New E-Classic owner

[beenthere]

Bioman
Were you at Warnock Hersey doing the testing?
Appreciate your insight given on the testing.

[Bioman]

We're using Intertek in Middleton.

[beenthere]

That's right, they bought WH

[Bioman]

I guess I heard that and had forgotten.  We say some WC tags around the shop.

[doctorb]

Most of us inquiring about outdoor wood furnaces are consumers, not manufacturers or regulators.  Bioman and Beenthere, you two seem to have been on the inside of this EPA testing process to one degree or another.  Is there any insight you could pass on to us regarding 1) future changes in regulations or testing procedures, 2) real world differences between the available model furnaces that are not noted in the tests, and 3) what future improvements can be expected within the industry?  Do either of you own an outdoor wood furnace?  Which one did you choose and why?  I am sorry to try and put you on the spot, but, I have found that, outside of the EPA phase 2 testing list, there is no real comparative data among the available devices.  You could purchase one tomorrow and have a "supposedly" better one come out the next day.  On the comsumer end of this, we are a little blind.  Thanks for whatever info. you can provide.

Doctorb

[beenthere]

doctorb
I have been in the 3rd party testing facility mentioned, and used to know the testing engineers setting up the tests. Not sure I'd know anyone there now. I've not been involved with EPA. To me they are an enviro-laden Gov't agency run amok.
But I do know, that trying to corall all the many variables that enter into a test vs. the many, many more variables that users will add to the field use of OWB adds to the confusion and frustration.
Gov't policy makers likely require some 3rd party testing to certify wood burners so advertising claims can be judged by the consumer. For may years, we had electrical cords and such with the UL approved label. Now there are other 3rd party testing companies that do quite well with certifying that a mfg's claims are on track and can be backed up.
I gather from what Bioman posted, that they were going through such tests to get certain certification of their burner.
As he said, Intertek can do very controlled testing with a very controled load of wood that probably is not very realistic in the real world. Species, moisture content, size of wood load, cleanliness of the burner, wind, outside air temp and RH, draft, and a host of other variables will enter into how well a wood burner will perform.
I have an indoor boiler, not an OWB. It is a lot of effort to figure out what works and what doesn't work to keep the right amount of the right wood burning for the longest period of time with the least amount of wasted burning of wood but enough heat to keep the house warm when the temps drop.  Burning wood isn't like flipping the switch on the gas boiler and just walking away. 
Your summary and frustration of what is missing in data for comparison is real, and I think right on. But I don't foresee any agency shedding any light on the "consumer end of this, we are all blind" statement. Too many variables, and getting 3rd party certification has been the best at providing some across the board comparisons. And that certification is very expensive, and has to be paid for by the consumer. If a new model comes out the next day, certification has to be done all over again.
Likely certification puts a real damper on new development. But that is what Gov't control does very well.

And for EPA, I think they would like to see zero wood burners, IMO.

[Bioman]

beenthere

You sum things up nicely. 

Those of us trying to introduce new technology to meet future needs/standards are up against old test procedures.  In our case there are no procedures that match what our machine does.  The guys at Intertek have to combine procedures from different technologies to satisfy EPA yet not represent what we're doing.  The lab guys at Intertek don't have any other options.  I do know 'they' are working on the next set of standards but don't expect to see anything released until 2012 at the earliest.

doctorb

1.  As I said above, I'm hearing it will be 2012 at the earliest.  Thankfully for us, the chairman of the ASTM standards committee has seen our equipment and has added this technology to the standards discussions.  The challenges we're facing in the current tests have nothing to do with the emissions they test for or care about.
2.  Hopefully future tests will represent real world applications - I doubt it though because assuming future emissions standards are at least as strict, there is no way most (or maybe any) of the OWB's could pass these tests if they were run that way.
3.  Personally, I think we are bringing one future technology to the market right now.   I believe the future lies in technology that can utilize the least expensive, locally available and most versatile fuel supplies.  If local jobs can be created (local fuel producers) and consumers get access to cheaper fuels using technology that is smoke free, I don't know how it can get much better than that.  Especially if said technology has a future eye on CHPC (combined heat power and cooling).  The technology we're introducing has auto feed, is both an indoor/outdoor boiler and a fully rated gas backup boiler in the event you can't get fuel or want to go away for extended periods of time.

When it comes to the EPA list keep in mind the Phase 2 program is voluntary.  Yes, some areas require the hang tag, and marketing is much simpler if you have the tag.  However, it's a bit of a two-edged sword as getting on the list doesn't necessarily mean the equipment is better -it just means the company was able to pass the tests under unique circumstances.  So, given the current testing climate it is honestly difficult to determine how a machine will perform and whether it is better because it has been through the program. 

Consumers are ultimately the final judge of how well products work.  It's too bad manufacturers have to 'voluntarily' make certified machines that are thought to be 'better' for having gone through the rigors of Phase 2 testing. 

That said, the program isn't inherently bad.  We personally found we needed to make a few changes to our product - good ones for the consumer.  The variables are immense and I wouldn't want to be on the committee writing the standards.  Trying to figure out how to test all this stuff is a big task.

[doctorb]

Well, I guess I have used the "EPA approved list argument" for the last time.  In essence then, the EPA doesn't require testing standards of all OWB's, their tests don't shed accurate info on the degree of efficiency / heat production / pollution under real world conditions, and yet they, complicit with state governments, write the regulations for thier use. 

Bioman and beenthere, can't thank you enough for the tutorial.  I admire people who can make progress in the face of such inane bureaucracy.

Doctorb

[Bioman]

You got it......

[doctorb]

beenthere- your statement

And for EPA, I think they would like to see zero wood burners, IMO.

is a bit chilling, in more ways than one.

It's hard to actually grasp the environmental impact of one form of energy use versus another.  Oil is drilled and shipped and refined throughout the world.  That process uses energy and creates pollution.  Natural gas is clean when burned but the fracking (short for fracturing) process to get the gas out of the earth is awful.  Solar, while clean, has been expensive and requires lots of room.  I don't know the impact of the manufacture of the panels, but it would not seem excessive.  Wind seems clean enough but not all of us live on a high ridge.  Each of our energy sources has problems and consequenses.  With the better methods of wood combustion, and further advances to come, it's hard for me to imagine the EPA outlawing wood as a fuel.  It is not hard, however, to envision a failure on their part to accurately compare the total enviromental footprint of each of these energy methods.

Doctorb

[Bioman]

Well said.

[JJ]

Thank you Bioman and Benthere for insight on the insanity.
EPA is out of control in my state (mho), req passing the poorly defined testing critera in 2008.

Some manfacuring models were 'frozen out' by the limited testing resources of EPA, and were elimated from my buy list.

           Jim

[Bioman]

Here's an update and validation of the content in this thread.  This comment is posted on the EPA site in regards to testing procedure.  They only cover efficiency in the notice.  From experience we can tell you the same holds true for emissions and performance.  This from the EPA at http://www.epa.gov/burnwise/owhhlist.html#foot3 -----


Please Note Energy efficiency numbers that have been calculated using the current test procedure are generating numbers that do not represent actual efficiencies. As such, we have taken down the efficiency column from this web site. Please bear with us while we review this issue. 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I look forward to new test procedures and some regulation/rating that effect real performance in this industry

[doctorb]

I think that the above comments by Bioman and beenthere regarding EPA testing of outdoor wood burners should be required reading for all owners and prospective owners of these furnaces, and for all regulators of their use.   Doctorb

[Guitarjunkie37]

Ok, Ive been monitoring your post here and found them very informative. Ive recently installed at E-classic 1400 and this is my first wood stove so I had no experience on how it should or shouldn't work compared to others. The Dealer who installed it was an idiot so I wish I would have went with another dealer if I could do it over. First off the guy didn't bring enough ground pipe so it delayed the install til he got his act together.  Then the guy started to drill through the basement wall without observing what was on the other side and almost drilled into a water sofner  I had along the wall. Then after the stove was installed the dealer didn't purge the air from the pipes and the first time I fired it up the stove boiled over because the water couldn't circulate through the heat exchanger because of the air in the system.  Ok, Now that Ive established my authorized dealer in the area is an idiot i'll move on to the stove and I have some questions for you stove experts.  Once I got the stove operating properly the stove seems to be performing quite well. Ive always had consistant heat and always at the exact tempature that I have the house thero set at so everything seels to be operating good. The only problem Ive had was the stove went out a couple times and I had to restart the fire. My question is should the half moon in the bottom of the stove be completely covered with coals or should this be kept as clear as possible? Or should I keep a coal bed on it and just poke a hole though it to get air?

 Does the firebox temp fluxuate according to the heat demand or should this be normally at a certain tempature? Mine seems to usally be in the 200-300 degree range unless it kicks on to bring the water temp up.

Ive noticed inside the furnace there is a black substance that builds up on the stove. Looks almost like it's melting paint. Ive scraped this off several times and it keeps re-appearing. I noticed this after the first itme I used the stove and it's still doing it after a month of operation. Is this normal or just something a stove will do? is something causing this? Ive noticed on the top of the inside of the stove it looks like a bunch of black drip spots of the black stuff. Hope I dont sound like a idiot but thats the best way to describe it..

Thanks in advance for your input.

[doctorb]

Guitarjunkie37
Welcome to the FF.  You'll find lots of help here.

1.  The half moon should definitely be covered.  It only becomes uncovered when the fire burns too low.  I have an e-2300 as opposed to the e-1400, so I don't know the optimum depth of the coal bed.  That's in your instruction manual.  Yes, you can poke a hole through the coal bed down through the half moon.  I do it often, but I have no proof that it is necessary.  When the coal bed becomes finely powdered firmly packed ash, air won't go through very well and it will be time to empty some of it out.  Anyway, I can go for days or weeks without seeing the half moon!

2.  My stove only measures water temp, not firebox temp. I wish I had that option.  As far as the firebox temp is concerned, the stove goes through a cycle, including low burn, high burn and idle.  The firebox temp may be different on all three of these points in the cycle.  I think that it would fluctuate dependent upon how much demand for heat is requested, assuming that there is enough fuel in the firebox and the air flow was good.

3.  The black stuff is creosote.  It can clog your air intakes.  Notice that a very hot fire removes it.   I don't scrape it from the walls, only from the bypass door opening so that the seal on that door remains good, and off the air intake holes to make sure air flow is good.  Minimize creosote by burning dry seasoned hardwood.  This means getting your wood up and ready a minimum of 6 months in advance.  See the seasoning firewood thread.

There is a learning curve here and you will get frustrated.  Bring your troubles onto the FF and we can help solve them.  We have all been there.

Doctorb

[hockeyguy]

Hey Guitarjunkie37,
Good advice from doctorb regarding the coals over the half moon. I find if my coals get too deep the boiler will labor to bring water up to temp. Heavy smoke and lack of gassification are sure signs of this. After a while you'll be able to tell how it's running and where it is in its cycle just by looking at what's coming out of the stack.

If your losing fires, it's telling me either your wood isn't seasoned well enough or you need to (add?) or adjust the pulse timer to keep a good bed of coals. Been there done that!

Good luck!

[ken999]

Time for an update I suppose:

Recently I drilled the two holes in the rear of the firebox to allow for more airflow and better more complete burn. Typically I'd have to really work to keep the back lower portion of the firebox from building up with a big 'bock' of nasty unburned gunk. Since drilling the new holes this problem is gone completely. I've never had it so good maintaining the coal bed. It's really hard to believe these boilers even made it out of R&D without the additional holes. I used a 5/8" bit as it was what I could borrow. Turns out the corner holes, the last ones going down the sides, were smaller in diameter than 5/8" so I opened them up some too while I was in there. The two present in the back were 5/8" IIRC.  Regardless of size, the additional airflow made a huge difference. If you haven't done it yet, do it. You'll be glad you did.

The other modification I made was removing the bottom, low burn, solenoid and attached disk. Bye bye low burn mode. Another huge improvement IMHO. The stove cycles quicker and smokes less at re-fire time. Without any real timing of things, I'd guess the stove gets up to temp AT LEAST 1/3 quicker, maybe even 2x as fast. It's another mod I'd recommend to any of the 2300 owners out there like myself who have older, non-Firestar controllers. The other nice thing is, on my bigger temp cycles, when I manually running the stove while home, the stove doesn't haul right along to the old low burn mode set point, clicking off a degree every 1.5 min, then fall flat when the solenoid drops. It just chugs right up to temp then shuts down with no over-run in temp. Another feature that should have never made it past R&D.

Things have been real good lately...I dipped into some primo maple a week or so ago and I've never seen the firebox so clean. It looks as good, maybe even better than it did at the end of the summer when I was buning 50 degree swings everyday for DHW. Unreal...no goop, the little bit of build-up is easily scraped down as it's nice and dry, not sticky. I'd like to attribute this to the mods, but I think it's more to do with the nice wood. I'l find out soon as I'll be through the nice maple and be into a mix of hardwood softwood in a month or so.

Now if I could get my dealer over here to swap out the blown FC (since April... ) and do a warrantied swap out of my controller display, I'll be sorta happy. Oh...I need to replace the cover on the RC door. It's warped.

[Logginglogginglogging]

Haha...yeah...I've been purposely misleading my better half for years too...

I take it you are loading in between the airholes on the sides without blocking the flow? I'm not sure I can load my 2ft'ers that way without causing trouble. I'm holding the wood towards the door in hopes that I at least keep the back inlets open. Our stove seems to burn from the front as others have noted, so I'm still getting a gob of 'stuff' in the back 1/4 of the firebox...more than I'd like to see anyways.

Tomorrow, I'd like to get things burned way down and give the boiler a good scraping and cleaning.

Got the mother of all fireballs this afternoon...phew...worst one yet...thought of you when I did it.

Managed to keep my eyebrows though, so I didn't score too many bonus points. I must have looked like the former President Bush ducking a hurled shoe when that baby came screaming out at me...kinda glad my wife didn't see that one.

One night I came home after a few too many frosty cold ones, and dident pull the bypass before opeing the door. My wife was stand on the porch watching as a jiant fireball shot ot as i opened it, and singed my entire head. Lol I looked like Michle Jackson after that one!!!!!

[Logginglogginglogging]

Doc you seem a wee bit defensive...have you got something to lose???  If you think everything is hunky dory with the E-Classic than gooood for you.  One look at the numerous posts on this forum (and others) regarding E-Classic's problems should be enough for new buyers to be wary of this boiler. Remove fire bricks, drill holes in the boiler plate...*edited* At least until CB works out all the bugs. 

I don't want to get into a pissing match(?), I'm simply trying to open up the discourse on this forum to more options and broader discussion.   Most are on here to learn and there is a whole lot to learn about wood gasification.  There are at least 10 other proven gasification boilers on the market that have not had any of the the problems the E-Classic has had. Some have but the companies are no longer in business.  I think this is something people should know before they drop $15,000.

To answer other questions
1. My Econoburn is a 200,000 BTU outdoor unit.
2.  I wish I had 2000 gallons of water storage!
3.  I heat 4500 sq. ft. as well but on 5 cords per year because with 1000 gallons of storage it NEVER idles so it NEVER wastes wood energy.


(shuswapian, we aren't a typical internet forum and stay away from foul language, even the abbreviations.  We make an effort not to turn discussions into personal arguments too.  Admin)

I like my e-classic 2300, but when i bought it used i dent care if it was EPA Aproved of not, I bought it cause it was a wicked good deal (half price) 1 year oled. But if I found another unit that I thought worked better and was cheaper, I would have bought that...made in Errope , approved here or not...I dont care ...who is gonna get me the wood stove police.... Enjoy your stove whatever it is if it heats your house well.