Real Rating BTU

User avatar
coal berner
Member
Posts: 3590
Joined: Tue. Jan. 09, 2007 12:44 am
Stoker Coal Boiler: 1986 Electric Furnace Man 520 DF
Stove/Furnace Make: Electric Furnace Man
Stove/Furnace Model: DF520
Location: Pottsville PA. Schuylkill County PA. The Hart Of Anthracite Coal Country.

Post Sat. Jan. 21, 2012 3:32 pm

Berlin wrote:Superior Quality
Old testing and superior is selling different coal from different veins then they did when the testing was done and the testing that was done is not the same test the use when testing Anthracite in the lab either in the breaker or a independed anthracite testing lab the real test for Anthracite is a ASTM D3176-89(2002) A basic test would be ASTM D3172-07a like they do for Bit coal

User avatar
Rob R.
Site Moderator
Posts: 11516
Joined: Fri. Dec. 28, 2007 4:26 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: EFM DF520
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Hitzer 50-93
Coal Size/Type: Lehigh Rice
Other Heating: Dad's 1953 EFM Highboy
Location: Chazy, NY

Post Sat. Jan. 21, 2012 4:27 pm

coal berner wrote:the real test for Anthracite is a ASTM D3176-89(2002) A basic test would be ASTM D3172-07a like they do for Bit coal
What is the difference between the two tests?

User avatar
Rob R.
Site Moderator
Posts: 11516
Joined: Fri. Dec. 28, 2007 4:26 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: EFM DF520
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Hitzer 50-93
Coal Size/Type: Lehigh Rice
Other Heating: Dad's 1953 EFM Highboy
Location: Chazy, NY

Post Sat. Jan. 21, 2012 4:37 pm

Pacowy wrote:At the risk of irritating both of you, I agree with coalberner that it depends on the coal, but I agree with Rob that a btu/lb value in the 12,000's probably is reasonable to use for figuring purposes. Some of the higher BTU numbers for anthracite come from "dry basis" or (D.B.) analyses, but I think for this discussion some accounting has to be made for the moisture in the coal, which detracts somewhat from the energy produced by the combustion. For what it's worth, the highest # I've seen claimed by EFM for a DF520 is 214,690 btu/hr. I agree some people may do better than that under some circumstances, but I also agree that anyone who would need to run a 520 at or near its maximum output to satisfy their needs probably should consider a boiler with a larger heat exchange area (e.g., a Highboy or 700).

Mike
No irritation here. I'd love to see what a 520 can do with "premium anthracite", but if satisfactory boiler output depends on a better than average BTU content of the coal...I'd step up to a bigger boiler/stoker.

Visit Alternate Heating Sytems

User avatar
Yanche
Member
Posts: 3030
Joined: Fri. Dec. 23, 2005 12:45 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: Alternate Heating Systems S-130
Coal Size/Type: Anthracite Pea
Location: Sykesville, Maryland

Post Sat. Jan. 21, 2012 7:00 pm

Rob R. wrote:
coal berner wrote:the real test for Anthracite is a ASTM D3176-89(2002) A basic test would be ASTM D3172-07a like they do for Bit coal
What is the difference between the two tests?
There are two tests commonly done for testing coal. D3172 - 07a Standard Practice for Proximate Analysis of Coal and D3176 - 09 Standard Practice for Ultimate Analysis of Coal.

The objective of coal proximate analysis is to determine the amount of fixed carbon (FC),volatile matters (VM), moisture, and ash within the coal sample.

The objective of coal ultimate analysis is to determine the constituents of coal, i.e. its basic chemical elements. The ultimate analysis determines the amount of carbon (C), hydrogen (H), oxygen (O), sulfur (S), and other elements within the coal sample.

More details are here:

http://www.scribd.com/doc/45720245/Understanding- ... l-Analysis

Caution there is at least one error, the author names the proximate analysis ultimate analysis.

User avatar
Rob R.
Site Moderator
Posts: 11516
Joined: Fri. Dec. 28, 2007 4:26 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: EFM DF520
Hand Fed Coal Stove: Hitzer 50-93
Coal Size/Type: Lehigh Rice
Other Heating: Dad's 1953 EFM Highboy
Location: Chazy, NY

Post Sat. Jan. 21, 2012 7:50 pm

After reading that article, my interpretation is that we should be focusing on the as-received BTU content?

User avatar
Berlin
Site Moderator
Posts: 1847
Joined: Thu. Feb. 09, 2006 1:25 pm
Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Will-Burt Combustioneer 77B
Coal Size/Type: Ohio BITUMINOUS pea stoker coal
Location: Buffalo/Adirondacks, NY

Post Sat. Jan. 21, 2012 7:57 pm

Rob R. wrote:After reading that article, my interpretation is that we should be focusing on the as-received BTU content?
yup. for us, it's the only thing that matters.

Visit Alternate Heating Sytems

User avatar
lsayre
Member
Posts: 12567
Joined: Wed. Nov. 23, 2005 9:17 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S130 Coal Gun
Coal Size/Type: Blaschak Anthracite Pea
Other Heating: Resistance Boiler (13.5 KW), ComfortMax 75
Location: N/E Ohio, between Medina and Wadsworth

Post Sat. Jan. 21, 2012 8:04 pm

I think that solidifies my usage of 10,000 BTU's per pound for nominal anthracite output.

12,351 as received BTU's x 80% efficiency = 9,881 (which is right close to 10K)

User avatar
Berlin
Site Moderator
Posts: 1847
Joined: Thu. Feb. 09, 2006 1:25 pm
Hot Air Coal Stoker Furnace: Will-Burt Combustioneer 77B
Coal Size/Type: Ohio BITUMINOUS pea stoker coal
Location: Buffalo/Adirondacks, NY

Post Sat. Jan. 21, 2012 8:15 pm

lsayre wrote:I think that solidifies my usage of 10,000 BTU's per pound for nominal anthracite output.

12,351 as received BTU's x 80% efficiency = 9,881 (which is right close to 10K)
well, that's what your boiler might see, but not your house. As was mentioned earlier, combustion efficiency and overall efficiency are two different things.

User avatar
lsayre
Member
Posts: 12567
Joined: Wed. Nov. 23, 2005 9:17 pm
Stoker Coal Boiler: AHS S130 Coal Gun
Coal Size/Type: Blaschak Anthracite Pea
Other Heating: Resistance Boiler (13.5 KW), ComfortMax 75
Location: N/E Ohio, between Medina and Wadsworth

Post Sat. Jan. 21, 2012 8:18 pm

Berlin wrote:well, that's what your boiler might see, but not your house. As was mentioned earlier, combustion efficiency and overall efficiency are two different things.
I agree fully. Right now I believe my overall efficiency is running closer to 70% than to 80%. But the colder it gets, the closer I get to achieving 80%. October and November are dragging me down efficiency wise. That means that overall this season (to date) I've realized an honest 8,750 BTU's from every pound of coal I've burned so far, but right now I believe I'm getting right close to 10,000 BTU's per lb..

Post Reply

Return to “Stoker Coal Boilers Using Anthracite (Hydronic & Steam)”