At 07:32 AM 6/15/03 -0700, you wrote:
>Last week Steve Boylan stirred the pot
Yes, and eventually he'll get what's coming to him . . . . :-)
>More specifically, how narrow can they get and still work well?
IMH (and inexperienced) O, the thing I understand about coal,
especially in smaller scales, is that it's as important to have a deep fire
as to have a wide one. So personally I wouldn't be as concerened about
firebox width in our scales as I would depth although certainly you'd want
to retain as much width as possible purely for operational reasons.
>A related question is how narrow a water leg can be and still keep water
>on the sides of the firebox?
In a recent discussion with friends in Oz the numbers 1/8" and 5mm
came up in the conversation. While I agreed that all the grate area
possible should be preserved, I also know that coal will produce more heat
per in/sq or Cm/sq of grate than gas or meths. So if I were going to
fudge, that is make a choice between the need for a little more grate area
vs. a little more water leg space, I'd fudge on the side of water leg
space. I'm not sure how important this is in the grand scheme of things
but at 1/8", with a mature fire producing violent boiling in the water
legs, I don't think you'd be heating anything but steam, so in my opinion I
would vote for 1/8" should as an absolute minimum.
Regards,
Harry
