Ash pan and cleaning mess

A._Badger

Greenfires is right - wood burns best on a decent layer of wood ash.

Just don't try it with smokeless - it will prove very expensive very quickly!

pgalland

This is all great advice thank you... I still have 200kg of smokeless to try (bought different kind to test heat/cost/ash)... but I might try the briquette next.
From a cost standpoint - is smokeless fuel more economical than briquettes/hotties (I pay £10 per 25kg bag for blaze / supertherm)? What about the heat output?

Thanks again for all your valuable input...

Laura_88

Greenfires wrote: »

To be honest - if you're only burning wood you'd be better letting the ash build up to cover the grate - wood is much happier on a bed of ash than on a clean grate. Smokeless fuel is the opposite of course.

Never knew this! I've been cleaning ours out every day when I Hoover - I have a little routine of emptying the ash tray then Hoover around the hearth. Will try & not to empty it as much!

Love this site for all the tips!

Back to thread... I'm getting a metal bucket & hoping to empty it in their when we've got it on 24/7. What stove you got? We've got the seranno 7 & love it!!

A._Badger

pgalland wrote: »

This is all great advice thank you... I still have 200kg of smokeless to try (bought different kind to test heat/cost/ash)... but I might try the briquette next.
From a cost standpoint - is smokeless fuel more economical than briquettes/hotties (I pay £10 per 25kg bag for blaze / supertherm)? What about the heat output?

Thanks again for all your valuable input...

That's quite a good price for a quality smokeless fuel. In terms of calorific value, smokeless fuel produces considerably more heat than wood or wood derivatives. Whether than actually translates to better value depends on how much you have to pay for wood or briquetes.

pgalland

Laura_88 wrote: »

What stove you got? We've got the seranno 7 & love it!!

We have a seranno 5 SE - it's nice, beside the ash pan that's very (too) small

pgalland

A._Badger wrote: »

In terms of calorific value, smokeless fuel produces considerably more heat than wood or wood derivatives.

According to the hottie website, it's actually roughly the same... was wondering then

http://www.bridgebrooke.co.uk/heat-output-charts.html

I will get a few and try for myself

A._Badger

pgalland wrote: »

According to the hottie website, it's actually roughly the same... was wondering then

http://www.bridgebrooke.co.uk/heat-output-charts.html

I will get a few and try for myself

That's rather naughty of them and quite misleading (though not surprising). Their comparison is with 'ordinary coal'; Probably cheap imported bituminous housecoal. In other words not a manufactured smokeless product, which is the only thing you should use in a multifuel stove (other than dry wood, of course).

Even then. look at the 'energy density' they quote for housecoal. ie 4.9 as against 7.7 for 'coal'.



.

Greenfires

Quite possibly not so much being naughty, as the fact that bituminous housecoal is pretty much just that - whereas smokeless fuels, being manufactured products, can be very different from each other in their performance. I don't like the stuff at all personally - I don't like the mess it leaves behind or even the fire it produces to be honest - but I have plenty of customers who use it. Quite a few of them have had very poor results with "brand A", and have eventually ended up with "brand C" which has made a huge difference in their particular application. I'll stick with Hotties though for my own use!

pgalland - if you want to try a sample pack - just drop me a line and I'll sort you out!

GlynD

I've read through this thread with a lot of interest. Personally I wouldn't find a 12 or 14 hour burn before emptying the ash pan a burden. I love the idea of a Tippy and if I had that type of ashpan I'd buy one.

Fortunately in our house we have a Baxi Burnall and I've never come across a more effective grate and boiler. The output is even better than our oil boiler on its current settings but the major this about it in relation to this thread is the ashpan - http://www.ashpanworld.co.uk/a002-lift-out-ashpan-loa-18-inch---24-inch-137-p.asp

We'd burn the fire for at least three nights before we need to empty this baby and it's just a question of lifting the entire unit out, covering it (if it's windy) and emptying it.

Were I ever given a choice in another house I would forget about stoves and burners and fit another one of these as you get the effectiveness of it as a central heating source but can still enjoy an open fire - and it's so easy to clean. I note than it one ashpan version, if the fireplace is against an outside wall, the ashpan can be emptied from outside - while the fire is still lit. http://www.c20fireplaces.co.uk/parts/baxi-burnall I also remember a man some years ago who showed me how he'd converted his (in a split level bungalow) to empty directly into a large steel container (on wheels) in the garage by pulling a small lever beside the fireplace: now that's convenience.

A._Badger

Greenfires wrote: »

Quite possibly not so much being naughty, as the fact that bituminous housecoal is pretty much just that - whereas smokeless fuels, being manufactured products, can be very different from each other in their performance. !

In which case why not do what the stove makers do and compare it with anthracite?

True, that varies but so does wood and they' make that comparison.

I think it's important that consumers get accurate information and comparing this manufactured wood product against housecoal is meaningless for stove users who, as we've both said, shouldn't use housecoal on stoves.