Splitting outputs

I have been interested in rocket stoves and mass heaters for a while and was interested in making a large on with optional outputs, but I haven't found anyone that has done a thing like this yet so I was wondering if it is possible.

The plan is a bigger one at a wall with a connection outside with a top to put a kettle on (easy) and a bell chamber bench inside (not that hard)
But also a bench in the other side of the wall to heat the green house (secondary bench not that hard but maybe lower profit)

And now to make it tricky I would like to make it optional so one or the other or both of the benches half... Which makes the whole thing more difficult


I was thinking of making a cast iron door after the bell to choose between the two benches.

What are your thoughts on this

Lloyd,

Whatever you do, please make absolutely positively beyond-a-shadow-of-a-doubt that your RMH is completely and totally airtight.  I am sure that you already know that a good portion of the wood gas is carbon monoxide.  It only takes a tiny amount of CO to be fatal.

I once had CO poisoning from a vehicle I was in (I was alone), I got a crushing headache and had to get out.  This was in the days before cell phones so I needed to find a friendly person (I walked to find her) to call an ambulance and I went to the hospital.  I was lucky.  I would never wish this on anyone.

CO sticks to hemoglobin better than oxygen.  As in something like 200 times better!  And once it sticks, it does not like to let go.  Depending on the exposure, the poisoning can last for days.  It is not as simple as stepping out to get a fresh breath of air.  Stepping outside merely stops more CO from sticking to your hemoglobin.  Getting rid of that CO takes quite a bit of time.

I am thinking that a valve introduces the possibility of a gas leak.  Please please please don’t be a CO victim like I (almost) was.

Your idea is creative in the way I love, so if you decide to do it, I would love to hear.  But at the very least, I strongly suggest getting at least one CO monitor.

Good luck and be safe,

Eric

So it might be a safer amd easier way to make one bench and stove inside and have it fully air tight and a second one in the greenhouse, than over compacting things and risk the chance of an leak in the system.

Or if I really wanted one to also heat the other system make a water heater to flow there....

But that is the next project than first to design it with 2 seperate stoves (maybe mirror them)

Thanks for the input and it is wise to take extra care about safety with these systems

How do you think about making the inside bench flow out into the outside bench guiding flow one way by tesla valve) so only the outside is connected to a chimney and higher than the flow from the inside bench

Hi Lloyd;  Welcome to Permies!
I have to agree with Eric that a shut off gate is a less than safe idea.
Having a CO monitor is a low cost way to stay safe.

There is a limit on how far you can move hot air.  Having a bench thru both areas and an outlet(chimney)  at the far end,  is fine as long as the distance is acceptable.
No need for a tesla type valve. The hot air will find the outlet. Although a "plunger tube" outlet might be needed to start the flow of hot gasses up and out of the chimney.

A batch box design RMH would push more hot air than a traditional J tube design will.

Lloyd,

I would think (but don’t know for certain as I have never actually done this before) that as long as you have one continuous sealed tube in a bench that you would be OK.  I am not exactly certain what a Tesla valve is, but as long as the exhaust flow only runs outside and NEVER has a chance to back up and flow out the intake then you should be OK.

BTW, I really like the idea of a 2 unit setup or the idea the use of water as a heat transfer agent.  Might be a little bit tricky, but I definitely like it.  Water has a great specific heat capacity, therefore it stores a huge amount of heat that will release slowly.  I am sure that there is some tricky engineering, but put the time and effort in and I am certain that you can do it.

Please, let me know what you think.  I would love to hear how this works out!

Eric

A tesla valve restricts flow one way for gasses and liquids but not the other (restricts not block completely)
So until I go further with this I will need to figure out how long it can be maximum till the chimney and how much pull or push there should be generated to not circulate the gasses...

The water was the first idea, but if we don't want to heat the bench than we can't close it off. Or at least I haven't figured out how.
If you have the bench as a regular water tank and a heater in the bell or inside masonry of the stove then it would heat siphon automatically.
Closing the bottom would stop the siphon and start boiling the heater leading to pressure.
Closing the top would do the same but with the steam pushing the water outside of the heater. Both not ideal


Anyway back to the drawing board

And thanks guys

Lloyd there's another thread about a damper installed on one of Paul's heaters, to "shut-off" the mass and vent directly to chimney for priming, and to isolate the mass so the stored heat didn't just leave up the chimney.
The biggest issue was knowing/remembering/checking that the damper was in the desired position at the desired times.
One failure mode was the damper being shut (to the mass) and a fire burned for a while and ALL the heat just going straight out the chimney.

In your case, I could see two exits from the manifold, with a flap that sits in between and selects one branch or the other. I don't have any practical experience, and I don't know if "both at once" would work at all, or work how you want it to (there might be one side that flows and the other not so much).
I can see the benefits of one "engine" (feed tube, heat riser, bell) being shared cost, and startup and tending efforts, space savings on the "slave" side of the system, one firewood pile...
The tricky parts are:
1.) knowing which way it is set at any given time. (and remembering to check)
2.) the method for switching it being safe, no leaks, no blazing hot damper handle, it NOT mattering to the safe operation of the stove whichever way it sits...

that last one is two-fold:
Both sides would need to work properly without the other (and possibly completely independently, as in the unused side stays cold, because you don't want to cook your plants).
The other side is that YOU need to operate it properly, and know that both masses are safe to be heated at any time you run the stove. Since they are in separate rooms, you'd need to be vigilant about checking.

I must have mist the thread with the damper with double options in my searches.

The concerns about the patching leaking has been brought up and I have discussed it here.

So we are now thinking that simplicity is the biggest driving force.
And although I find the twin chamber interesting and the the water plan as well. They aren't worth the hassle

What do we want
1 mass heater with a bench inside for the sitting room, the key idea was to harvest the last heat of that for the green house.
And one to warm the green house in case of mayor wind chill if the house is already warm (with a small bench but it is a secondary thing.)
So if we make one inside with a bench (channel or strophications bell) with the chimney going to the green house
And the one from the greenhouse also going to a bench and to a similar chimney place and than make those chimneys clay bricks that slightly twis to provide a little slowing action the remaining heat should be stored in the chimney

Hi Lloyd;
So if I understand correctly. You are now simplifying and thinking of one rmh with bench in the house and the flue run over to the green house, where it enters a brick chimney?
In the green house you are thinking a smaller bench with rmh and the stove pipe would end at the same brick chimney?
Would each rmh have a separate flue? Or were you thinking of venting 2 stoves into one stack?
If so, it was recently discussed in another post , that 2 into one as not being a safe alternative.
A brick chimney with two separate flues would be good.

2 separate systems with each their own chimney but I was thinking letting them come out in the same place so I can share the chimney structure
Just to simplify it