Coalpail.com Forum

being that one can remove the baffles in the back behind the pot and run a brush up and drown to clean the plates, I would prefer the back inside panel just have open access. that way I could see the flyash and remove it from the front with the ashes when it builds up. but if that creates a problem with pressure or draft than an access panel below the exhaust panel in the back. but I still don't understand why it can't just be all open under there like the vanwerts an others?

It seems to me that if you remove the center panel, much of your heat would go straight up the chimney.

it would be interesting to find out. I would not cut out the whole panel but, say a 6" high section across the bottom if there would be any difference. I have seen the vanwert being built and know the whole bottom is open but I don't believe they have as much heating surface as the efm does because they don't have the plates and baffles.

EnergyManager wrote:I like everything except that non american made forklift in the picture

Actually, Toyota forklifts are made in Columbus, Indiana.

In addition, Nissan forklifts are made in Marengo, Illinois - from raw plate steel to the finished product.

HOWEVER, "classic" American brands, such as Yale, Clark, and Hyster are NOT made in America anymore - they are made in Japan, Korea, etc.

So, all is not always as it seems.....

Chris

We were discussing the base today and what we'll do is set aside a day for homeowners to come in to see the show boiler and take suggestions as to how to modify the base, or other suggestions.

stokerscot wrote:A good cleanout would be 4" or 5" slots across the back sides, a foot tall. On the same side as the stoker panels just farther back in the flyash cleanout. With the matching cutouts in the covers. Just enough to get your arm and a brush up the heat exchanger. Whistlenut is right Scott

That is fine for the old style tube boiler but there would be not a need for the new style plate boiler being you can clean it threw the front door . But then again I had the same idea that you had When they where working on this new design base last Summer. I Myself & the Guy talked about a side panel for a lower clean out. The Guy that gave EFM the design and idea and help on how to make this new base. Along with Putting the coil back up front like the Highboys had . A side panel door would be nice instead of taking off the flue pipe and the back panel.

You can clean between the plates by reaching into the flue outlet. From the side, you can't get between the plates on the new style boilers.

So, it seems to me that the only advantage another base design change would accomplish is to make it easier to detect a high level of flyash and to remove it with a vacuum.

One of our stoker dealers removes the smokepipe and uses a coffee can to scoop out the flyash and then vacuums. He hasn't run into a situation, where in a year's time, there was enough flyash to block the flue outlet. It was more apt to block up at the chimney base.

I can see where the new base is set up for the new boilers but like Jay says, the older boilers that require a new base could benefit alot from the slot in the side. I could clean my plate boiler from the side with a cleanout. Not all plate boilers have the removeable baffles in front of the plates. I have two here that don't. But it really don't matter. While I can't weld for crap, I am pretty good at cutting holes. Do you think cutting the slots would affect the performance of the new base, i.e. the structural integrety?? Scott

My own opinion....I don't think it would. I could probably request that special side panels be made to accomodate the older boilers and be included in the base kit on an "as needed" basis. All I need to know is where you want the cutout, based upon the location of the tubes.

stokerscot wrote:I can see where the new base is set up for the new boilers but like Jay says, the older boilers that require a new base could benefit alot from the slot in the side. I could clean my plate boiler from the side with a cleanout. Not all plate boilers have the removeable baffles in front of the plates. I have two here that don't. But it really don't matter. While I can't weld for crap, I am pretty good at cutting holes. Do you think cutting the slots would affect the performance of the new base, i.e. the structural integrety?? Scott

They where design so you could replace any of the panels with out taking the boiler off the base so cutting a little cleanout slot /door on the backside should not hurt anything just make sure you seal it up like you need to with any of the panels

stoker-man wrote:You can clean between the plates by reaching into the flue outlet. From the side, you can't get between the plates on the new style boilers.

So, it seems to me that the only advantage another base design change would accomplish is to make it easier to detect a high level of flyash and to remove it with a vacuum.

One of our stoker dealers removes the smokepipe and uses a coffee can to scoop out the flyash and then vacuums. He hasn't run into a situation, where in a year's time, there was enough flyash to block the flue outlet. It was more apt to block up at the chimney base.

Like Scott said the older round door plate or tube boiler do not have removables back baffle plates so you have to take off the back flue panel to clean them remember Chris the old style bases have big Panels that go from the bottom to the top of the base not like the Sq door models or the new base that are smaller Panels with less room to get in.
The older Panels where half of the base itself with heavy angle steel in the corners bottom and top to make the frame with the base panels and floor panle welded on and the two sides and flue Panel bolted on from top to bootom . You had alot more room to get into the plates or tubes . With the smaller new base side and flue panels what Scott said about a rear side clean out door would be a good idea for the older boiler and bases . Aswell as the new design base it would make it easier to Vac out the flyash with out going threw the flue pipe outlet . Like I said I talked to the Guy about this last Summer when he help & gave efm the new design base it was talked about on are end but never went threw on efm end .

If the base design is changed to benefit older boilers, ALL the new bases will be built with the new access panel. All we need to know is where to place it.

It is extremely refreshing to have a manufacturer that has a rep on an independent forum and have that person genuinely care about other opinions and to share them with Corporate. Kudos to Chris, and the EFM Company. It is unbelievable that a product used by someone else and is now 50 years old is still highly sought after. They got it right the first time, and even to this day continue to refine the old girl!

I'm not forgetting the other fine folks on this forum, but this is Chris's thread, and we are saying 'Thanks.' :pepsi:

Chris,
I purchased my efm df520 a few months ago. I am now at the electrical stage at this point. After reading this post which was generated on Thu Feb 26, 2009, I do not see that the clean-out (access door) implemented in the base. Did I miss something or was the idea discarded?

Furthermore, I noticed the plates that hang in front of the tubes do not left off which would allow for easy access to cleaning.

If anyone has any info on an electrical diagram that allows for the existing boiler and the efm to run (existing in summer and efm in winter) I would appreciate it greatly.

To clean the rear of the base, remove the smokepipe and vacuum through the 8" hole. The front of the base is easier.

The plates are hanging on hooks and should easily lift off.

My dual system could work like your dual boiler system. I Teed into the supply and return lines of my oil boiler and then used all the heating zones, which are controlled by my oil boiler. It also required installation of flow check valves. All the wood boiler does is supply hot water to my oil boiler in a circulating loop and the oil boiler controls do all the rest.