Some stove windscreen test results

Bushwalking gear and paraphernalia. Electronic gadget topics (inc. GPS, PLB, chargers) belong in the 'Techno Babble' sub-forum.
Forum rules
TIP: The online Bushwalk Inventory System can help bushwalkers with a variety of bushwalk planning tasks, including: Manage which items they take bushwalking so that they do not forget anything they might need, plan meals for their walks, and automatically compile food/fuel shopping lists (lists of consumables) required to make and cook the meals for each walk. It is particularly useful for planning for groups who share food or other items, but is also useful for individual walkers.

Some stove windscreen test results

Postby Tony » Tue 29 Sep, 2009 5:22 pm

I just did these test for a thread on BPL and I thought that some on BW-T might be interested in the results.

It is often assumed that using a windshield it directs the heat from the flame up the side of the pot and therefore the sides will absorb heat into the water, this may be so with some stove systems but this may not necessarily be so with all stoves systems at all settings.

I have just run some tests measuring the gas temperatures up the sides of a pot with and without a wind screen and at different valve settings.

These tests are far from comprehensive and only one test per setting was conducted, a comprehensive set of tests would take more time than I have available to me at the moment.

Stove used a Kovea Supalite Titanium. Pot used a Snow peak Ti 1liter, Windshield very old modified MSR Whisperlite.

The first tests where done with a suspended windscreen that covered the pot and burner, The canister was not covered, the windshield was placed around the pot with about 1-1.5cm gap and the hot gas temperature probe was placed at the top to measure the hot gasses coming out the top gap (see picture 1).

Image
Picture 1

The tests where done in my garage under windless conditions at an ambient temperature of around 10C.

Results Windshield

Image
Chart 1

Three tests where done using different control valve settings, slow, medium and fast, the medium setting as around what I use in the field.

Slow setting: 6.2g/80C, 10m 45s/80C.
Medium setting: 6.3g/80C, 5m 20s/80C
Fast setting: 7.2g/80C, 2m 59s/80C

Results: with the slow test the gas temperature did not raise much above around 40C, there is some evidence in the gas result line that the gas temperature is actually rising as the water temperature rises therefore it maybe taking heat away from the water in the pot.

The same could be said for the medium test but to a much lesser extent.

With the fast test some heat would be absorbed into the water from the sides but more gas was used.

Note that in all tests the gas temperature measured went up and down randomly, I am not sure exactly what is going on but I think that cooler air is being entrained with the hot gasses.


Image
Chart 2: HR= heating Rate, Gas = gas temperatures.

With chart 2 the probe was placed in three places and temperatures recorded, the first was with no windscreen (No WS top HR and No WS top gas) and was placed at the bottom of the pot 15 mm from the bottom 3 mm from the side (see picture 2), the second (No Ws bott HR and No WS bott Gas) also with no windscreen the probe was placed at the top (picture 3) 3 mm from the sides, the third placing was with a windscreen and the probe was placed at the top as per tests in graph 1.

Image
Picture 2

Image
Picture 3

WS top setting: 6.3g/80C, 5m 20s/80C
No WS top setting: 6.2g/80C, 5m 10s/80C
No WS bottom setting: 6.5g/80C, 4m 45s/80

With all three tests the settings where set at about what I would set the stove in the field (this is not exact science but with canister gas stoves it is very difficult to exactly to repeat tests.)

Results: It can be noted that with the top placed probes the measured gas temperature where lower than the bottom placed probe , my thoughts on this is that as the hot gas travel’s up the sides it mixes with the cooler surrounding air cooling the gas down, surprisingly this also happens when the windshield is used some of this heat loss my be from contact with the windshield but my guess is that as the hot gasses travel up th sides it entrains cooler air.

When I find time I will do some similar tests with my flux ring pot to look at the gas temperatures up the sides and to see if I can see if using the neoprene cozy makes any difference.

Conclusion: As pointed out in my earlier discussions these tests are not comprehensive but they show that in a windless environment using a windshield makes very little if any difference to the efficiency of a canister stove system, in a windless environment the main influence on efficiency is the valve setting.

Tony
There is no such thing as bad weather.....only bad clothing. Norwegian Proverb
User avatar
Tony
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1896
Joined: Fri 16 May, 2008 1:40 pm
Location: Canberra
Region: Australian Capital Territory

Re: Some stove windscreen test results

Postby photohiker » Tue 29 Sep, 2009 5:58 pm

Interesting stuff Tony. Thanks for sharing.

Have you done a series using the windshield and wind?

Also, I noticed recently that my Snowpeak ti heated a pot of water faster than my Coleman dual fuel 533a single burner stove in a light breeze. I've always thought that the Coleman was more powerful due to the larger burner area, but I'm now wondering if the Snowpeak hotspot is more efficient that the broad application of heat delivered by the Coleman. On the other hand, perhaps the fuel was old. I need to do a bit of side-by-side testing with fresh fuel.

The SnowPeak kills the Coleman for portability in any case.
Michael
User avatar
photohiker
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 3130
Joined: Sun 17 May, 2009 12:31 pm
Location: Adelaide, dreaming up where to go next.

Re: Some stove windscreen test results

Postby Ent » Tue 29 Sep, 2009 6:29 pm

Content removed by poster
Last edited by Ent on Mon 15 Nov, 2010 11:57 am, edited 1 time in total.
"lt only took six years. From now on, l´ll write two letters a week instead of one."
(Shawshank Redemption)
User avatar
Ent
Lagarostrobos franklinii
Lagarostrobos franklinii
 
Posts: 4086
Joined: Tue 13 May, 2008 3:38 pm
Region: Tasmania

Re: Some stove windscreen test results

Postby Tony » Tue 29 Sep, 2009 7:35 pm

Hi photohiker,

photohiker wrote:Interesting stuff Tony. Thanks for sharing.

Have you done a series using the windshield and wind?


I am planning to do some tests on windshields and wind (when I get time)


Also, I noticed recently that my Snowpeak ti heated a pot of water faster than my Coleman dual fuel 533a single burner stove in a light breeze. I've always thought that the Coleman was more powerful due to the larger burner area, but I'm now wondering if the Snowpeak hotspot is more efficient that the broad application of heat delivered by the Coleman. On the other hand, perhaps the fuel was old. I need to do a bit of side-by-side testing with fresh fuel.

The SnowPeak kills the Coleman for portability in any case


A smaller burner compared to pot diameter is more efficient, I have done some tests on this topic, I will dig up some results that I have and post them on BW-

Tony
There is no such thing as bad weather.....only bad clothing. Norwegian Proverb
User avatar
Tony
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1896
Joined: Fri 16 May, 2008 1:40 pm
Location: Canberra
Region: Australian Capital Territory

Re: Some stove windscreen test results

Postby Tony » Tue 29 Sep, 2009 7:53 pm

Hi Brett,

Brett wrote:I have always been curious wither flat out or more moderate flame is more efficient on fuel. I get the feeling that wind might be the tricky variable as with electronic heat sinks it does not take much of a fan to dramatically downsize the required heat sink. There are formulas for this and would not surprise me if your test might "reinvent" such formulas.

Cheers Brett


it is much more efficient to slow the heating rate down check the graph below out, the yellow line is a gas stove with points from very fast to very slow, for a liter of water taking about 12 minutes seems to be about the best, slower than that it does not seem to change, faster sees a dramatical decrease of efficiency.

Image

Wind and stoves are a different story, a standard gas stove with even mild wind will loose a lot of efficiency and may not even bring water to boil, my tests show that the windsceen like these ones with this alcohol stove http://www.traildesigns.com/ are very good in wind.

Tony
There is no such thing as bad weather.....only bad clothing. Norwegian Proverb
User avatar
Tony
Athrotaxis selaginoides
Athrotaxis selaginoides
 
Posts: 1896
Joined: Fri 16 May, 2008 1:40 pm
Location: Canberra
Region: Australian Capital Territory


Return to Equipment

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 26 guests