Glenwood #30 Ready for Install

franco b wrote:

wsherrick wrote:Such methods are probably lost forever now.

Even though I agree with you as to the form of the better stove I think the need to have a low flue opening to install in fireplaces has influenced both wood and coal stoves. The next problem is the small market for coal stoves as opposed to wood or pellet stoves which have both come a long way in just the last 30 years both in looks and operation.

Many current stoves work pretty well so there is not the pressure to design something better that occurred with wood stoves, both from owners and government regulation.

Any idea what kind of efficiencies current coal stoves run at? I know some of the wood stove advances were made to increase their efficiency in addition to the EPA regs. Wood is a more complex fuel to burn than anthracite. I don't really understand all the reasons why the coal stove market is so much smaller than the wood stove market, that is certainly the case. I guess you have to buy your fuel just like an oil furnace etc. But given that, why the pellet stove becoming so popular? Is it the perception of coal being "dirty" from our bituminous fired power plants?

dj

franco b wrote:

wsherrick wrote:Such methods are probably lost forever now.

They are not lost, just supplanted by better methods.

Even though I agree with you as to the form of the better stove I think the need to have a low flue opening to install in fireplaces has influenced both wood and coal stoves. The next problem is the small market for coal stoves as opposed to wood or pellet stoves which have both come a long way in just the last 30 years both in looks and operation.

Many current stoves work pretty well so there is not the pressure to design something better that occurred with wood stoves, both from owners and government regulation.

Maybe the better methods have been developed for other materials, certainly not for cast iron and cast iron parts. I don't know about you but a cast door that is perfectly made at a fraction of an inch in width and it fits perfectly next to another thin cast piece perfectly with no flaws and it still does so after a 100 plus years is saying something about the original product. Now we have loose fitting rough thick doors with gaskets to compensate for the wide gaps in the fittings. I think gaskets are good, they are easy to maintain and replace and much cheaper than getting a whole new door that has warped out shape, but; it doesn't require the exact machining skills of a master machinist to do that either.

You are exactly right about the coal heater market being a niche market. It really is, at least until people get over their ignorance and bias about burning coal. Well, education and enlightenment is why we are all here as well as to enjoy the company of like minded people. The wood stove makers have the bulk of the market and there the R&D money will go. It's just the opposite of yesteryear when all of the R&D went into coal heaters because that was where the vast bulk of the market existed. Back then the wood stove market was in the spot the coal stove market is now.

dlj wrote: Any idea what kind of efficiencies current coal stoves run at? I know some of the wood stove advances were made to increase their efficiency in addition to the EPA regs. Wood is a more complex fuel to burn than anthracite. I don't really understand all the reasons why the coal stove market is so much smaller than the wood stove market, that is certainly the case. I guess you have to buy your fuel just like an oil furnace etc. But given that, why the pellet stove becoming so popular? Is it the perception of coal being "dirty" from our bituminous fired power plants?

Claimed efficiency s for coal stoves have been as high as 90 percent,verified by DIN the official German government testing lab.

The problem is we do not know at what firing rates these figures were arrived at. Run it a little hotter or cooler and the figure changes and for what length of time was the test run? I would be willing to bet that top efficiency was not reached at the listed maximum output of the stove. My own belief is that top efficiency can only reached in a hand fed stove by a hopper or magazine feed although with careful and frequent tending you can probably come close. How the gasses given off are handled makes the difference just as in wood stoves. With coal the problem is less than with wood but is still there.

You are right as to the perception of coal being dirty. Many remember the days when coal was common when there were many badly run stoves; ash all over everything; filthy coal bins and deaths every year from coal gas. I still remember smelling coal gas in friends houses as soon as entering the house. Burning coal will remain, I think, limited to those who enjoy tending a stove and don't mind the extra work. Most people just want an appliance that tends itself with as little work as possible.

Viewing the fire is pleasant but requires cleaning the glass or mica periodically. If you look at the progression of antique stoves through the years you see the windows getting smaller and smaller until they disappear. Too much trouble keeping them clean and in repair.

franco b wrote:

dlj wrote: Any idea what kind of efficiencies current coal stoves run at? I know some of the wood stove advances were made to increase their efficiency in addition to the EPA regs. Wood is a more complex fuel to burn than anthracite. I don't really understand all the reasons why the coal stove market is so much smaller than the wood stove market, that is certainly the case. I guess you have to buy your fuel just like an oil furnace etc. But given that, why the pellet stove becoming so popular? Is it the perception of coal being "dirty" from our bituminous fired power plants?

Claimed efficiency s for coal stoves have been as high as 90 percent,verified by DIN the official German government testing lab.

The problem is we do not know at what firing rates these figures were arrived at. Run it a little hotter or cooler and the figure changes and for what length of time was the test run? I would be willing to bet that top efficiency was not reached at the listed maximum output of the stove. My own belief is that top efficiency can only reached in a hand fed stove by a hopper or magazine feed although with careful and frequent tending you can probably come close. How the gasses given off are handled makes the difference just as in wood stoves. With coal the problem is less than with wood but is still there.

No appliance operating a maximum capacity will operate at that high of an efficiency rate. Thermal efficiency and combustion efficiency are often at odds with each other. The laws of physics will not allow both to be simultaneously at maximum. A good stove design is a compromise between the two. I read some about some tests done with stoves back around 1910 or so and it was discovered that as combustion efficiency went up the heat produced exceeded the capacity of the test stove to radiate the extra heat and this heat was lost up the stack. At lower combustion rates the radiating efficiencies were well up near 90% but a lot of potential heat was lost due to unburned gasses escaping up the flue unused. That is where the formula for a proper coal stove was found. I have said this a lot here, but; it bears repeating. The optimal proportions for a coal burning appliance with a natural draft is the combustion chamber must at AT LEAST twice the height of the width or depth of the fire pot for proper combustion and a high degree of Thermal efficiency. Hence, the whole premise behind a base burner and the reason stoves were made upright and had large areas over the firepot to maximize both thermal and combustion efficiency.

Franco, you made a good observation about the progression to smaller windows. The big base burners with the three sides of all windows require a lot more maintenance. It's not that the mica gets dirty, you must check every year to reseal and tighten the frames around the mica squares or the stove becomes very leaky. They can be kept reasonably air tight but you have to keep up with the maintenance with the stoves with the many window frames.

wsherrick wrote:No appliance operating a maximum capacity will operate at that high of an efficiency rate.

There are gas and oil fired boilers and furnaces that do this. Even going back to the 1940s. They can do it because the firing rate and heat exchange surface are all designed together to function at one fixed output.

That's the problem with a hand fired stove which is expected to have a range of output. Your base burner which can add or remove heat exchange surface at will is probably the best solution so far.

franco b wrote:

wsherrick wrote:No appliance operating a maximum capacity will operate at that high of an efficiency rate.

There are gas and oil fired boilers and furnaces that do this. Even going back to the 1940s. They can do it because the firing rate and heat exchange surface are all designed together to function at one fixed output.

That's the problem with a hand fired stove which is expected to have a range of output. Your base burner which can add or remove heat exchange surface at will is probably the best solution so far.

I should have said stoves at max capacity. I'm sorry I never think about furnaces. I never thought about it but it is a lot easier to design an appliance that the when the combustion can be exactly controlled and it is at a constant rate you can make the proper radiating surface to maximize both.

franco b wrote: Claimed efficiency s for coal stoves have been as high as 90 percent,verified by DIN the official German government testing lab.

That's pretty good, but I understand that both wood and pellet stoves can run higher than that now.

franco b wrote: The problem is we do not know at what firing rates these figures were arrived at. Run it a little hotter or cooler and the figure changes and for what length of time was the test run? I would be willing to bet that top efficiency was not reached at the listed maximum output of the stove. My own belief is that top efficiency can only reached in a hand fed stove by a hopper or magazine feed although with careful and frequent tending you can probably come close. How the gasses given off are handled makes the difference just as in wood stoves. With coal the problem is less than with wood but is still there.

This is an excellent point. Oil and gas fired furnaces can be turned on and off almost instantly so they are set to run at a specific burn rate optimizing both combustion and thermal transfer efficiencies. Need more heat-burn longer; need less heat-burn shorter. Solid fuel burners have to vary the rate of burn to get different heat outputs. They can't be as efficient. 90% is darned high, but I'm with you, I'd like to see how they got that number.

franco b wrote: You are right as to the perception of coal being dirty. Many remember the days when coal was common when there were many badly run stoves; ash all over everything; filthy coal bins and deaths every year from coal gas. I still remember smelling coal gas in friends houses as soon as entering the house. Burning coal will remain, I think, limited to those who enjoy tending a stove and don't mind the extra work. Most people just want an appliance that tends itself with as little work as possible.

But here is what I don't understand as well. I understand the perception problem of coal being dirty. But anyone running a wood stove has much more extra work, well above what a coal stove requires. Frankly, wood burning is dirtier. I used to burn wood. Burning coal, the house is cleaner, stove provides a long even heat, less "stuff" in my living room, just all around much better. Now that I'm burning coal, I'll never go back. Well, unless I have to move and end up where I can get free wood. Then I might go back to burning wood, but it wouldn't be a happy return...

dj

dlj wrote:But here is what I don't understand as well. I understand the perception problem of coal being dirty. But anyone running a wood stove has much more extra work, well above what a coal stove requires. Frankly, wood burning is dirtier. I used to burn wood. Burning coal, the house is cleaner, stove provides a long even heat, less "stuff" in my living room, just all around much better. Now that I'm burning coal, I'll never go back. Well, unless I have to move and end up where I can get free wood. Then I might go back to burning wood, but it wouldn't be a happy return...

You are right in all your points and that is the reason coal took over from wood 100 years ago or more. Since then gas and oil have taken over from coal with just set the thermostat and forget it convenience. Most people today have only this to compare to and a wood fire is nice to look at and feels romantic and gathering your own wood, at least for a while, gives a feeling of independence and self reliance. Then of course reality sets in with the trail of bugs and bark and the smell of creosote. So the next step is to forget the whole thing or to get a pellet stove or, like us, switch to coal and have a warm house in the morning.

franco b wrote:

dlj wrote:But here is what I don't understand as well. I understand the perception problem of coal being dirty. But anyone running a wood stove has much more extra work, well above what a coal stove requires. Frankly, wood burning is dirtier. I used to burn wood. Burning coal, the house is cleaner, stove provides a long even heat, less "stuff" in my living room, just all around much better. Now that I'm burning coal, I'll never go back. Well, unless I have to move and end up where I can get free wood. Then I might go back to burning wood, but it wouldn't be a happy return...

You are right in all your points and that is the reason coal took over from wood 100 years ago or more. Since then gas and oil have taken over from coal with just set the thermostat and forget it convenience. Most people today have only this to compare to and a wood fire is nice to look at and feels romantic and gathering your own wood, at least for a while, gives a feeling of independence and self reliance. Then of course reality sets in with the trail of bugs and bark and the smell of creosote. So the next step is to forget the whole thing or to get a pellet stove or, like us, switch to coal and have a warm house in the morning.

The absolute ignorance of the general public concerning the truth about coal is profound. For many it also conjures up an image in black and white of the dirt poor family in the Depression huddled around a dilapidated Cannon Heater with the loading door, hinges broken off and all.
I am very proud of the fact I burn coal and don't keep it a secret. I get responses from shock, disbelief and out right mockery. Tell the same people you have a wood stove and to them you are a smart person. After awhile a few people will speak up and say they burn coal or know somebody in "Pennsyltucky," that does. It is really astounding to me.

Hi, now imagine what it is here in the province of Quebec, kingdom of electricity and wood. After more than 20 Y. of wood burning and 12 Y. of electric heating before, I hope never go back to wood or electricity heating. Here, to make peoples curious about coal, I always say Anthracite. Then peoples get all surprised and ask: what is that? I answer: oh, it is a thing found in the ground.....Nobody know what it is. The worst thing is that, I find the present anthracite stoves so far from good, nice(that is why I wrote the subject: are they ugly? a few months ago),and not too efficient so I cannot recommend to change and to try anthracite.
We need new stoves with options found in stoves like Glenwood, Chuby...

nortcan wrote:The worst thing is that, I find the present anthracite stoves so far from good, nice(that is why I wrote the subject: are they ugly? a few months ago),and not too efficient so I cannot recommend to change and to try anthracite.
We need new stoves with options found in stoves like Glenwood, Chuby...

I think there can be improvement made in the grate ash clearing systems too. I like the way some stokers just push the ash off the front edge of the burn area to fall into the ash pan.

If coal were more popular then there would be the incentive for better designs in stoves ,but I am also afraid of what greater popularity and demand would do to the price of coal.

I have found that coal can be as CLEAN or DIRTY as the MODERN user wants to make it ...for me I let my shaken down ashes in the stove for 24 hrs. to cool and remove them right before I do my daily shake down, thinkin of makin a dust cover for my ash pan like Norcan did on his Vigilant...to keep fly ash down from the stove to the outside door.
I also have a big shop vac with a "BLUE HEPA FILTER"...setting close with a long hose on it to clean up any spills or mess I might have or did make while tending the stove ...DO IT NOW NOT LATER is my motto.
So far even with the cannon heater there is NO DUST layin on my bikes and such here in the old shop ...and that is because ?..YUP ya guessed it,keep it clean it will be clean!
The general public remembers YRS. AGO COAL WAS DIRTY & FILTHY and to most folks when ya say coal that is the first thing that jumps in there mind....but our Grandfather's didnt have a SHOP VAC with a HEPA filter let alone electricity in there younger yrs. and "SPRING CLEANING" was exactly that...the old timers damn near emptied the houses and beat the carpets and washed all the walls, windows, kids, etc... to get rid of the winters build up of dust and ash, could you imagine NOT HAVING A VACUME CLEANER ?..and burning coal daily
And God knows what was in there coal ...im sure it wasnt as clean as todays screened and washed anthracite we are used to burning?..heck a big ol pc. of sandstone mixed in would still get HOT and radiate some heat anyway...Im sure they didnt bother picking it out.
This is the Honest to God's truth...I remember getting milk in the big can and eggs from the chicken house up the road at a local farm when I was little and such as we were raised in farm country but we had indoor plumbing and a Zenith T.V. it only got 3 or 4 stations ..lol , but my Mom & Dad divorced Dad got remarried to a Gal that was from the Old School, she had 14 brothers and sisters! ..and the first time I went to her parents house I was SHOCKED...this is 1978 an her Mother & Dad still had an outhouse, no indoor plumbing other than the well water pumped into the Kitchen sink, Big Arse cook stove burning in August, and everyone setting round the stove shootin the breeze on a saturday night..I remember it always being 110 winter or summer in that house....and my STEP GRAM MAKIN GROUNDHOG STEW...
and they had a Round Oak coal stove in the living room that they burned in the dead of winter and I remember the DIRT!

Tim

Hi Tim just a word to be honest with you and other readers, the lid on my Vigilant 11 comes with the stove. I did modif it a bit cause it was not sliding very well.