Howdy,

The subject line says most of it...

Is it wise to use a conventional fireplace grate in a well designed
Rumford fireplace?

Thanks for any thoughts,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

How else to get air under the fire? It'll smother itself much faster
without it.

"Kenneth" wrote in message
...
Howdy,

The subject line says most of it...

Is it wise to use a conventional fireplace grate in a well designed
Rumford fireplace?

Thanks for any thoughts,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 13:42:18 -0500, Kenneth
wrote:

Is it wise to use a conventional fireplace grate in a well designed
Rumford fireplace?

Maybe I'm missing some terminology here ?

Why should the type of grate make any difference to a Rumford ?
Rumford's rules specify the design of the smokebox, particularly its
narrow depth and the use of a shelf. It's not a specific sort of
grate.

Although that said, I'm assuming you mean a grate that's open, rather
than a more modern closed smokeless fuel stove, or a metal box
woodburner with baffles.
--
Klein bottle for rent. Apply within.

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 16:19:53 -0500, "George"
wrote:

How else to get air under the fire? It'll smother itself much faster
without it.

"Kenneth" wrote in message
.. .
Howdy,

The subject line says most of it...

Is it wise to use a conventional fireplace grate in a well designed
Rumford fireplace?

Thanks for any thoughts,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."


Hello again,

Here's why I posted the question:

I had been using the fireplace with a grate that was of the wrong
shape: It was too deep, and not wide enough. That is, it was not even
close to the shape of the hearth of our Rumford fireplace.

I then thought that surely someone made a grate that would be a
"better fit."

As I started to search the web, I found something that really took me
by surprise. I came upon a few articles suggesting that Rumford
fireplaces would burn better, and would also radiate more heat to the
room if the fire were built right on the hearth rather than on a
grate. These suggestions certainly did not fit with my intuition (for
reasons similar to your comment), but I am happy to learn.

Hours later, after my fire burned down, I gave it a try. I removed the
grate, and build a fire...

To my surprise, with no grate, the fire produced better draw, and
burned the fuel much more completely. With the grate, there were
always a few chunks of wood that fell through where they remained
unburned. Without the grate, I was left only with fine ash. (I cannot
be sure about the radiated heat.)

I will continue to experiment, but for now, despite my original
intuition, I believe that there are significant advantages to burning
in a Rumford fireplace with no grate at all.

All the best,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."

Nothing new in that , really. Any fireplace or stove lights better with
air, which gets the chimney drawing, is self-banking with an ash bed.

Now, what're you after? Ambiance favors an open grate and the crackling
fire, efficiency a banked fire (once the chimney's warm), which is why we
have "airtight" stoves.

You can create a "grate" of wood to help light, and burn on the hearth, or
you can buy a minimum-gap grate which will hold created ash to bank the
fire, and scoop the ash out from underneath for lighting.

"Kenneth" wrote in message
...


I will continue to experiment, but for now, despite my original
intuition, I believe that there are significant advantages to burning
in a Rumford fireplace with no grate at all.

On Mon, 29 Dec 2003 07:53:44 -0500, "George"
wrote:

Nothing new in that , really. Any fireplace or stove lights better with
air, which gets the chimney drawing, is self-banking with an ash bed.


Huh...?

Earlier (in responded to my asking if I could use my fireplace without
a grate) you said:

"How else to get air under the fire? It'll smother itself much faster
without it."

I responded because I agreed with you about that, and, as it turns
out, we were both wrong...

All the best,

--
Kenneth

If you email... Please remove the "SPAMLESS."