Trying to monitor temps and avoid over firing Hearthstone Heritage

[coal2wood]

Hey everyone! Just had a new Hearthstone Heritage installed and am getting acquainted with burning it properly. So far, I have put a thermometer on the iron plate in the middle top of the stove. I have it set up to vent out the rear so there is a nice round piece of iron where the top mount vent would go. I have tried to keep that temp around 500-550. The stove doesn't seem to put out much heat. I had been burning a VC Encore Cat type stove and it heated my 2200 square foot home without breaking a sweat. So my main question is this, is there a difference between the temp on the area where I currently have my thermometer and the stone top? I did find a thermometer on Amazon that is designed to go on the stone to monitor temp. That should be here in a couple days. Until then I'm hoping to get some advice from anyone with experience with this type of stove. Thanks for any help!

 

[webby3650]

I used to have a Hearthstone.. and I install them all the time.
Soapstone makes a wonderful insulator! Unfortunately a stove needs to radiat heat. So, much heat is lost up the chimney while delivering a “softer” heat. It works well for some people, not for others with older homes or that are used to an iron or steel stove.

 

[boleary]

You should move the thermometer to the center of the center front soap stone. I run my Heritage around 375 - 400 degrees as measured from this stone. Hearthstone recommends monitoring the temp from that center front stone. I live in a 2100 sq ft, three story,1893 Victorian and am able to comfortably heat the entire house with the stove. All the windows were replaced seven years ago. Third floor is a bit cool but that's where the man cave AV room is and I like it that way. I have a bit of a love/hate relationship with this stove. I recently posted
this: https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads/hearthstone-heratage-carberator-maintenance.166030/

Haven't gotten any replies. To burn hot this stove requires well seasoned hard wood.

 

[Highbeam]

I put 30 cords through my last stove, a hearthstone heritage. Top vented and temps monitored on the top center stone. I always kept it under the 550 or whatever the manual required. Don’t measure the iron lid, measure the stone.

It heated my 1963 built 1700 sf just fine in the single digit outside temps. Plenty of power.

 

[coal2wood]

Well, I've been burning the Heritage using both thermometers and can pretty easily regulate the temps. Still not getting much or enough heat out of it. Kinda wishing I had bought the Quadrant Fire Explorer 2 that was my second choice. Oh well, I suppose it's a first world problem.

 

[electrathon]

Soapstone is a great insulator. Your heat is sealed inside the stove till it exits up the chimney. Some of it slowly absorbs into the stone, then it is released into the room. If you want soft, gentle heat, soapstone is great. if you want a warm home, there are far better choices. Force feed it wood, a lot of wood, and it will be a little better. I am convinced that the majority of heat that I get out of my stove (into the house, not up the chimney) comes through the glass. It is very pretty though. Soapstone is form over function.

 

[Dairyman]

Well, I've been burning the Heritage using both thermometers and can pretty easily regulate the temps. Still not getting much or enough heat out of it. Kinda wishing I had bought the Quadrant Fire Explorer 2 that was my second choice. Oh well, I suppose it's a first world problem.

How hot are you getting it?

 

[Joyboy]

I don’t agree. My Woodstock progress has an 81 percent efficiency rating. It has two layers of soapstone. It doesn’t mean all your heat is going out the flue. I know it’s a different stove but it has plenty of soapstone on it.

Soapstone is a great insulator. Your heat is sealed inside the stove till it exits up the chimney. Some of it slowly absorbs into the stone, then it is released into the room. If you want soft, gentle heat, soapstone is great. if you want a warm home, there are far better choices. Force feed it wood, a lot of wood, and it will be a little better. I am convinced that the majority of heat that I get out of my stove (into the house, not up the chimney) comes through the glass. It is very pretty though. Soapstone is form over function.

 

[electrathon]

I don’t agree. My Woodstock progress has an 81 percent efficiency rating. It has two layers of soapstone. It doesn’t mean all your heat is going out the flue. I know it’s a different stove but it has plenty of soapstone on it.

I think that those tests are done in perfect world situations. Sort of like the window sticker on a car saying that it gets 27 MPG but when you drive it you cant bey more than 19 MPG no matter how you drive. Soapstone is very slow to absorb heat, and very slow to release it. When a fire is built, the heat from the fire is going someplace, it will not linger inside the stove. It is either going into the room, or up the chimney, there are no other choices. If the stove was made from aluminum, it would absorb the heat fast from the fire and release it fast to the room. The more heat into the room, the less that is wasted. You can without a doubt heat a house with a soapstone stove. It does work, just not as well as other materials do when it comes to heat transfer. The huge advantage of soapstone is that it looks gorgeous. I think soapstone is like the prettiest girl in school. You finally convince her to go out with you and then find out that the wallflower girl is who you really are happy with. Someone does take the pretty girl home, then you find out about the high maintenance issues.

 

[Joyboy]

I think that those tests are done in perfect world situations. Sort of like the window sticker on a car saying that it gets 27 MPG but when you drive it you cant bey more than 19 MPG no matter how you drive. Soapstone is very slow to absorb heat, and very slow to release it. When a fire is built, the heat from the fire is going someplace, it will not linger inside the stove. It is either going into the room, or up the chimney, there are no other choices. If the stove was made from aluminum, it would absorb the heat fast from the fire and release it fast to the room. The more heat into the room, the less that is wasted. You can without a doubt heat a house with a soapstone stove. It does work, just not as well as other materials do when it comes to heat transfer. The huge advantage of soapstone is that it looks gorgeous. I think soapstone is like the prettiest girl in school. You finally convince her to go out with you and then find out that the wallflower girl is who you really are happy with. Someone does take the pretty girl home, then you find out about the high maintenance issues.

I agree that it’s a perfect world number. But it still surpasses many steel stoves in their perfect world number. Why aren’t all steel stoves at say, 90% then?

Soapstone is slow to heat up and cool down. In the beginning of a burn it is absorbing more heat and is transmitting less to the room. On the end of the burn it is absorbing less from the fire and transmitting more to the room. Doesn’t necessarily mean it’s an insulator, and is less efficient.

 

[electrathon]

I agree that it’s a perfect world number. But it still surpasses many steel stoves in their perfect world number. Why aren’t all steel stoves at say, 90% then?

Soapstone is slow to heat up and cool down. In the beginning of a burn it is absorbing more heat and is transmitting less to the room. On the end of the burn it is absorbing less from the fire and transmitting more to the room. Doesn’t necessarily mean it’s an insulator, and is less efficient.

I suspect if Heathstone rated all the steel stoves you would find their efficiency would go up.

A couple years back when my son was in college he was talking to me about heat transfer. His instructor had used a few different material examples as a bad material for heat transfer. They were using actual numbers of what different materials do, not a direct wood stove conversation, but insulator verses heat transfer qualities.

 

[Joyboy]

I suspect if Heathstone rated all the steel stoves you would find their efficiency would go up.

A couple years back when my son was in college he was talking to me about heat transfer. His instructor had used a few different material examples as a bad material for heat transfer. They were using actual numbers of what different materials do, not a direct wood stove conversation, but insulator verses heat transfer qualities.

https://www.hearth.com/talk/threads...nductivity-in-typical-stove-materials.102734/

This was an entertaining read on this subject. By the end, I think everyone agreed to disagree. Lol

I’ve derailed this thread enough. Back to the OP.

 

[yooper08]

Soapstone isn’t really an insulator, it just has higher thermal mass and less conductivity relative to steel. This means it takes more time for it to build up enough heat to start releasing it. It also means it will release the stored heat slower.

The efficiency numbers are a measure of BTUs provided by combustion and the BTUs transferred to the stove. What you guys are sort of talking about is a factor of time. Steel stoves, and if there were aluminum ones, absorb and release heat quickly due to their thermal properties. Soapstone stoves can still be efficient and release the same amount of BTUs as steel stoves, they just do so over longer periods of time.

Just because soapstone takes longer doesn’t mean that heat is wasted up the flue. You have convection taking place inside the stove, which transfers the heat built up in the air to the walls of the stove. This is where most of the efficiency comes in as well as being able to burn more smoke and gases, is how well can a stove take that energy from combustion and absorb it.

Think about it this way. If you had three stoves built exactly the same but one was soapstone, another cast iron, and another steel, they would all absorb and release the same amount of BTUs because the system has the same properties for losing heat. This also assumes everything else being equal such as flue, atmospheric conditions, etc. The only main difference between the three stoves though is when all of those BTUs get released.

 

[electrathon]

Soapstone isn’t really an insulator, it just has higher thermal mass and less conductivity relative to steel. This means it takes more time for it to build up enough heat to start releasing it. It also means it will release the stored heat slower.

The efficiency numbers are a measure of BTUs provided by combustion and the BTUs transferred to the stove. What you guys are sort of talking about is a factor of time. Steel stoves, and if there were aluminum ones, absorb and release heat quickly due to their thermal properties. Soapstone stoves can still be efficient and release the same amount of BTUs as steel stoves, they just do so over longer periods of time.

Just because soapstone takes longer doesn’t mean that heat is wasted up the flue. You have convection taking place inside the stove, which transfers the heat built up in the air to the walls of the stove. This is where most of the efficiency comes in as well as being able to burn more smoke and gases, is how well can a stove take that energy from combustion and absorb it.

Think about it this way. If you had three stoves built exactly the same but one was soapstone, another cast iron, and another steel, they would all absorb and release the same amount of BTUs because the system has the same properties for losing heat. This also assumes everything else being equal such as flue, atmospheric conditions, etc. The only main difference between the three stoves though is when all of those BTUs get released.

Joyboy said to stop discussing this, so this is my last post in this thread.

Your premise is flawed on heat transfer. If soapstone takes longer to heat than steel it absolutely means that the heat is going up the flu. You build a fire, it makes heat. The air is moving through the stove, the available heat is moved up the chimney. If the stove can latch onto the heat before it enters the chimney the stove warms up. The cooler the stove is the easier it can absorb the heat. The faster the stove can absorb heat the faster it can transfer heat. The stove is now warmer than the room. The heat now moves from the stove into the room, the easier it is to release the heat from the stove and into the room the faster the room warms, the more heat the stove can draw from the fire and the more the room is warmed.

The releasing of heat by soapstone at a very slow rate is also part of why they heat so poorly. If the stove is 400 degrees but has the properties of soapstone if holds the heat in at the same rate as it absorbs heat. Slow in, slow out, that is how it works. All of the heat that is not transferred to the room is transferred up the chimney.

If anyone thinks that a wood stove is 90 percent efficient simply needs to lay their hand on the stovepipe to learn otherwise. A thousand degree fire would have a flu temperature of 100 degrees to hit 90 percent (there are a few more factors involved but that is the basic idea).

I drank the cool-aid too when I bought my stove. I went into the stove store and bought "the best" stove available. It is awsome pretty. It puts out far less heat than my Blaze King Princess slammer insert from the mid 1980's did. It burns far more wood too. Much more wood, much less heat. It is awesome pretty though.