log burner
 

Hi, I am thinking of opening up a fireplace I bricked up in the small
living room and fitting a log burner in there, mainly due to the
number of power cuts we are having and also it should save some money,
we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance, so
with oil at 40p a litre we could do with cutting down.

with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)

I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion? that would be a downside as the loft is WELL insulated so
the roofspace would get the effects of the cold without the help of
rising heat from the house.

I also miss the open fire !!

log burner
 

On 21 Dec, 16:04, Staffbull wrote:
Hi, I am thinking of opening up a fireplace I bricked up in the small
living room and fitting a log burner in there, mainly due to the
number of power cuts we are having and also it should save some money,
we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance, so
with oil at 40p a litre we could do with cutting down.

with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)

I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion? that would be a downside as the loft is WELL insulated so
the roofspace would get the effects of the cold without the help of
rising heat from the house.

I also miss the open fire !!

I can't answer your chimney question, not my area. But the radiators
- you'll be able to gravity feed the upper hall one but I doubt you
will be able to do that with the lower one, unless your living room is
below the downstairs hall, so that would require a pump with all the
associated gubbins.

Also remember that if you are adding a heat source that the radiators
in the involved areas will require TMV's - and if you've made the same
mistake as me, you'll find that the radiators you want to upgrade
don't have isolators on them. In my case the TMV had gone faulty and
it was either drain down totally or have a fight fitting the isolators
using Arctic Spray ! Arctic Spray does work and actually in the
current weather conditions for over twice as long as the tin says.

The other way to go is to do the whole integration exercise and either
use a heatbank with two pairs of inlets, or fit a Dunsley Neutraliser
as a heat blending tank from both sources. What you can't do is just
to connect one to the other.

Rob

log burner
 

On 21 Dec, 16:31, robgraham wrote:
On 21 Dec, 16:04, Staffbull wrote:





Hi, I am thinking of opening up a fireplace I bricked up in the small
living room and fitting a log burner in there, mainly due to the
number of power cuts we are having and also it should save some money,
we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance, so
with oil at 40p a litre we could do with cutting down.

*with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)

I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion? that would be a downside as the loft is WELL insulated so
the roofspace would get the effects of the cold without the help of
rising heat from the house.

I also miss the open fire !!

I can't answer your chimney question, not my area. *But the radiators
- you'll be able to gravity feed the upper hall one but I doubt you
will be able to do that with the lower one, unless your living room is
below the downstairs hall, so that would require a pump with all the
associated gubbins.

Also remember that if you are adding a heat source that the radiators
in the involved areas will require TMV's - and if you've made the same
mistake as me, you'll find that the radiators you want to upgrade
don't have isolators on them. *In my case the TMV had gone faulty and
it was either drain down totally or have a fight fitting the isolators
using Arctic Spray ! *Arctic Spray does work and actually in the
current weather conditions for over twice as long as the tin says.

The other way to go is to do the whole integration exercise and either
use a heatbank with two pairs of inlets, or fit a Dunsley Neutraliser
as a heat blending tank from both sources. *What you can't do is just
to connect one to the other.

Rob- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

MMm sounds interesting, are you saying there is a way I can connect
the log burner to my current sealed CH system (oil combi boiler), if
there is that would be top banana!!

log burner
 

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:04:11 -0800 (PST), Staffbull wrote:

with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)

I'm fairly sure the regs these days say you need a double skinned liner
all the way to the top.

I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion?

Open vented more from safety than anything else, get a good fire going an
you'll be able to boil a cylinder of water in an evening... As you are
also looking at this being a backup system the thing will need to work
with gravity circulation not pumped or have any motorised valves. Gravity
means that a rad on the same floor as the boiler isn't likley to get
particulary warm let alone hot.

If you have an ordinary open vented CH system plumb it into the primary of
that via a Dunsley Neutraliser (or similar) and when you have power you
can heat your DHW and CH system saving oil. Without power you should still
have DHW and CH upstairs.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

log burner
 

On 21 Dec, 17:26, "Dave Liquorice" wrote:
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:04:11 -0800 (PST), Staffbull wrote:
with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)

I'm fairly sure the regs these days say you need a double skinned liner
all the way to the top.

I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion?

Open vented more from safety than anything else, get a good fire going an
you'll be able to boil a cylinder of water in an evening... As you are
also looking at this being a backup system the thing will need to work
with gravity circulation not pumped or have any motorised valves. Gravity
means that a rad on the same floor as the boiler isn't likley to get
particulary warm let alone hot.

If you have an ordinary open vented CH system plumb it into the primary of
that via a Dunsley Neutraliser (or similar) and when you have power you
can heat your DHW and CH system saving oil. Without power you should still
have DHW and CH upstairs.

--
Cheers * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Dave. * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * pam is missing e-mail

We have a sealed system here on the C/H, so I take it the neutraliser
is out.

I'm thinking of fitting just the two rads in the halls (up and down)
and using a pump for circulation, hassle would be thinking of running
pipes all the way up to the roofspace for a vent/expansion tank.

I take it a double skinned liner isnt going to be cheap :-(

log burner
 

On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 10:46:30 -0800 (PST), Staffbull wrote:

We have a sealed system here on the C/H, so I take it the neutraliser
is out.

I don't think sealed per se prevents the use of a neutraliser but the
combi does as you have no stored ho****er, thus nowhere to dump the heat
from the boiler when there is no demand. Combis, 'orrible things no power
= no hot water or CH and a failed water supply = no water.

I'm thinking of fitting just the two rads in the halls (up and down)
and using a pump for circulation,

You don't want the pump, the power goes, no circulation in log burners
boiler, it boils (may explode or suffer damage), to prevent that you have
to shut the log burner down sharpish just when you want it as your backup
heat source...

The loop from boiler to upper heat sink (rad or cylinder) needs to be free
flowing without pumps or valves. You could pump another loop down to the
lower rad though.

hassle would be thinking of running pipes all the way up to the
roofspace for a vent/expansion tank.

22mm vent and 15mm feed are probably easier than a 28mm gravity loop from
the boiler to the upper rad.

I take it a double skinned liner isnt going to be cheap :-(

Yep, but I'm not expert on what the regs say is required. Have a dig about
the web.

--
Cheers
Dave. pam is missing e-mail

log burner
 

Staffbull wrote:
Hi, I am thinking of opening up a fireplace I bricked up in the small
living room and fitting a log burner in there, mainly due to the
number of power cuts we are having and also it should save some money,
we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance, so
with oil at 40p a litre we could do with cutting down.

with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)


Youu would be daft not to totally reline.
With a double insulated flue at that. Keeps the flue inner hot and the
soot down. Stoves can burn mega hot. Much hotter than an open fire.



I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion? that would be a downside as the loft is WELL insulated so
the roofspace would get the effects of the cold without the help of
rising heat from the house.


I think you can use a closed system..not sure. There are pressure issues
if the thing boils..so its not trivial, but with appropiate safety
systems in place it should be no worse that a pressurised hpot water system



You can certainly use a pumped system, and probably get up to about
5-10KW total stove output. enough for a well insulated house.

The only downside of solid fuel is the massively labour intensive nature
of it. Its the day when you are in bed with a cold feeling like a
eunuchs limp dick, that the wood runs out, and the ash needs clearing..etc.

My wifes parents used to have a house with only a coal aga, and open
fires to heat..clammy bedclothes, up at 8 a.m. cos its too cold to stay
in bed..downstairs, bank up the aga with two scuttelfuls of coal,
fetched from an icy bunker..clear the ash and clinker, then collect some
kindling, split some logs and build a fire..9 am. almost time to have
breakfast. Forget a shower, There isn't one. Forget a bath, or there
will be no hot water for the next 3 hours..


I also miss the open fire !!

So do I, but I don't miss the hard work that goes with it. We have two
here and a stove. We light one when its really cold, mostly the CH takes
the strain tho.

log burner
 

Staffbull wrote:
On 21 Dec, 16:31, robgraham wrote:
On 21 Dec, 16:04, Staffbull wrote:





Hi, I am thinking of opening up a fireplace I bricked up in the small
living room and fitting a log burner in there, mainly due to the
number of power cuts we are having and also it should save some money,
we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance, so
with oil at 40p a litre we could do with cutting down.
�with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)
I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion? that would be a downside as the loft is WELL insulated so
the roofspace would get the effects of the cold without the help of
rising heat from the house.
I also miss the open fire !!
I can't answer your chimney question, not my area. �But the radiators
- you'll be able to gravity feed the upper hall one but I doubt you
will be able to do that with the lower one, unless your living room is
below the downstairs hall, so that would require a pump with all the
associated gubbins.

Also remember that if you are adding a heat source that the radiators
in the involved areas will require TMV's - and if you've made the same
mistake as me, you'll find that the radiators you want to upgrade
don't have isolators on them. �In my case the TMV had gone faulty and
it was either drain down totally or have a fight fitting the isolators
using Arctic Spray ! �Arctic Spray does work and actually in the
current weather conditions for over twice as long as the tin says.

The other way to go is to do the whole integration exercise and either
use a heatbank with two pairs of inlets, or fit a Dunsley Neutraliser
as a heat blending tank from both sources. �What you can't do is just
to connect one to the other.

Rob- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

MMm sounds interesting, are you saying there is a way I can connect
the log burner to my current sealed CH system (oil combi boiler), if
there is that would be top banana!!

Oh yes.. the old house here used to have such a system. Never worked out
how it worked tho. It wasn't SEALED tho. At the least you should be able
to kook up a gravity fed heat exchanger and preheat the water to the CH
system.

log burner
 

Staffbull wrote:
On 21 Dec, 17:26, "Dave Liquorice" wrote:
On Fri, 21 Dec 2007 08:04:11 -0800 (PST), Staffbull wrote:
with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)
I'm fairly sure the regs these days say you need a double skinned liner
all the way to the top.

I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion?
Open vented more from safety than anything else, get a good fire going an
you'll be able to boil a cylinder of water in an evening... As you are
also looking at this being a backup system the thing will need to work
with gravity circulation not pumped or have any motorised valves. Gravity
means that a rad on the same floor as the boiler isn't likley to get
particulary warm let alone hot.

If you have an ordinary open vented CH system plumb it into the primary of
that via a Dunsley Neutraliser (or similar) and when you have power you
can heat your DHW and CH system saving oil. Without power you should still
have DHW and CH upstairs.

--
Cheers � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � �
Dave. � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � � pam is missing e-mail

We have a sealed system here on the C/H, so I take it the neutraliser
is out.

I'm thinking of fitting just the two rads in the halls (up and down)
and using a pump for circulation, hassle would be thinking of running
pipes all the way up to the roofspace for a vent/expansion tank.

I take it a double skinned liner isnt going to be cheap :-(

About a grand. With fitting.
That sort of order,

log burner
 

Staffbull wrote:

we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance

Uh humm, are they *your* large woods? If so then by all means take the
wood, if not then you're stealing.

log burner
 

On 22 Dec, 01:42, (Steve Firth) wrote:
Staffbull wrote:
we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance

Uh humm, are they *your* large woods? If so then by all means take the
wood, if not then you're stealing.

They have days during the year they allow locals to collect fallen
wood, keeps their woods clear for free i suppose, goes back many
generations and is an old piece of local law if you like, the family
that own the estate date back and are related to Prince Llewelyn the
last "real" prince of Wales.

log burner
 

On 21 Dec, 16:04, Staffbull wrote:
Hi, I am thinking of opening up a fireplace I bricked up in the small
living room and fitting a log burner in there, mainly due to the
number of power cuts we are having and also it should save some money,
we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance, so
with oil at 40p a litre we could do with cutting down.

*with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)

I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion? that would be a downside as the loft is WELL insulated so
the roofspace would get the effects of the cold without the help of
rising heat from the house.

I also miss the open fire !!

See this

http://stovesonline.co.uk/stove_buil...gulations.html
Chris

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 03:18:01 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On 21 Dec, 16:04, Staffbull wrote:
Hi, I am thinking of opening up a fireplace I bricked up in the small
living room and fitting a log burner in there, mainly due to the
number of power cuts we are having and also it should save some money,
we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance, so
with oil at 40p a litre we could do with cutting down.

=A0with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)

I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion? that would be a downside as the loft is WELL insulated so
the roofspace would get the effects of the cold without the help of
rising heat from the house.

I also miss the open fire !!

See this

http://stovesonline.co.uk/stove_buil...gulations.html

Thats interesting, so it is not essential for building regs to line a
chimney before a stove is put in. I have friends who have a big old
chimney very similar to mine, they didnt line their chimney and it
works perfectly well with a woodburner

Anna
~ ~ Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England
|""""| ~ Lime plaster repair and conservation
/ ^^ \ // Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
|____| www.kettlenet.co.uk

log burner
 

Anna Kettle wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 03:18:01 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On 21 Dec, 16:04, Staffbull wrote:
Hi, I am thinking of opening up a fireplace I bricked up in the small
living room and fitting a log burner in there, mainly due to the
number of power cuts we are having and also it should save some money,
we live on the edge of a large woods, and timber is in abundance, so
with oil at 40p a litre we could do with cutting down.

=A0with fitting a log burner can I get away with putting a S- steel pipe
up a way (couple of metres up the chimmeny? or do I have to have it
all the way to the pot, or do I have to have the chimeney re lined
(currently red brick)

I have also seen them with small boilers attached, so could do with
one of these to fit a rad in the downstairs and upstairs halls, I take
it I would need to plumb it in using an open tank system for
expansion? that would be a downside as the loft is WELL insulated so
the roofspace would get the effects of the cold without the help of
rising heat from the house.

I also miss the open fire !!
See this

http://stovesonline.co.uk/stove_buil...gulations.html

Thats interesting, so it is not essential for building regs to line a
chimney before a stove is put in. I have friends who have a big old
chimney very similar to mine, they didnt line their chimney and it
works perfectly well with a woodburner


It certainly is if its a new flue, I was made to line mine.

Where does it say there that you do not need one?


It also does not mention flue heights above thatch either. Thats a
fairly crucial part of 'safe practice' for thatch.

I suspect that in the end its down to the BCO in an old house. If the
flue is ceramic lined and in good shape he may let you use it.

However being as two of our neighbours are voluntary firemen, the number
of fires started from solid fuel in bad stacks is an extremely large
part of their duties..and having had sister in laws house burn down due
to unsafe operation of an unattended wood fire..I am inclined to think
that a proper liner if there is ANY doubt, is something I would do
automatically.

I've set chimneys alight on more than one occasion too. Is your
brickwork capable of sustaining a red heat..how much timber is in
contact with it ?

No. double skinned insulated stainless steel flues. I am not interested
in what you *might* get away with legally.

;-)











Anna
~ ~ Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England
|""""| ~ Lime plaster repair and conservation
/ ^^ \ // Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
|____| www.kettlenet.co.uk

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:41:40 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

Thats interesting, so it is not essential for building regs to line a
chimney before a stove is put in.

That's right but the difficulty arises in proving that the existing
chimney meets regs without a liner, so an installer would be unsure to
sign off a flue installation plate.

I have friends who have a big old
chimney very similar to mine, they didnt line their chimney and it
works perfectly well with a woodburner

As did many chimneys before the new regs came in in 2000.

I fitted my wood burner (small Jotul) 30 years ago and it vents, via a
short 150mm enameled steel flue into a 220mm concrete lined chimney and
works fine. Doing the same job now I would probably opt for a 904
stainless 150mm liner with vermiculite insulation.

AJH

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:54:14 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Thats interesting, so it is not essential for building regs to line a
chimney before a stove is put in. I have friends who have a big old
chimney very similar to mine, they didnt line their chimney and it
works perfectly well with a woodburner

It certainly is if its a new flue, I was made to line mine.

Where does it say there that you do not need one?

Nowhere. But equally it doesnt say that you do need one

It also does not mention flue heights above thatch either. Thats a
fairly crucial part of 'safe practice' for thatch.

It mentions height above combustible surfaces like thatch in the 'flue
outlet heights' section

However being as two of our neighbours are voluntary firemen, the number
of fires started from solid fuel in bad stacks is an extremely large
part of their duties..

There are regular pictures of such cases in the Bury Free Press, but
every single one I have seen has been in a house with a thatched roof
which makes me extremely suspicious that the problem is not with the
flue but with sparks shooting out the top, in which case a chimney
with a liner could be worse than one without

So I'd like to know just what do your firemen mean by _bad stacks_?

and having had sister in laws house burn down due
to unsafe operation of an unattended wood fire..

But was that anything to do with the flue????

I am inclined to think
that a proper liner if there is ANY doubt, is something I would do
automatically.

Go on ... convince me! I'm interested in this cos I shall be putting a
woodburner in myself next summer and I dont want to do any unnecessary
work but on the other hand I dont want to be left with a dangerous
system either

I've set chimneys alight on more than one occasion too. Is your
brickwork capable of sustaining a red heat..

It sustained a red heat when the bricks were made so I suppose so

how much timber is in
contact with it ?

Some ...

No. double skinned insulated stainless steel flues. I am not interested
in what you *might* get away with legally.

hmmm. You might be right ... but then you might have just fallen for
the hype :-)

Anna
~ ~ Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England
|""""| ~ Lime plaster repair and conservation
/ ^^ \ // Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
|____| www.kettlenet.co.uk

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:05:32 +0000, andrew heggie
wrote:

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:41:40 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

Thats interesting, so it is not essential for building regs to line a
chimney before a stove is put in.

That's right but the difficulty arises in proving that the existing
chimney meets regs without a liner, so an installer would be unsure to
sign off a flue installation plate.

I shall be installing it myself so I dont care about that

I have friends who have a big old
chimney very similar to mine, they didnt line their chimney and it
works perfectly well with a woodburner

As did many chimneys before the new regs came in in 2000.

I fitted my wood burner (small Jotul) 30 years ago and it vents, via a
short 150mm enameled steel flue into a 220mm concrete lined chimney and
works fine. Doing the same job now I would probably opt for a 904
stainless 150mm liner with vermiculite insulation.

You are another person who would go for the insulated liner then ...

Anna
~ ~ Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England
|""""| ~ Lime plaster repair and conservation
/ ^^ \ // Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
|____| www.kettlenet.co.uk

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:45:22 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

You are another person who would go for the insulated liner then ...

For preference, yes and to get the flue signed off yes also. There can be
efficiency improvements as it means you can reject flue gas at a
lower temperature and still have an effective chimney, but the woodburner
would need to be designed with this in mind. In fact there are all sorts
of reasons why an insulated flue of the correct cross section is better,
the only drawback is that the flue tends to cost far more than the wood
burner.

Some types of woodburner, masonry stoves, actually use a massive fireplace
to absorb heat and then release it into the room slowly, these burn at a
very high power and wouldn't work with an insulated flue as they depend on
the flue passage as a heat exchanger, a bit like roman hypercausts.

AJH

log burner
 

Hi,

Soot buildup could be much more of a problem with unlined chimneys.

So for professional installers, lined insulated chimneys have much
more butt covering potential in case the chimney gets neglected.

Once a chimney fire gets going I wonder if it's easier to stop with a
stove rather than an open fire.

Maybe worth getting the opinion of an experienced chimney sweep, who
may favour something that needs more sweeping, but could have some
good advice.

cheers,
Pete.

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:42:52 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

However being as two of our neighbours are voluntary firemen, the number
of fires started from solid fuel in bad stacks is an extremely large
part of their duties..

There are regular pictures of such cases in the Bury Free Press, but
every single one I have seen has been in a house with a thatched roof
which makes me extremely suspicious that the problem is not with the
flue but with sparks shooting out the top, in which case a chimney
with a liner could be worse than one without

Maybe but consider also that wood will start to smoulder at 300C, so a
fire fuelled by tar and soot in the chimney could conduct heat
through 9 inches of brick. Also once the mortar has failed the flue gases
can pass through the chimney as well as letting more air in. A 904
stainless steel liner will survive gas tight to above 1200C for a short
while and 900C indefinitely so with a properly sealed register and good
air control on a stove all that's likely to happen is a cleaner chimney.

AJH

log burner
 

Anna Kettle wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 13:54:14 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

Thats interesting, so it is not essential for building regs to line a
chimney before a stove is put in. I have friends who have a big old
chimney very similar to mine, they didnt line their chimney and it
works perfectly well with a woodburner

It certainly is if its a new flue, I was made to line mine.

Where does it say there that you do not need one?

Nowhere. But equally it doesnt say that you do need one

It also does not mention flue heights above thatch either. Thats a
fairly crucial part of 'safe practice' for thatch.

It mentions height above combustible surfaces like thatch in the 'flue
outlet heights' section

However being as two of our neighbours are voluntary firemen, the number
of fires started from solid fuel in bad stacks is an extremely large
part of their duties..

There are regular pictures of such cases in the Bury Free Press, but
every single one I have seen has been in a house with a thatched roof
which makes me extremely suspicious that the problem is not with the
flue but with sparks shooting out the top, in which case a chimney
with a liner could be worse than one without

Nope. It seems that what is most common is a leaky stack inside the
thatch where you don't see it.

People point up where its visible, and can inspect teh loft, or smell
smoke.if the leak is inside..but if its inside the layer of thatch there
is no sign of the leak until the thing goes up.

Mostly you don't have fires in dry weather..sparks tend to go out on the
wet thatch. Not saying it doesn't happen,but the usual starting point is
underneath the wet stuff wheer its nice and dry.




So I'd like to know just what do your firemen mean by _bad stacks_?


What I have described. Where there is a leak in the stack and hot gasses
can escape sideways. Now that may not be a problem until and unless the
stack catches fire internally. At that point you have all the
ingredients for a disaster.


and having had sister in laws house burn down due
to unsafe operation of an unattended wood fire..

But was that anything to do with the flue????


No, that wasn't specifically. Although it was a contributory factor. The
main point was that any chance I have to reduce fire risk is worth
thousands to me. A grand on a flue liner in an unknown chimney is cheap
at twice the price.

I take it as read that a chimney WILL catch one day. I want hermetic
seals all the way up. Insulated flues are good in that they get very hot
very quickly and prevent soot condensing.




I am inclined to think
that a proper liner if there is ANY doubt, is something I would do
automatically.

Go on ... convince me! I'm interested in this cos I shall be putting a
woodburner in myself next summer and I dont want to do any unnecessary
work but on the other hand I dont want to be left with a dangerous
system either


Just ask yourself if you can guarantee that there is no place that you
can't see, with loose mortar, and assume that one day the thing will
catch fire..even if its only the pigeon that fell down it in the summer.

Now, do you feel lucky today? Every chimney fire I have had, has been
out inside if 5 minutes. *I* know what to do. I am less sure that my
wife does.

Or someone who might be tending the fire while we are out taking the
dogs for a walk..if indeed we didn't just leave the fire unattended.

Hey: It's your life and your house.


I've set chimneys alight on more than one occasion too. Is your
brickwork capable of sustaining a red heat..

It sustained a red heat when the bricks were made so I suppose so

how much timber is in
contact with it ?

Some ...

No. double skinned insulated stainless steel flues. I am not interested
in what you *might* get away with legally.

hmmm. You might be right ... but then you might have just fallen for
the hype :-)


No. I personally would have been happy with a flexible liner, but the
BCO said no, if it isn't clay block lined, its essentially doing
nothing. AND made us put fireproof board round it where the timbers hung
off it.

I am not renowned for being a fan of Elfin Safety, or silly regulations,
but where fire is concerned I have seen the devastation it causes, and I
am bang on or beyond all fire safety recommendations. Its the same with
cars. I've been motor racing too often to even THINK about driving
without a belt and strap on. I was even responsible for fire issues at
two of the companies I was director of..if you don't want the BCO
involved, go and talk to the local fire safety officer: I did. They will
be most helpful and are probably the least biased people where this is
concerned. They will spot the weak points.

You SHOULD IIRC go 2 meters above the thatch for spark safety. Which is
a pain in an existing listed property. I was lucky. I just stuck pots on
the stacks so it didn't look too ugly.

I've even got fireproof board on top of the roof, under the paper and
before the thatch..if the thatch goes, as long as the boys are there in
time, it shouldn't take the house with it..

If you ever do a complete strip and rethatch job, its not a huge extra
cost to do that. Every little helps.

Fire has not been a political hot potato: The Fire building regulations
have been developed by fire officers and engineers, not by politicians
and bureaucrats. To my mind they are sensible and well founded. Every
last inch of them. Flues, hearths, distances from stoves to combustible
materials, ventilation.

The principal is to work on the assumption that one day there will be an
uncontrolled or out of control fire. The essence of fire safety is first
of all to protect human life by slowing down the rate of progress,
raising the alarm, and making alternative ways out available, and
secondly to limit the scope of the fire to limit property damage.

Only then do you put the icing on the cake by dealing with issues that
may actually START an uncontrolled fire.

But you shouldn't rely on them.

Having a quality steel liner may help to reduce the chances of a stack
fire, but the real issue is that a stack fire just makes a lot of noise
and sparks, until you can damp down the fire and starve it of oxygen.
Then its just an exciting episode. If the stack leaks, you can't put it
out, and air can be drawn in to feed it and hot gasses can escape to
start secondary fires.

log burner
 

andrew heggie wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:45:22 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

You are another person who would go for the insulated liner then ...

For preference, yes and to get the flue signed off yes also. There can be
efficiency improvements as it means you can reject flue gas at a
lower temperature and still have an effective chimney, but the woodburner
would need to be designed with this in mind. In fact there are all sorts
of reasons why an insulated flue of the correct cross section is better,
the only drawback is that the flue tends to cost far more than the wood
burner.

Some types of woodburner, masonry stoves, actually use a massive fireplace
to absorb heat and then release it into the room slowly, these burn at a
very high power and wouldn't work with an insulated flue as they depend on
the flue passage as a heat exchanger, a bit like roman hypercausts.


Odd that. as the aga which is essentially that, was specified for an
insulated flue. Albeit of a lower spec than the wood burner.


AJH

log burner
 

Pete C wrote:
Hi,

Soot buildup could be much more of a problem with unlined chimneys.

So for professional installers, lined insulated chimneys have much
more butt covering potential in case the chimney gets neglected.

Once a chimney fire gets going I wonder if it's easier to stop with a
stove rather than an open fire.

Slightly.

The trick is to put the fire out quickly with water, and then block
the chimney.

Ive used a bucket of water for the first, and a couple of newspapers
over an open fire face for the second. This is the 'approved' method.
With a stove although its slightly harder to put the fire out, its a
damn sight easier to starve the airflow. Shut all dampers and doors.



Maybe worth getting the opinion of an experienced chimney sweep, who
may favour something that needs more sweeping, but could have some
good advice.

Regularly used flues with wood need sweeping annualy. maybe more with
unlined ones.

The one that I set alight three times in a row, was an open wood and
coal burner that had been swept about 18 months previously, but was the
second source of heat in the house apart from a coal aga.


The other one was similar, but hadn't been swept for several years


cheers,
Pete.

log burner
 

andrew heggie wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 16:42:52 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

However being as two of our neighbours are voluntary firemen, the number
of fires started from solid fuel in bad stacks is an extremely large
part of their duties..
There are regular pictures of such cases in the Bury Free Press, but
every single one I have seen has been in a house with a thatched roof
which makes me extremely suspicious that the problem is not with the
flue but with sparks shooting out the top, in which case a chimney
with a liner could be worse than one without

Maybe but consider also that wood will start to smoulder at 300C, so a
fire fuelled by tar and soot in the chimney could conduct heat
through 9 inches of brick. Also once the mortar has failed the flue gases
can pass through the chimney as well as letting more air in. A 904
stainless steel liner will survive gas tight to above 1200C for a short
while and 900C indefinitely so with a properly sealed register and good
air control on a stove all that's likely to happen is a cleaner chimney.


Do you feel lucky today ;-)

I think Anna's place is thatched..the sparks CAN be a bit of an
issue..if you have ever seen a stack fire you will know it looks like a
giant firework going off. HUGE draught and white hot flakes of soot
being blasted into the sky. If its a cold still dry day..they can and do
fall back down. No problem on slate or tile, but less than ideal on damp
thatch.




AJH

log burner
 

On 23 Dec, 16:45, (Anna Kettle) wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:05:32 +0000, andrew heggie

wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:41:40 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:

Thats interesting, so it is not essential for building regs to line a
chimney before a stove is put in.

That's right but the difficulty arises in proving that the existing
chimney meets regs without a liner, so an installer would be unsure to
sign off a flue installation plate.

I shall be installing it myself so I dont care about that

I have friends who have a big old
chimney very similar to mine, they didnt line their chimney and it
works perfectly well with a woodburner

As did many chimneys before the new regs came in in 2000.

I fitted my wood burner (small Jotul) 30 years ago and it vents, via a
short 150mm enameled steel flue into a 220mm concrete lined chimney and
works fine. Doing the same job now I would probably opt for a 904
stainless 150mm liner with vermiculite insulation.

You are another person who would go for the insulated liner then ...

Anna
* * * * * * ~ ~ * * * * * Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England *
*|""""| * *~ * * * * * Lime plaster repair and conservation
*/ ^^ \ // * *Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
*|____| * * * * * * * * * * * *www.kettlenet.co.uk

Dear Anna and Staffbull

1)
"The 2002 edition of Approved Document J of The Building Regulations
stipulates that any work that affects an existing chimney (ie fitting
a new stove or liner) or creating a new chimney now comes under
building control"
2)
"An existing chimney or a new flue or chimney installation must be
given a visual inspection to check that it is in good order, clear of
obstructions and is of a suitable size and type for the appliance you
plan to install. It may be necessary to sweep the flue (which should
always be done anyway before fitting a stove or lining a chimney) and
also, if necessary, to do a smoke test to check for gas tightness. "

As the wood burner is more efficient than on open fire I understand
from the literature (but may be wrong) that there is a much increased
risk of condensate of wood extractive then lining the flue and
becoming a fire risk in itself which is why double lined insulated
flues were invented and put in.

Generally speaking, I researched this and found that it would be at
LEAST twice the price of the stove to get it installed properly and
that I had to have a positive air supply which rather ruined my plans
for air tightness so I now have a normal fireplace and flue and keep
the flue closed when not in use

If you have access to lots of free wood and can store it on the
premises then go for it but it will cost and even if you do it
yourself you will need a helper to put in the liner and it will take
twice the time you think it will!
chris

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:51:35 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

I think Anna's place is thatched.

No its not and I think that is actually a blessing in disguise cos
though it may look pretty thatch is expensive to maintain and risky to
light fires underneath. The house used to be thatched until 1960 but
then it was given a new roof of concrete tiles. Must have been very
ugly initally but now they are covered in lichen and look ok

Anna

~ ~ Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England
|""""| ~ Lime plaster repair and conservation
/ ^^ \ // Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
|____| www.kettlenet.co.uk

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:40:40 +0000, The Natural Philosopher
wrote:

There are regular pictures of such cases in the Bury Free Press, but
every single one I have seen has been in a house with a thatched roof
which makes me extremely suspicious that the problem is not with the
flue but with sparks shooting out the top, in which case a chimney
with a liner could be worse than one without

Nope. It seems that what is most common is a leaky stack inside the
thatch where you don't see it.

People point up where its visible, and can inspect teh loft, or smell
smoke.if the leak is inside..but if its inside the layer of thatch there
is no sign of the leak until the thing goes up.

Yes I suppose that makes sense. If there is a tiled roof then the
hidden bit is much smaller, just where the flashing goes

No. I personally would have been happy with a flexible liner, but the
BCO said no, if it isn't clay block lined, its essentially doing
nothing. AND made us put fireproof board round it where the timbers hung
off it.

I am not renowned for being a fan of Elfin Safety, or silly regulations,
but where fire is concerned I have seen the devastation it causes, and I
am bang on or beyond all fire safety recommendations. Its the same with
cars. I've been motor racing too often to even THINK about driving
without a belt and strap on. I was even responsible for fire issues at
two of the companies I was director of..if you don't want the BCO
involved, go and talk to the local fire safety officer:

That sounds like a good idea. I'll do that

snip lots of interesting stuff

OK you might have convinced me :-)

Anna
~ ~ Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England
|""""| ~ Lime plaster repair and conservation
/ ^^ \ // Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
|____| www.kettlenet.co.uk

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 11:08:25 -0800 (PST), wrote:

As the wood burner is more efficient than on open fire I understand
from the literature (but may be wrong) that there is a much increased
risk of condensate of wood extractive then lining the flue and
becoming a fire risk in itself which is why double lined insulated
flues were invented and put in.

Generally speaking, I researched this and found that it would be at
LEAST twice the price of the stove to get it installed properly and
that I had to have a positive air supply
which rather ruined my plans
for air tightness

Can you elaborate? If the stove is small then regs say a vent is not
needed. Is that what you are talking about? My stove will largely be
for decoration and for enjoying the log fire and maybe boiling the odd
kettle so I thought I would just get a small stove, though I dont
think that putting in a vent will be difficult to do. Why did you want
it to be air tight?

BTW I have been told that the best places for a vent are high up in
the same room or low down and very close to the stove. Low down and
away from the stove produces draughts round the ankles

If you have access to lots of free wood and can store it on the
premises

Yes I can do that

then go for it but it will cost and even if you do it
yourself you will need a helper to put in the liner and it will take
twice the time you think it will!

Everything does! Especially things I have never done before and this
is a prime example. However I will have the advantage of a proper
scaffold in place cos I'm planning to repoint the stack and remove the
chimney pots at the same time

PS Anyone in the market for a couple of large Victorian chimney pots?

Anna


chris





~ ~ Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England
|""""| ~ Lime plaster repair and conservation
/ ^^ \ // Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
|____| www.kettlenet.co.uk

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:51:35 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Do you feel lucky today ;-)

If I didn't have bad luck I'd have no luck at all :-)

I think Anna's place is thatched..the sparks CAN be a bit of an
issue..if you have ever seen a stack fire you will know it looks like a
giant firework going off.

I was taking the point about sparks as being read. Yes I have had a
chimney fire and it was spectacular, 1974 IIRC. That was an open fire and
needed a fireman with a set of rods with a hose attached and a stirrup
pump in a bucket of water to extinguish, very messy. I wouldn't expect any
where near the same problem with a properly installed stove. The trouble
is that a normal sweeping will not dislodge much of the tar deposits.

AJH

log burner
 

On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:42:00 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Some types of woodburner, masonry stoves, actually use a massive fireplace
to absorb heat and then release it into the room slowly, these burn at a
very high power and wouldn't work with an insulated flue as they depend on
the flue passage as a heat exchanger, a bit like roman hypercausts.


Odd that. as the aga which is essentially that, was specified for an
insulated flue. Albeit of a lower spec than the wood burner.

The aga is massive but its flue is just a means of exhausting the gases,
there's no scope for getting more heat out of the flue gases so they
should not be cooled further, and as they are already quite cool they can
use a cheaper liner if fired on smokeless fuel, gas or oil. The aga I
mentioned earlier that would not draw simply did not have enough heat in
the flue gases to warm the massive chimney it was exhausting into, as well
as the other problems I mentioned.

The masonry fire is actually built into the chimney breast that then
becomes a "radiator" and thermal store, so the flue reaches high
combustion temperatures but is cooled by the massive structure. I'm not
familiar with them but I would expect the flue gases to actually leave the
top at a similar temperature to a conventional wood stove 150C.

AJH

log burner
 

andrew heggie wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:42:00 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Some types of woodburner, masonry stoves, actually use a massive fireplace
to absorb heat and then release it into the room slowly, these burn at a
very high power and wouldn't work with an insulated flue as they depend on
the flue passage as a heat exchanger, a bit like roman hypercausts.

Odd that. as the aga which is essentially that, was specified for an
insulated flue. Albeit of a lower spec than the wood burner.

The aga is massive but its flue is just a means of exhausting the gases,
there's no scope for getting more heat out of the flue gases so they
should not be cooled further, and as they are already quite cool they can
use a cheaper liner if fired on smokeless fuel, gas or oil. The aga I
mentioned earlier that would not draw simply did not have enough heat in
the flue gases to warm the massive chimney it was exhausting into, as well
as the other problems I mentioned.

The masonry fire is actually built into the chimney breast that then
becomes a "radiator" and thermal store, so the flue reaches high
combustion temperatures but is cooled by the massive structure. I'm not
familiar with them but I would expect the flue gases to actually leave the
top at a similar temperature to a conventional wood stove 150C.


No. You can put your hand on the stove pipe. It's nearer 60-70C. For an aga.

VERY efficient heater. More so than a condensing boiler IMO.



AJH

log burner
 

log burner
 

andrew heggie wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:51:35 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Do you feel lucky today ;-)

If I didn't have bad luck I'd have no luck at all :-)
I think Anna's place is thatched..the sparks CAN be a bit of an
issue..if you have ever seen a stack fire you will know it looks like a
giant firework going off.

I was taking the point about sparks as being read. Yes I have had a
chimney fire and it was spectacular, 1974 IIRC. That was an open fire and
needed a fireman with a set of rods with a hose attached and a stirrup
pump in a bucket of water to extinguish, very messy. I wouldn't expect any
where near the same problem with a properly installed stove. The trouble
is that a normal sweeping will not dislodge much of the tar deposits.


It dislodges the crud that burns. That much I know.


AJH

log burner
 

wrote:
On 23 Dec, 16:45, (Anna Kettle) wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 14:05:32 +0000, andrew heggie

wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 12:41:40 +0000, Anna Kettle wrote:
Thats interesting, so it is not essential for building regs to line a
chimney before a stove is put in.
That's right but the difficulty arises in proving that the existing
chimney meets regs without a liner, so an installer would be unsure to
sign off a flue installation plate.
I shall be installing it myself so I dont care about that

I have friends who have a big old
chimney very similar to mine, they didnt line their chimney and it
works perfectly well with a woodburner
As did many chimneys before the new regs came in in 2000.
I fitted my wood burner (small Jotul) 30 years ago and it vents, via a
short 150mm enameled steel flue into a 220mm concrete lined chimney and
works fine. Doing the same job now I would probably opt for a 904
stainless 150mm liner with vermiculite insulation.
You are another person who would go for the insulated liner then ...

Anna
� � � � � � ~ ~ � � � � � Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England �
�|""""| � �~ � � � � � Lime plaster repair and conservation
�/ ^^ \ // � �Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
�|____| � � � � � � � � � � � �www.kettlenet.co.uk

Dear Anna and Staffbull

1)
"The 2002 edition of Approved Document J of The Building Regulations
stipulates that any work that affects an existing chimney (ie fitting
a new stove or liner) or creating a new chimney now comes under
building control"
2)
"An existing chimney or a new flue or chimney installation must be
given a visual inspection to check that it is in good order, clear of
obstructions and is of a suitable size and type for the appliance you
plan to install. It may be necessary to sweep the flue (which should
always be done anyway before fitting a stove or lining a chimney) and
also, if necessary, to do a smoke test to check for gas tightness. "

As the wood burner is more efficient than on open fire I understand
from the literature (but may be wrong) that there is a much increased
risk of condensate of wood extractive then lining the flue and
becoming a fire risk in itself which is why double lined insulated
flues were invented and put in.

Generally speaking, I researched this and found that it would be at
LEAST twice the price of the stove to get it installed properly and
that I had to have a positive air supply which rather ruined my plans
for air tightness so I now have a normal fireplace and flue and keep
the flue closed when not in use


In my case it was about a grand to do two pipes..one downstairs from the
aga, one upstairs from a wood burner.


The air feed was accomplished by a 4" p[ipe into the loft for the
latter, and a underfloor vent of tow 4" pipes for the aga.



If you have access to lots of free wood and can store it on the
premises then go for it but it will cost and even if you do it
yourself you will need a helper to put in the liner and it will take
twice the time you think it will!
chris

log burner
 

Anna Kettle wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 11:08:25 -0800 (PST), wrote:

As the wood burner is more efficient than on open fire I understand
from the literature (but may be wrong) that there is a much increased
risk of condensate of wood extractive then lining the flue and
becoming a fire risk in itself which is why double lined insulated
flues were invented and put in.

Generally speaking, I researched this and found that it would be at
LEAST twice the price of the stove to get it installed properly and
that I had to have a positive air supply
which rather ruined my plans
for air tightness

Can you elaborate? If the stove is small then regs say a vent is not
needed. Is that what you are talking about? My stove will largely be
for decoration and for enjoying the log fire and maybe boiling the odd
kettle so I thought I would just get a small stove, though I dont
think that putting in a vent will be difficult to do. Why did you want
it to be air tight?

BTW I have been told that the best places for a vent are high up in
the same room or low down and very close to the stove. Low down and
away from the stove produces draughts round the ankles

If you have access to lots of free wood and can store it on the
premises

Yes I can do that

then go for it but it will cost and even if you do it
yourself you will need a helper to put in the liner and it will take
twice the time you think it will!

Everything does! Especially things I have never done before and this
is a prime example. However I will have the advantage of a proper
scaffold in place cos I'm planning to repoint the stack and remove the
chimney pots at the same time

Ideal. if the flues are straight you simply drop it from the top in
sections, and hold it there with a plate on the stack top.

The problems happen when you have cranked over stacks.


PS Anyone in the market for a couple of large Victorian chimney pots?


5 years too late. ;-)
Anna


chris





~ ~ Anna Kettle, Suffolk, England
|""""| ~ Lime plaster repair and conservation
/ ^^ \ // Freehand modelling in lime: overmantles, pargeting etc
|____| www.kettlenet.co.uk

log burner
 

On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:15:54 +0000, Huge wrote:

On 2007-12-23, andrew heggie wrote:

the flue passage as a heat exchanger, a bit like roman hypercausts.

Not a flame(!), but it's "hypocaust".

No it's christmas ;-) and I think you are right but:

Hypocaust would be the bit under the floor, I think the flue passages also
ran up the walls and I have seen a square flue wall tile described as a
hypercaust but that equally may have been wrong. I was describing a
vertical chimney breast that was designed to absorb heat and then slowly
release it to the room.

I know the derivation of hyper and hypo but whence "caust"? Caustic is
used to describe alkaline substances that burn. I'll have to remeber to
look one day.

AJH

log burner
 

On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 09:13:19 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

No. You can put your hand on the stove pipe. It's nearer 60-70C. For an aga.

I was comparing the chimney outlet of a masonry stove with that of a
conventional stove, not agas which I had earlier said had low temperature
flue gases,


VERY efficient heater. More so than a condensing boiler IMO.

:-) I've left my personal opinions of agas out of this....

AJH

log burner
 

On 24 Dec, 09:13, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
andrew heggie wrote:
On Sun, 23 Dec 2007 18:42:00 +0000, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

Some types of woodburner, masonry stoves, actually use a massive fireplace
to absorb heat and then release it into the room slowly, these burn at a
very high power and wouldn't work with an insulated flue as they depend on
the flue passage as a heat exchanger, a bit like roman hypercausts.

Odd that. as the aga which is essentially that, was specified for an
insulated flue. Albeit of a lower spec than the wood burner.

The aga is massive but its flue is just a means of exhausting the gases,
there's no scope for getting more heat out of the flue gases so they
should not be cooled further, and as they are already quite cool they can
use a cheaper liner if fired on smokeless fuel, gas or oil. The aga I
mentioned earlier that would not draw simply did not have enough heat in
the flue gases to warm the massive chimney it was exhausting into, as well
as the other problems I mentioned.

The masonry fire is actually built into the chimney breast that then
becomes a "radiator" and thermal store, so the flue reaches high
combustion temperatures but is cooled by the massive structure. I'm not
familiar with them but I would expect the flue gases to actually leave the
top at a similar temperature to a conventional wood stove 150C.

No. You can put your hand on the stove pipe. It's nearer 60-70C. For an aga.

VERY efficient heater. More so than a condensing boiler IMO.

AJH

I was dubious about your claim that agas are efficient, so I did a
little calculation. Assuming that a solid fuel aga requires the same
amount of energy whatever the fuel, aga suggest you need 47.5kg of
solid fuel to get 220kWh. Unless I've done something wrong, that makes
it about 70% efficient. That's pretty impressive for a slow burning
cooker!

T

log burner
 

On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 07:09:30 -0800, tom.harrigan wrote:

aga suggest you need 47.5kg of
solid fuel to get 220kWh. Unless I've done something wrong, that makes
it about 70% efficient.

I haven't checked your maths, nor do I know the calorific value of your
fuel but coke burning devices always look good because the LHV
and HHV are the same. My beef with the aga is that it gives you the heat
when it wants to. Now this is fine with solid fuels because they all have
this thermal inertia problem but it's an unnecessary restriction when
burning inherently "better" fuels like gas or oil.

AJH

log burner
 

On 24 Dec, 15:16, andrew heggie wrote:
On Mon, 24 Dec 2007 07:09:30 -0800, tom.harrigan wrote:
aga suggest you need 47.5kg of
solid fuel to get 220kWh. Unless I've done something wrong, that makes
it about 70% efficient.

I haven't checked your maths, nor do I know the calorific value of your
fuel but coke burning devices always look good because the LHV
and HHV are the same. My beef with the aga is that it gives you the heat
when it wants to. Now this is fine with solid fuels because they all have
this thermal inertia problem but it's an unnecessary restriction when
burning inherently "better" fuels like gas or oil.

AJH

According to Wikipedia, coal is about 6.67 kWh/kg. According to Aga
you need 47.5kg of fuel a week. My only issue with agas is that when
you want to cook, but don't want the heat all day, that's when you
start to waste money. If I could afford to run one, I'd probably get
one. At the moment I'm after a solid fuel cooker that's a bit more off-
and-on-able. It's quite difficult getting information on heat up
times, but I reckon the Stanley Errigal should heat up fairly quickly,
though I do prefer the look of the Rayburn 300W or Esse woodfired
cooker.

T