Page 1 of 1

Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Sat. Aug. 24, 2013 11:37 am
by lsayre
On the Alaska website it states that their Kodiak hand fired stove can be throttled down to only 15,000 BTU's per hour. By my calculation, it takes roughly 42 lbs. of coal burned in 24 hours to be roughly the equivalent of 15,000 output BTU's per hour. Could it be that they are referring to input BTU's, in which case it could be throttled back to consume only about 27 lbs. of coal per day at the lowest possible burn setting? Bottom line is: How little coal can you burn daily in a Kodiak and still maintain a fire?

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Sat. Aug. 24, 2013 11:47 am
by freetown fred
Don't know about the KODIAK--but my HITZER 50-93--I'm burning 20 lbs or less in a 24 hr period on the cuff seasons

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Sat. Aug. 24, 2013 11:50 am
by lsayre
freetown fred wrote:Don't know about the KODIAK--but my HITZER 50-93--I'm burning 20 lbs or less in a 24 hr period on the cuff seasons
Thanks Fred. Both of these stoves have similar capacities and identical high end output ratings, so that info "may" be close for the Kodiak at the low end.

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Sat. Aug. 24, 2013 12:09 pm
by lsayre
Lets throw a DS-1500 into the mix here as well. How little coal can one of those burn in 24 hours and still keep going?

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Tue. Aug. 27, 2013 10:26 am
by Vinmaker
lsayre wrote:On the Alaska website it states that their Kodiak hand fired stove can be throttled down to only 15,000 BTU's per hour. By my calculation, it takes roughly 42 lbs. of coal burned in 24 hours to be roughly the equivalent of 15,000 output BTU's per hour. Could it be that they are referring to input BTU's, in which case it could be throttled back to consume only about 27 lbs. of coal per day at the lowest possible burn setting? Bottom line is: How little coal can you burn daily in a Kodiak and still maintain a fire?
Wow. Is that the math? 42lbs/ day of coal to make 15K btu/hour? I guess I always felt like it was putting out more than 15K BTU when I stick in 20lbs in the morning. Is that all it does on an hourly basis? Amazing. So how does one achieve those max numbers of say 80-100K btu? They do not hold 80-100lbs of coal.

Am I missing something?

Vin.

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Tue. Aug. 27, 2013 12:57 pm
by lsayre
About 250 lbs. of coal burned per day would give you the maximum rated output.

250lbs./day x 13,250 BTU's/Lb. x 0.72 (efficiency) / 24 hours/day = ~100,000 BTU's per hour.

I don't think you are missing anything. Most homes need far fewer input/output BTU's in general than their present heating appliances are rated for.

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Wed. Aug. 28, 2013 8:54 pm
by lsayre
I just had a crazy thought. If a 100,000 BTU rated hand fired stove was eating 10+ lbs. of coal per hour and actually firing at it’s full rated 100,000 BTU's, what would its surface temperature be?

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Wed. Aug. 28, 2013 9:20 pm
by 2001Sierra
I am guessing 20 lbs a day. My 90,000 BTU stoker barely uses 50 lbs a day in the dead of winter, heating 2200 sq ft of 60's house with upgrades.

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Thu. Aug. 29, 2013 6:46 am
by dcrane
lsayre wrote:I just had a crazy thought. If a 100,000 BTU rated hand fired stove was eating 10+ lbs. of coal per hour and actually firing at it’s full rated 100,000 BTU's, what would its surface temperature be?
a lot more than the 600 degree temps they recommend :lol: U/L has to have some eye on the rating vs how blazing hot the stove has to get to achieve this, lets face it... most of us probably exceed the surface temps recommended, on some stoves this is not a big deal at all, on other stoves its a "stove killer" to do it (VC and some others with their silly lil iron grates in the front that warp and twist like pretzels or have glued & screwed cast iron tops and pieces over the firebed that would expand and contract to a point of harming the integrity of the unit have problems, while some others with 1/4" solid welded steel stoves have no problem with steady surface temps of 900+). Either way to burn up that amount of coal lets assume the surface temps have to reach well over 600

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Thu. Sep. 05, 2013 8:44 pm
by ridgeracing
With my DS1600WH throttled back to 250deg. stove temp, I have gone 24hrs on 20-25lbs. At deep winter time I burn 50lbs in 24hrs at 500-550 stove temp, its supposed to be a 110000btu at that setting.

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Thu. Sep. 05, 2013 9:06 pm
by lsayre
I'm becoming convinced that the ratings for coal stoves must mean input BTU's. And since a hand fired stove is about 60% efficient, a 100,000 BTU rated stove would only have a maximum output of 60,000 BTU's per hour. Even at that it would need to burn at least 7.6 lbs. of coal per hour. That's about 182 pounds per day.

7.6 x 13,200 x 0.6 = 60,192 BTU's

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Thu. Sep. 05, 2013 10:06 pm
by Rob R.
Are you any closer to ordering a stove?

Re: Alaska Kodiak Hand Fired, Low End Coal Consumption Question

Posted: Fri. Sep. 06, 2013 6:08 am
by lsayre
Rob R. wrote:Are you any closer to ordering a stove?
Next step is getting out to actually see them. Only problem is that aside from DS Machine and Hitzer my minimum travel is 75 to 100 miles to see any alternatives like Alaska and Keystoker.