Page 5 of 6

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 12:04 am
by realityguy
Dr. Daren..just doesn't sound right... :o


:lol:

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Mon Mar 08, 2010 11:19 am
by zelph
He ventured, he gained. :D

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Tue Mar 16, 2010 8:47 pm
by DarenN
zelph wrote:He ventured, he gained. :D
yes, i ventured, but my hope is that someone else will gain.

pay it forward......

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 7:32 pm
by ConnieD
I found it: 12 jets .046

I got that in the "bounce box". The stove has written on the bottom: 12 @ .046 W/FG

Is "bloom" counted from when the jets start, or, "full bloom" is formed?

At "full bloom" I set 16 oz. cold tap water in the Vargo 750 Sierra Pot/Cup on the three square pot stand: using 1 fl. oz. Yellow Heet (no priming, lit from middle) I had a full rolling boil at 6 minutes and flame out at 8:10 minutes.

The stove was sitting in a dry stainless steel kitchen sink. The potstand is "3 squares" hardware cloth.

Ambient temperature 69 F.

I didn't know where to report these results. Maybe here? This would be a PepsiG stove?

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Mon Feb 28, 2011 9:34 pm
by Ridgerunner
Connie, I've always considered a bloom when all jets have lit and sustained a fire ring. You are referring to Darens PepsiG stove. He sent me one in a trade and it works well. Daren does excellent work and hopefully he is doing well north of the border in BC. :)

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Tue Mar 01, 2011 2:10 am
by ConnieD
Then, it is a DarenN PepsiG.

It is my first pop-can stove. It is my first side jet stove. It works really well.

I didn't do three timed and measured trials. I only found out it is better to put the pot on after the "bloom". If before, the pot interfers with the development of the "bloom".

I hadn't really used the stove, measuring and timing everything because I was reluctant to spill alcohol on my skin exposed to the cold pouring from the original Yellow Heet container. In really cold weather, you don't want any fuel on your bare skin.

I like a flat plastic bottle for the Yellow Heet, like a contact lens cleaner bottle, to dispense the alcohol.

I like the small flat form-factor.

I like the pot stand, as well.

I am able to center my favorite cooking pot so the flames nicely come up the tapered sides so that my favorite cooking pot gets maximum exposure to blue flames.

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Tue Jun 12, 2012 11:55 pm
by steamjam
In my experience sitting around my dank hole of an office playing around with penny stoves and the such, that the relationship between how fast the stove can transmit heat from priming to the fuel is a much better indication of short bloom time then jet size/number. I found that in open top soda can stoves, if you make the inner liner out of thin copper instead of aluminum, you'll shave a lot more time off bloom then more holes of diff diameters.

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 6:29 pm
by zelph
That's an interesting observation....hmmmm, I thought aluminum had better transmission than copper. One thing that I have noticed on many videos is the person doing the test has to blow air at the stove to make the central column of flame so as to have it reach over the lip of the stove and down to the jets to get them to ignite. Bill Ballow(designer of the WBS) even suggests blowing on the center flame to make the jets ignite faster on his White Box Stove. (side jets)

The amount of jets and where they are placed in relation to the top rim of the stove is important for bloom. The farther away from the stove rim, the longer it takes to bloom.

Enough fuel vapor has to come out of the jet holes and rise up to the rim of the stove to meet up with the central flame in order to ignite. If the holoes are too small and too far from the rim they may never ignite.

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Wed Jun 13, 2012 7:08 pm
by steamjam
zelph wrote:That's an interesting observation....hmmmm, I thought aluminum had better transmission than copper. One thing that I have noticed on many videos is the person doing the test has to blow air at the stove to make the central column of flame so as to have it reach over the lip of the stove and down to the jets to get them to ignite. Bill Ballow(designer of the WBS) even suggests blowing on the center flame to make the jets ignite faster on his White Box Stove. (side jets)

The amount of jets and where they are placed in relation to the top rim of the stove is important for bloom. The farther away from the stove rim, the longer it takes to bloom.

Enough fuel vapor has to come out of the jet holes and rise up to the rim of the stove to meet up with the central flame in order to ignite. If the holoes are too small and too far from the rim they may never ignite.
copper conducts energy (heat) mush more efiiciently then aluminum. Stainless steel is one of the worst conductors. Aluminum is also a good conductor. Just not as good as copper. (Its why electrical wires are made of copper... conducts energy very well)

Re: ramble about jets and potstands

Posted: Fri Jun 15, 2012 9:02 pm
by zelph
At some point in time they were making aluminum electrical wire......but it didn't take too many years to find out there was a

corrosion problem occuring where there were mechanical conections. Aluminum wire came to a halt :roll: