DSR3 build, 200mm bell system + bench
Jun 17, 2022 1:57:54 GMT -8
hallinen, sertus, and 3 more like this
Post by peterberg on Jun 17, 2022 1:57:54 GMT -8
This second session was started with a warm heater. Surface temperature ranged from 25 to 50 ºC (68 - 122 ºF).
The shortest distance between outside and inside measured from an edge is roughly 1.4 times greater than from the flat surface to the inside. So there's more material at the corners, the sole reason why those are cooler.
The top of this particular heater is also much cooler again. There's lots of insulation material on top, 100 mm (4") of superwool and loose perlite.
Most of the fuel happened to be beech, which produces lots of woodgas in the earlier stage of the burn. When the heater is able to cope with that, there won't be any problem with other wood species. Weight of the fuel load was estimated to be around 16 kg (35.3 lbs). It took a relatively long time for the fire to really get going, which is usually accompanied by a short peak in the CO level. That was also the case with this stove, although the peak in the small development model came between 10 and 20 minutes. With this one at 35 minutes but the length of the firing was also much longer, matching a larger fire chamber.
Length of this burn was much more than the EU-norm minimum, end of burn according to the norm.
The flame image remained fairly constant from those 35 minutes and beyond, the averages were quite decent.
O² 15.3%, eff. 83.9%, CO 619 ppm, temp 130 C (266 ºF).
The whole burn looked quite impressive, the round porthole above the door allows a view of the inside of the ceramic fiber tube. It also continued to look like a large, angry red eye for a considerable stretch of time.
Conclusion: this configuration did what was expected, all values I am able to measure were well within the European standard. What it would do regarding fine dust I don't know. Although a bell system slows down the gas stream to such an extend that most if not all fine dust will settle down on the bell's floor. That's what happens in my heater which is 23 times the system size below the firebox.
After the test was ended, we checked the draw difference between the extended and original chimney length. The extended chimney generated a draw of 30 to 40 Pa (0.3 to 0.4 mbar), without the extra length 20 to 30 Pa (0.2 to 0.3 mbar) and with the chimney cap on 10 to 20 Pa (0.1 to 0.2 mbar). This was done with a hot heater, I fully expect the draw to be generated by a warmish heater and the higher chimney would be 10 to 20 Pa. I would suggest to extend the chimney by 1 meter and a rotating chimney cowl.
Here's another, wide-angle photo of the space, that reciprocal roof is really worth seeing!
The shortest distance between outside and inside measured from an edge is roughly 1.4 times greater than from the flat surface to the inside. So there's more material at the corners, the sole reason why those are cooler.
The top of this particular heater is also much cooler again. There's lots of insulation material on top, 100 mm (4") of superwool and loose perlite.
Most of the fuel happened to be beech, which produces lots of woodgas in the earlier stage of the burn. When the heater is able to cope with that, there won't be any problem with other wood species. Weight of the fuel load was estimated to be around 16 kg (35.3 lbs). It took a relatively long time for the fire to really get going, which is usually accompanied by a short peak in the CO level. That was also the case with this stove, although the peak in the small development model came between 10 and 20 minutes. With this one at 35 minutes but the length of the firing was also much longer, matching a larger fire chamber.
Length of this burn was much more than the EU-norm minimum, end of burn according to the norm.
The flame image remained fairly constant from those 35 minutes and beyond, the averages were quite decent.
O² 15.3%, eff. 83.9%, CO 619 ppm, temp 130 C (266 ºF).
The whole burn looked quite impressive, the round porthole above the door allows a view of the inside of the ceramic fiber tube. It also continued to look like a large, angry red eye for a considerable stretch of time.
Conclusion: this configuration did what was expected, all values I am able to measure were well within the European standard. What it would do regarding fine dust I don't know. Although a bell system slows down the gas stream to such an extend that most if not all fine dust will settle down on the bell's floor. That's what happens in my heater which is 23 times the system size below the firebox.
After the test was ended, we checked the draw difference between the extended and original chimney length. The extended chimney generated a draw of 30 to 40 Pa (0.3 to 0.4 mbar), without the extra length 20 to 30 Pa (0.2 to 0.3 mbar) and with the chimney cap on 10 to 20 Pa (0.1 to 0.2 mbar). This was done with a hot heater, I fully expect the draw to be generated by a warmish heater and the higher chimney would be 10 to 20 Pa. I would suggest to extend the chimney by 1 meter and a rotating chimney cowl.
Here's another, wide-angle photo of the space, that reciprocal roof is really worth seeing!