Solo Bonfire stove/firepit. All I read, users ensure having a 'sack' to carry the stove so soot does not transfer to other items. My Solo came with a sack.
I tried the closest thing I've got to dry sticks last night, a piece of 2x4 scrap split into pieces. Lots of sparks started coming out so I shut it down pretty quick.
Seems to be tipping towards the well-established ‘concentric tubes’ kerosene wick stoves as in these examples. John
@snwcmpr : I remember an old rhyme from my days in the Scouts about different species of wood and their burning characteristics. I haven't managed to find the original verse, but this covers most of them - and, it seems I'd remembered correctly; sparks are down to the species of tree. Note what it says about Cedar, Horse Chestnut and Sweet Chestnut:- Alder: Produces poor heat output and it does not last well. Poor. Apple: A very good wood that burns slow and steady when dry, it has small flame size, and does not produce sparking or spitting. Good. Ash: Reckoned by many to be one of best woods for burning. It produces a steady flame and good heat output. It can be burnt when green but like all woods, it burns best when dry. Very Good. Beech: Burns very much like ash, but does not burn well when green. Very Good. Birch: Produces good heat output but it does burn quickly. It can be burnt unseasoned, however the sap can cause deposits to form in the flue with prolonged use. Good. Blackthorn: Has a slow burn, with good heat production. Good. Cedar: Is a good burning wood that produces a consistent and long heat output. It burns with a small flame, but does tend to crackle and spit and the sap can cause deposits to form in the flue with prolonged use. Good. Cherry: Is a slow to burn wood that produces a good heat output. Cherry needs to be seasoned well. Good. Chestnut: A poor burning wood that produces a small flame and poor heat output. POOR. Douglas Fir: A poor burning wood that produces a small flame and poor heat output and the sap can cause deposits to form in the flue with prolonged use. POOR. Elder: A poor burning wood that produces a small flame and poor heat output. POOR. Elm: Is a wood that can follow several burn patterns because of high moisture content, it should be dried for two years for best results. Elm is slow to get going and it may be necessary to use a better burning wood to start it off. Splitting of logs should be done early. Medium. Eucalyptus: Is a fast burning wood. The sap can cause deposits to form in the flue and can increase the risk of a chimney fire if burned unseasoned. POOR. Hawthorn: Is a good traditional firewood that has a slow burn with good heat output. Very Good. Hazel: Is a good but fast burning wood and produces best results when allowed to season. Good. Holly: Is a fast burning wood that produces good flame but poor heat output. Holly will burn green, but best dried for a minimum of a year. POOR. Hornbeam: A good burning wood that burns similar to beech, slow burn with a good heat output. Good. Horse Chestnut: A good wood for burning in wood stoves but not for open fires as it does tend to spit a lot. It does however produce a good flame and heat output. Good (for Stoves). Laburnum: A very smokey wood with a poor burn. Very POOR – Do not use. Larch: Produces a reasonable heat output, but it needs to be well seasoned. The sap can cause deposits to form in the flue with prolonged use. Medium. Laurel: Burns with a good flame but only reasonable heat output. It needs to be well seasoned. Medium. Lilac: Its smaller branches are good to use as kindling, the wood itself burns well with a good flame. Good. Lime: Not a good wood for burning as it produces very little flame or heat output. Poor. Maple: Is a good burning wood that produces good flame and heat output. Good. Oak: Because of its density, oak produces a small flame and very slow burn, it is best when seasoned for a minimum of two years as it is a wood that requires time to season well. Good. Pear: Burns well with good heat output, however it does need to be seasoned well. Good. Pine Species: (Including Leylandii) Burns with a good flame, but the resin sap can cause deposits to form in the flue and can increase the risk of a chimney fire must be well seasoned. Good (with caution). Plum: A good burning wood that produces good heat output. Good. Poplar: A very smokey wood with a poor burn. Very POOR. Rowan: Is a good burning wood that has a slow burn with good heat output. Very Good. Rhododendron: The older and thick stems can burn well. Good. Robinia (Acacia): Is a good burning wood that has a slow burn with good heat output. It does produce an acrid and dense smoke but this is of course not a problem in a stove. Good (for Stoves). Spruce: Produces a poor heat output and it does not last well. Poor. Sycamore: Produces a good flame, but with only moderate heat output. Should only be used well-seasoned. Medium. Sweet Chestnut: The wood burns OK when well-seasoned but it does tend to spit a lot. This is of course not a problem in a stove. Medium (for Stoves). Thorn: One of the best woods for burning. It produces a steady flame and very good heat output, and produces very little smoke. Very Good. Walnut: is a moderate to good burning wood. Medium. Willow: A poor fire wood that does not burn well even when seasoned. Poor. Yew: A good burning wood as it has a slow burn, and produces a very good heat output. Very Good. https://www.deanforge.co.uk/support/which-wood/ Gunner
Interesting point, Itchy. I've worked as a fireman (stoker) on steam locos, and they work on exactly the system you've described. Primary air is drawn in from under the grate, providing the air for the initial burn - but as the flames emerge from the top of the fire-bed, they also contain large quantities of combustible gases, which boil off from the various volatile constituents of the coal (such as coal tar). This smoky mixture then has secondary air injected into it through the fire-hole door, which is above the fire-bed. (even when the fire-door is apparently closed, there is always a route through it by which a certain minimum amount of secondary air can get into the fire-box) If the correct amount of secondary air is allowed into the combustion chamber (the upper part of the firebox) this combines with the black smoke given off by the coal, and burns very well, giving off lots of extra heat, which would otherwise be lost up the chimney. When you see a steam loco with black smoke pouring out of the chimney, the fireman has either put too much coal on at one go, or has got too much primary air going into the firebox (because the dampers under the grate are too wide open), or not enough secondary air (because the fire-hole doors aren't open enough). Too much primary air burns off the volatiles too quickly for the secondary air to be able to burn them all; too little secondary air cannot burn off the smoke, even if the coal is burning at the correct rate. But here's the thing; even if you are adding coal to the firebox on a loco at the correct rate, you still need to adjust both the dampers and the fire-hole doors to achieve efficient burning - i.e., getting the maximum heat from every shovel of coal - and the sign that firemen are told to aim for is "light grey smoke from the chimney - and don't add any more coal until the smoke clears". As you can imagine, getting everything right and keeping it that way calls for a lot of judgement, especially as every batch of coal burns differently (even when it's from the same coal-face in the same mine) - which is why it takes a long time to train up a good fireman (and looking after the fire is only ONE of his many jobs!) So it strikes me that if the fuel is producing a lot of smoke and tarry deposits, and not too much heat, that suggests that the cure might be to either reduce the airflow under the fuel, increase the airflow coming in above the fuel, or a combination of the two. It might even be the case that, as with steam locos, you need some kind of adjustable controls for one or both - though that does rather detract from the idea that this ought to be a very basic and simple set-up! This training film, made by the London, Midland & Scottish Railway in the 1930s or 1940s shows the principles very well: Though how easily (if at all!) such results can be obtained from one of these stoves is another kettle of fish, entirely . . . Gunner
Just plain pine 2x4, would guess some sap left in it. It also wasn't a LOT of sparks, would be completely acceptable and normal in a fire in a fire pit, I'm just burning it in a place fairly intolerant of such things. @Gunner Great info, and great video, thanks for sharing. I'm taking classes to operate steam tractors and am learning most of that stuff, enjoying it a lot.
Oooh, have fun, Marc!! MTA - but what's shown in that video applies to boilers used on railway locos; I'm not at all familiar with steam tractors, but I believe that they use boilers built on distinctly different principles, using a type of boiler known in Britain as a 'marine' or 'drum' boiler - so you may find certain aspects of managing your fire to be quite different. With best regards, Gunner
Looking it up real quick, I think what you call a marine type boiler, we call a Scotch type boiler. We do have one tractor with an upright boiler, but most use a locomotive style boiler. My understanding is that they're essentially the same as yours, just smaller. 25-110hp instead of 5000hp. Same basic design, though.
@Marc: I've just looked up the term steam tractor, and turned up a picture of a steam tractor at the Henry Ford Museum: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Steam_tractor#/media/File:15_23_1047_ford_museum.jpg and it certainly looks to be the same type of boiler used on British railway locomotives - in which case the info on that training film may prove helpful. But I think you've overestimated the strength of our firemen! As far as I know, the largest steam locos built in Britain, like the LMS 'Duchess' class (express passenger), and the British Railways Standard 9F (heavy fast freight) only got up to about 3,000bhp - and even that was pushing the fittest of firemen to their limits. At sustained high power, the fireman was shovelling 3,000lbs or more of coal into the firebox per hour. AFAIK, the only British locos which had a mechanical stoker were a few of the 9Fs, in the late 1950s, and it didn't work out too well. For one thing, it was difficult to ensure that an appropriate size of coal went into the tenders; the shot on that training film showing the fireman breaking up enormous lumps of coal, alongside plenty of smaller pieces, shows just what a mechanical stoker would be up against. For another, much of the best steam coal in Britain was soft coal from mines in South Wales, which took careful handling; feeding it through any kind of crusher or grader would shatter it into dust. The other problem was that much of the fine particles produced by the auger of a mech. stoker just blew straight through the firebox and only partially burnt, wasting coal, and producing lots of black smoke - which was not appreciated in a country as heavily built up as England! I did read a story about a war-time incident which puts it in context. During the war, our trains were frequently massively overloaded as compared to pre-war days, so when an LMS 'Duchess' pulled into Birmingham, where the crew were due to change, she had an awful lot of heavily crowded coaches hanging on the draw-bar. The replacement driver climbed aboard to take over, but his fireman was nowhere to be seen (he was off sick). In desperation, the traffic inspector collared a 16 year old cleaner (the lowest grade in the loco department), and told him "You're firing to Carlisle!" When the driver saw how small, young and puny his 'fireman' was, and found out that he'd only passed his firing test a few weeks previously, and had never even set foot on anything bigger than a small shunter (switcher) before, his heart sank - and it sank even lower when the cleaner slid open the fire doors, looked at the 42 square foot grate, and said: "Blimey - that's bigger than me bedroom!" Gunner
Hah, that's great! I remember watching British Railways documentaries as a wee sprog, I think the Duchess is my favorite. Streamlined please, maintenance hassle that it was. The 5000hp figure was based on what I knew of the Southern Pacific Daylight, and the assumption that you guys across the pond would have similar stuff. The Daylight is based not far from me and some of the crew attend the same class I'm taking. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Pacific_4449 Oil fired. That does change things!
@presscall My feeling at the moment with making a larger diameter cental flue is that it's a rather crude way of reducing the primary air. @Gunner I think has it right that some form of controllable damper is required, either as in one of @snwcmpr links where a can lid was placed inside, or a method of blocking the intake holes in the base. I'm toying with a 2 part disk with cutouts that can be rotated to vary the flow rate through the grate. This would initially reduce primary air by 50%. Trying to control the flow into the base itself would also alter secondary air and may not achieve anything. The only other variable available without major modification is the chimney height.
Heavens, we never had any locos that big, Marc - because we never had the need to pull trains of that size. Compared to the US, England is small and crowded, so our railway system was built to match it, and things like marshalling yards, stations, passing loops, freight sidings and so on were much smaller than yours. Even today, I think the heaviest trains we run are the stone trains running from Somerset to London - and I believe they only run to about 3,500 - 4,000 tons. When Ed Burkhardt, the boss of Wisconsin Central, came over to lick our freight railways into some semblance of sanity (after the government TOTALLY messed up their privatisation), he said he couldn't figure out how we could run trains at a profit hauling such small loads - and was pretty shaken when our crews explained that, for one thing, the trains were single-manned, and for another, they cruised at 90 mph, so as to slot in between express passenger trains! Burkhardt said that many of his trains were loaded to a point where their minimum speed on the steepest gradient was 17 mph. If we tried running trains like that on the main lines in Britain, it would cause chaos. To give you an idea of just how intensive our services are, Clapham Junction - a vital interchange station in south London - has 17 platforms, and at peak times a train goes through there every 20 seconds; even at off-peak times, it's a train every 36 seconds! Yes . . . our blokes get one of these . . . https://footplateequipment.co.uk/heritage-equipment/shovels/heavyduty.html Mind, we are very up to date in one respect, that the firing system is voice controlled; when the firebed is running low, the driver yells: "Oy! Fill up them back corners, mate!" Best regards, Gunner
@Simes - coo . . . you're talking to an LMS man, Simes!! My favourite - the LMS Crab, designed by Hughes. A real gutsy little job, according to crews who worked them on heavy freights and passeneger workings. Gunner
In advance of tonight's firing I pulled together a few bits and pieces as described previously. First pic of everything packed together. Cooking kit is an old Vango 2 man SS set. In the second is the stove sitting inside. Fits like a glove. All separated. With stove assembled. For tonight's burn the fuel. This is 'kindling' shop bought. I didn't have a small axe if I was going to use the stove in the wild so got the Fiskars. Next is a pattern for the damper, in cardboard for the moment. Thoughts welcomed on whether to reduce the arm widths. And lastly the chopped up wood in the stove. Apologies for some of the randomness doing it from the phone.
