it during a run-away anyway. Guess I'd have to stick with closing the primary air, blower on full & hold my breath 'till things settle down.
I don't suppose those chimney fire supressants would do anything for a run-away?
Why not fix your air control so it shuts completely off? I know in order for a stove to pass EPA clean burning standards the manufacture rigs their air controls open a hair but in some cases this could turn into a safety concern. Can't be too dificult to grind off those tabs that keep the air open.
Good idea that. As I understand it though, not all manufacturers do it that way. My Regency is made in Canada & many are sold there so EPA Regs don't always apply. I believe Regency added an extra hole to my U.S model that's always open (or was until I blocked it to get rid of an annoying howl).Todd said:
Todd said:
Oh come on Todd. We know nobody would ever do something like that.
PS: It almost always is unrestricted air inlets designed into the stove, not a restriction on the primary control. But people that mess with those things have to realize that you do not shut the primary air down completely. Ever.
midwestcoast said:
Separate air intake from the primary air - so the primary air control has no effect on secondary air. Isn't it against the law to alter the stove so as to be able to shut off the secondary air?
(Not that the EPA can do much about it while its in your home). But it does probably render the stove to no longer be EPA certified, and therefore, not in compliance with local code for stoves in many parts of the country.Of course, in an emergency runaway situation, the first law is save the people, save the house, and don't damage the stove in that order.
Also, under normal operating conditions, you want the secondary air, as designed, to achieve the efficiencies, reduce the creosote, and provide the light show. The low air sucking noise is a small price to pay.
One hundred and ten percent of the time the problem isn't unrestricted secondary air. It is unrestricted primary air feeding the inferno. To pass the EPA cert test the stove makers can't let you shut down primary all the way. Because the Method 28 criteria requires them to shut the primary control all the way down and still burn clean.
The EPA doesn't care if you burn your house down. As long as the stove was burning clean when it did it.
The EPA doesn't care if you burn your house down. As long as the stove was burning clean when it did it.
Well, I am pretty sure it's just an additional primary air inlet that I blocked, not secondary, so I don't see the EPA officers busting me. I get the light show as normal. It's an "idiot hole" IMO. Put there so that no uninformed, non HDC-reading user shuts the air off completely each night before bed thinking the fire will glow nicely through the night. I never close the air off completely.Green Energy said:Separate air intake from the primary air - so the primary air control has no effect on secondary air. Isn't it against the law to alter the stove so as to be able to shut off the secondary air?
Also, under normal operating conditions, you want the secondary air, as designed, to achieve the efficiencies, reduce the creosote, and provide the light show. The low air sucking noise is a small price to pay.
If it was just a low air sucking noise I wouldn't have even bothered to find where it was coming from. We're talking more like the first sounds someone might make when attempting to learn the French Horn. Other owners of the same model have posted here about it & how to solve it quick & simple with a magnet, for which I thank them.
BB, you say I should never close the air completely with this mod, even during overfire? Danger of backdraft even if 2'ndary air is unrestricted?
midwestcoast said:
Yep, I am the magnet guy. And no you don't close it all the way down. Gotta have some flame to feed the gases to those tubes up top. Essentially what you are doing is turning a EPA stove into a pre-EPA stove with secondary burn. Shut off all the primary air and some time later you are going to have a smoldering pile of crap in the bottom of the firebox. And not enough heat and a chimney that you ain't gonna like looking down.
If you feel the burning, pun intended, need to close the primary all the way down. Leave it alone like it was designed. And let the unrestricted inlet go its job.
why not close off all the air during a runaway? close off the air, close all the damper and let the sucker burn itself out
firefighterjake said:
That sounds like flying a plane--you don't compensate for where you are now, but where you'll be soon.
Ducky said:
That is the genesis of this discussion. With the new EPA stoves - even if you slam the controls all the way off, there is still a regulated (by EPA) amount of air feeding the fire.
Semipro said:
I was a bit concerned about that myself Semipro . . . which is why I didn't use much newspaper or have it soaking wet . . . that said . . . not that there will be a next time . . . but if there was . . . I would most definitely remember to cover the air inlet.
oldspark said:
Yes . . . although in fairness I suspect there would still be enough air to prevent this from happening . . . and if one were worried they could always allow some air to pass through . . . just block the majority of the incoming air with the foil.
BrotherBart said:
+1 to this statement . . . I would think dousing the stove with water would make things worse . . . much worse. As Bart says . . . deal with the issue in the stove . . . and ideally . . . deal with it in a proactive, preventative way by learning from my dumb mistake and not doing what I did.
BrotherBart said:
Thanks, but I think you missed exactly what I was asking. As I said, I never close the air all the way, for the reasons you stated. What I'm asking is: During an active overfire, and given the blocked inlet, should I keep the air cracked open to avoid a backdraft? Even though secondary air is still open?
- Status
Similar threads
