soild fuel stove advise

quasiff

Yesterday I put in an Oisin the same way as GSXR1, also in a new, never used chimney. I did what was recommended to me by other people (2 builders and the hardware shop who sold me the flue components and the stove). I haven't lit it yet and the fire cement is still soft. This morning I'm reading this.

I looked at the Stanley installation check list and it says 2 things of relevance. One, it should have a minimum of 6' of 5" flue pipe and two, "Appliance should be connected to a chimney of less than 250mm (8") in diameter (otherwise the chimney must be lined with a 5" flue liner)". Note that 250mm is 10", not 8". I expect they mean 200mm. Next point is that the information inside the manual seems to contradict this, saying a flue of 5" to 6" is what is allowed but it's somewhat ambiguous. It would be consistent if they meant the first 6' of flue should be between 5" and 6" diameter.

The 90 degree elbow is listed as allowed, and the one I fitted has a removable panel for access.

It looks to me as if the Stanley recommendation could be met by doing the following: Remove the adapter and fit 1.3m of 5" flue liner to the top to meet the 1800mm requirement and seal the gap at the top of this with fire cement and rock wool. Access to the top of the inserted liner is a problem. I could fit a soot door on the outside wall and access it through this.

Any suggestions, and rationale for the suggestions, from the experts regarding this solution?

gsxr1

Chimney sweep inspected today. Says it was fine and completely safe . Everything clean and in good working order. No soot build up at all at the 45 fitting.

quasiff

gsxr1 wrote: »

Chimney sweep inspected today. Says it was fine and completely safe . Everything clean and in good working order. No soot build up at all at the 45 fitting.

That's good to hear. Thank you for posting.

I looked up info about this and there is not much quantitative info published on the web. The 200mm chimney flue will draw air faster and might cause condensation, depending on a whole lot of conditions. The diameter of the chimney appears to be required to be at least one size bigger than the stove flue, and generally there isn't noted any upper limit. Liners seem to be recommended when the chimney is old (pre 1970 or thereabouts) and may be leaking, except by the liner suppliers who unsurprisingly seem to recommend them for every situation.

It seems burning unsuitable fuel (wet timber, for example) will be a problem anyway, whatever the flue size. Also running the stove at a very low level can cause it. Some "expert" suggested that a bucket of coal should be used every few days if only wood is burned to help prevent this. The Oisin is OK with anthracite but not petroleum coke, according to the manual.

If condensation is an issue with large flue sizes this will necessarily be climate and building exposure dependent, so cold climates (Canada for example) will have a worse problem than mild climates like southern Ireland.

Stanley sell these stoves all over the world, as far as I can tell, so they have to make their instruction manual deal with extremes beyond what we'd expect here. This means we can always be OK if we follow the rules prescribed (and as suggested by the experts who posted earlier) but not necessarily have problems if we deviate somewhat. As I said before, the Stanley manual is not very clear and open to interpretation.

I'm not an expert, and this is just my own personal conclusion. All expert comments welcome.

gsxr1

quasiff wrote: »

That's good to hear. Thank you for posting.

I looked up info about this and there is not much quantitative info published on the web. The 200mm chimney flue will draw air faster and might cause condensation, depending on a whole lot of conditions. The diameter of the chimney appears to be required to be at least one size bigger than the stove flue, and generally there isn't noted any upper limit. Liners seem to be recommended when the chimney is old (pre 1970 or thereabouts) and may be leaking, except by the liner suppliers who unsurprisingly seem to recommend them for every situation.

It seems burning unsuitable fuel (wet timber, for example) will be a problem anyway, whatever the flue size. Also running the stove at a very low level can cause it. Some "expert" suggested that a bucket of coal should be used every few days if only wood is burned to help prevent this. The Oisin is OK with anthracite but not petroleum coke, according to the manual.

If condensation is an issue with large flue sizes this will necessarily be climate and building exposure dependent, so cold climates (Canada for example) will have a worse problem than mild climates like southern Ireland.

Stanley sell these stoves all over the world, as far as I can tell, so they have to make their instruction manual deal with extremes beyond what we'd expect here. This means we can always be OK if we follow the rules prescribed (and as suggested by the experts who posted earlier) but not necessarily have problems if we deviate somewhat. As I said before, the Stanley manual is not very clear and open to interpretation.

I'm not an expert, and this is just my own personal conclusion. All expert comments welcome.

I seen a Canadian web site suggest using lots of paper and fast burning tinder to get your chimney hot as quick as possible . This reduces the chance of condensation .

I dont run her low much. In fact it my Stanleys front window gets black , it indicates that it need tuning up . You wont be disappointed with the little stove. They are fantastic.

ttm

So here's a simple reason why a vermiculite insulated liner is good for a multifuel stove - it needs far less heat than a traditional lined brick chimney to warm up.

If we look at the traditional open fire with 60%+ of the heat going up the chimney then that 60% of the heat is keeping the chimney hot.

Whats up with a cold chimney? Simple all the tar and muck from the fire hits a cold surface and condenses. So cold chimeny equals more tar deposits.

Finally lets look at a 80% efficient Multifuel stove that is throttled back so the fuel is just smoldering now there is 20% of the heat to keep the chimeny warm and the air starved fire isn't burning efficiently so producing more smoke, soot and tar than normal.

So if the traditional design chimney worked fine with lots of air and 60% of the heat from the fire heating it up how is it going to work with very little heat and a very smokey fire?

In many cases it works just fine BUT it needs far more attention and cleaning than most people will give it so safer to put in a liner that stays warm and operates correctly with the more efficient MultiFuel stoves.

Put in a tight 90degree bend and maybe next time you go to sweep the chimney you find its too much hassle and don't bother

gabbo is coming

gsxr1 wrote: »

Chimney sweep inspected today. Says it was fine and completely safe . Everything clean and in good working order. No soot build up at all at the 45 fitting.

Had chimney swept about a month ago, I installed mine based on gsxr1. Said it was the standard install, nothing wrong with it. I also have a carbon monoxide alarm above it.

On another note, I've had the back brick crack twice on the Oisin (once replaced by Stanley). Now, that it's broken again and the front two bars are bending way out of shape, I asked the sweep to look at it - he said it was a standard design flaw with the Oisin - they can't burn the smokeless as it burns too hot. That if I had smoke coal it'd be fine.

Anyone know (other than Stanley themselves) where to get spare parts?

I wouldn't recommend the Oisin to anyone thinking of burning smokeless coal, it's fine the briquettes.

gabbo is coming

gsxr1 wrote: »

Chimney sweep inspected today. Says it was fine and completely safe . Everything clean and in good working order. No soot build up at all at the 45 fitting.

In fairness, when my sweep took out the 2x45 adapter I have going from the back of the Stanley to the flu, quite a lot of soot fell out when he tipped it out.
He said the chimney was clean and didn't really need a clean (but swept it anyway). He also didn't pass much heed to the buildup of soot.

This guy has been servicing boilers and chimneys for years and comes recommened from boards...

10-10-20

gabbo is coming wrote: »

On another note, I've had the back brick crack twice on the Oisin (once replaced by Stanley). Now, that it's broken again and the front two bars are bending way out of shape, I asked the sweep to look at it - he said it was a standard design flaw with the Oisin - they can't burn the smokeless as it burns too hot. That if I had smoke coal it'd be fine.

Anyone know (other than Stanley themselves) where to get spare parts?

I wouldn't recommend the Oisin to anyone thinking of burning smokeless coal, it's fine the briquettes.

My back brick is broken too. I'm burning wood and briquettes, so I think it was due to some over-enthusiastic fueling when it was hot.
I need to get a replacement back-brick. The original supplier, www.gings.ie said that they stock them, if that's any good to you. I seem to remember it was €30 for the brick.

ttm

gabbo is coming wrote: »

Had chimney swept about a month ago, I installed mine based on gsxr1. Said it was the standard install, nothing wrong with it. I also have a carbon monoxide alarm above it.

On another note, I've had the back brick crack twice on the Oisin (once replaced by Stanley). Now, that it's broken again and the front two bars are bending way out of shape, I asked the sweep to look at it - he said it was a standard design flaw with the Oisin - they can't burn the smokeless as it burns too hot. That if I had smoke coal it'd be fine.

Anyone know (other than Stanley themselves) where to get spare parts?

I wouldn't recommend the Oisin to anyone thinking of burning smokeless coal, it's fine the briquettes.

I'm not really sure what the problem with a crack is? Often a firebrick will crack and provided you don't move it will still do its job fine.

Its only a theory but I always try and have a "gentle" first fire so the fire bricks are dried out before I set a really hot fire. My logic is that the water in a damp fire brick has to go somewhere so a gentle fire will dry it out but a really hot one will just turn any moisture into steam and put pressure on the firebrick and crack it. As I said only a theory . Same applies to a fire that hasn't been used in a while fire bricks will be damp so start off with a small fire first rather than a rageing infero.

gabbo is coming

ttm wrote: »

I'm not really sure what the problem with a crack is? Often a firebrick will crack and provided you don't move it will still do its job fine.

Its only a theory but I always try and have a "gentle" first fire so the fire bricks are dried out before I set a really hot fire. My logic is that the water in a damp fire brick has to go somewhere so a gentle fire will dry it out but a really hot one will just turn any moisture into steam and put pressure on the firebrick and crack it. As I said only a theory . Same applies to a fire that hasn't been used in a while fire bricks will be damp so start off with a small fire first rather than a rageing infero.

True TTM, it's just like two firebricks! But the bended bars at the front is bugging me when I open it to throw in fuel.Still, probably nothing wrong with them...

gsxr1

gabbo is coming wrote: »

Had chimney swept about a month ago, I installed mine based on gsxr1. Said it was the standard install, nothing wrong with it. I also have a carbon monoxide alarm above it.

On another note, I've had the back brick crack twice on the Oisin (once replaced by Stanley). Now, that it's broken again and the front two bars are bending way out of shape, I asked the sweep to look at it - he said it was a standard design flaw with the Oisin - they can't burn the smokeless as it burns too hot. That if I had smoke coal it'd be fine.

Anyone know (other than Stanley themselves) where to get spare parts?

I wouldn't recommend the Oisin to anyone thinking of burning smokeless coal, it's fine the briquettes.

my glass cracked , I have lost the recipt and just ordered a new pain for it of stanley. cost 40.

demanufactured

gsxr1 wrote: »

my glass cracked , I have lost the recipt and just ordered a new pain for it of stanley. cost 40.

thats what slack will do.

gsxr1

demanufactured wrote: »

thats what slack will do.

no in my case. (In fact I dont understand why you think slack would cause a crack?)

I was using using a stanley scraper to clean the class and over time I wrecked the gasket. which in turn leaked .

I sealed the glass back in.

bad idea.

the glass had no margin for expansion and cracked.

Now I have a nice new glass and gasket.

lesions learned.

demanufactured

The only reason i said it i because slack burns very hot.

gsxr1

demanufactured wrote: »

The only reason i said it i because slack burns very hot.

it does burn hot alright, but coal is specified as ok by stanley.
I would have issues with them if it started cracking the bricks by using coal.. Its in black and white in the manual that came with it.

burger1979

gsxr1 wrote: »

as for the clearance at the front. . its not perfect. But used with care I cant see a problem. I am using a spare tile in front on the thing when refueling. Just in case hot coal falls out and damages the floor.


the Harth is black granite and is hot under the stove but stays cool around the outside. The mantle is timber but is over the recommended distantance in hight . wont be a problem.

apologies for not reading through the whole thread on this but i have a similar situation to your's. my stove arrived yesterday and we had measured a few and came up with some oprions and picked one of them. the fire place is set up for a gas fire insert but we wanted a free standing stove. anyways it was a tight fit but got one in. we like you have a timber surround to the fire. the stove sits in the middle of the fireplace with roughly 7.5 inches from either side of the stove to the wood and then about 13 inches from the top of the stove to the wood. Do you think this clearance would be enough? the supplier came to the house to deliver it yesterday said that it would not be enough and though we should change the surround to a marble/stone type but this means more cost on top of the already €1200 that we have spent on it. he said that we could wait and see what happens but in the long run if that happens and the wood warps then it might cost us more. anyone any thoughts? also is it possible to get a hearth extension? the door opens out over the hearth and onto our wooden (laminate) floor so just needed to know if possible to get some thing like a metal extension to the hearth to catch any ash/hot embers that come out???

kodak

burger1979 wrote: »

apologies for not reading through the whole thread on this but i have a similar situation to your's. my stove arrived yesterday and we had measured a few and came up with some oprions and picked one of them. the fire place is set up for a gas fire insert but we wanted a free standing stove. anyways it was a tight fit but got one in. we like you have a timber surround to the fire. the stove sits in the middle of the fireplace with roughly 7.5 inches from either side of the stove to the wood and then about 13 inches from the top of the stove to the wood. Do you think this clearance would be enough? the supplier came to the house to deliver it yesterday said that it would not be enough and though we should change the surround to a marble/stone type but this means more cost on top of the already €1200 that we have spent on it. he said that we could wait and see what happens but in the long run if that happens and the wood warps then it might cost us more. anyone any thoughts? also is it possible to get a hearth extension? the door opens out over the hearth and onto our wooden (laminate) floor so just needed to know if possible to get some thing like a metal extension to the hearth to catch any ash/hot embers that come out???

Did you check if your flue is for gas or a fire?

You'll have to change your surround and your hearth is meant to extend 300mm from the stove.

You need 50mm clearance at the back and 150mm from the sides from non-combustible materials. (from what i can recall)

Alot more if they are combustible.

What KW is the stove?

burger1979

well the 150mm i have on both sides. the stove is pushed right up against the marble surround (the stove supplier said that the marble surround is fine and the haerth and that they both have expansion cracks in them) the flue he said was ok. i have the flue pieces that he gave me and its just the bend coming out of the stove and then a flue adapter to fit in the existing chimney. i know that buikding regs state that 300mm is to be at the front of the fire but was going to get a hearth extension made from black matt steel rather having to take out the existing hearth and put in a new one. the stove is 5KW.

gsxr1

burger1979 wrote: »

apologies for not reading through the whole thread on this but i have a similar situation to your's. my stove arrived yesterday and we had measured a few and came up with some oprions and picked one of them. the fire place is set up for a gas fire insert but we wanted a free standing stove. anyways it was a tight fit but got one in. we like you have a timber surround to the fire. the stove sits in the middle of the fireplace with roughly 7.5 inches from either side of the stove to the wood and then about 13 inches from the top of the stove to the wood. Do you think this clearance would be enough? the supplier came to the house to deliver it yesterday said that it would not be enough and though we should change the surround to a marble/stone type but this means more cost on top of the already €1200 that we have spent on it. he said that we could wait and see what happens but in the long run if that happens and the wood warps then it might cost us more. anyone any thoughts? also is it possible to get a hearth extension? the door opens out over the hearth and onto our wooden (laminate) floor so just needed to know if possible to get some thing like a metal extension to the hearth to catch any ash/hot embers that come out???

The only clearance I dont have is the front hearth. Its been in over a year now and nothing has ever fallin out. To be honest man. Even if a coal did fall out when I opened it. It would lifted with a set of tongs and put back in. Peeps on here would have you believe there would be a massive explosion and your house would surly be burned to the ground if such a thing happened:rolleyes: You will be grand. just keep that timberwork away from the back. They do get very very hot I have a timber mantle and surround , but its 400mm sides and 750mm top clear . it has not been affected.

gabbo is coming

gsxr1 wrote: »

my glass cracked , I have lost the recipt and just ordered a new pain for it of stanley. cost 40.

Just rang the service line?

burger1979

gsxr1 wrote: »

The only clearance I dont have is the front hearth. Its been in over a year now and nothing has ever fallin out. To be honest man. Even if a coal did fall out when I opened it. It would lifted with a set of tongs and put back in. Peeps on here would have you believe there would be a massive explosion and your house would surly be burned to the ground if such a thing happened:rolleyes: You will be grand. just keep that timberwork away from the back. They do get very very hot I have a timber mantle and surround , but its 400mm sides and 750mm top clear . it has not been affected.

cheers for the reply i feel a bit more comforted that someone has dimensions like mine and not had any major issues. my clearances to the sides of the stove are 185mm to the sides and 325mm on top. I was flicking through the manual that came with it last night and it said that 150mm minimum was required on all sides. the only part that doesnt meet this is the back of the stove, the fire is not that deep in some places. I think i will get it installed as is and get a budget price on a new mantle/sides made in stone/marble. the other option is to take the fire place out altogether and creat a larger ope to sit the stove into. but then i dont think that i would get all the benefits of the stove heating the room. all i wanted was something simple to 'plug and play' in the house but every time we go to do something simple in the house it turns out to be big thing and costing us lots and lots of more money. :( damn these money pits :)

Eurorunner

@burger1979: Your right - do not push stove back into fireplace. I have mine a bit too far back than I would like - and a lot of heat is dissipated into the walls of the fireplace rather than out into the room where it should be. If I was replacing, I would extend the hearth a bit.
The other thing you could do is get an inset stove - not too late to consider (just return what you've got) - would probably mean less hassle as regards surround/mantle, hearth, etc. An inset will still deliver heat to where its needed and they are more space efficient.

kodak

burger1979 wrote: »

cheers for the reply i feel a bit more comforted that someone has dimensions like mine and not had any major issues. my clearances to the sides of the stove are 185mm to the sides and 325mm on top. I was flicking through the manual that came with it last night and it said that 150mm minimum was required on all sides. the only part that doesnt meet this is the back of the stove, the fire is not that deep in some places. I think i will get it installed as is and get a budget price on a new mantle/sides made in stone/marble. the other option is to take the fire place out altogether and creat a larger ope to sit the stove into. but then i dont think that i would get all the benefits of the stove heating the room. all i wanted was something simple to 'plug and play' in the house but every time we go to do something simple in the house it turns out to be big thing and costing us lots and lots of more money. :( damn these money pits :)

If you do bring it out, here is how i did mine. I also listed the costs of it at the end.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055694180&highlight=stove+live+project

burger1979

Eurorunner wrote: »

@burger1979: Your right - do not push stove back into fireplace. I have mine a bit too far back than I would like - and a lot of heat is dissipated into the walls of the fireplace rather than out into the room where it should be. If I was replacing, I would extend the hearth a bit.
The other thing you could do is get an inset stove - not too late to consider (just return what you've got) - would probably mean less hassle as regards surround/mantle, hearth, etc. An inset will still deliver heat to where its needed and they are more space efficient.

not mad on getting an inset stove. the fire place is set up for a gas fire complete with little microbore pipe sticking out of the fire place. dont want to have to rip out the pipe and cause more work to it than needs be. i have found a fireplace shop that does hearth extenders, basically a black sheet metal piece that sits in front of existing hearth (black enamel i think and you dont need to fix in place or anything like that just carry it around) and will catch any embers that fall out from the stove. We are then going to get a cheep rug to start off with and see over time what it looks like after a few months of use and in time we might get rid of the extension and rug. i should probably stick up a few pics of the fire place and see what people think about it and show the set up. Kodak - yours is what i am heading for but not that amount of work, like i said just plug and play type of thing.

burger1979

just wondering if anyone has had a contractor install a stove? i am not keen on doing the work myself as whenever i do something it always takes alot more time and more money so i got a quote from someone to install 250 for the lot i have all the materials, though he needs an extension piece for the flue and thats included in the 250. does this seem right to you folks out there?

burger1979

some pics of the fire place and with the stove in place to see how it fits

jack of all

In relation to cracking firebacks on the Oisin; my supplier told me this was par for the course (I refer to the large single brick to the rear) and not a defect as such. I've been using my stove for almost a year now, burning a mix of timber, smokeless nuggets and briquettes. I found regular coal too dirty and wouldn't use it now. I try and get the fire going quickly (with lots of kindling and wood shavings/ paper) when lighting it to get a good draw on the flue and get it up to temperature. I've never had an issue with the glass sooting up- a simple wipe with a damp cloth (when cold) is sufficient to leave the glass clear. I put this down to a number of factors- I get the fire going quickly, I use well dried timber and I don't close down the damper. A smokey fire which is starved of air is bad for the glass, the flue and possibly your health! The Oisin is a great little stove and has proven to be a great chopice for us.

ttm

jack of all wrote: »

I found regular coal too dirty and wouldn't use it now.

If by that you mean Polish Coal then I'm not supprised its filthy stuff and should never be used in a stove unless there's nothing else, but people will always buy the cheapest its just part of the culture.

Edit> sorry that wasn't an attack on the previous poster just a rant in general.

gsxr1

ttm wrote: »

If by that you mean Polish Coal then I'm not supprised its filthy stuff and should never be used in a stove unless there's nothing else, but people will always buy the cheapest its just part of the culture.

Edit> sorry that wasn't an attack on the previous poster just a rant in general.

them polish should be ran out of the place, with there dirty coal :pac:

jack of all

I am curious as to why polish coal burns so badly in a stove (I found the roof and bonnet of our cars were covered in flakes of soot after using it!). I burned 1 bag of this and returned trhe remaining 5 bags, never again! Never had this issue when burning coal in an open fire. Strange...