Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7 13 14 15 16 17
Results 321 to 330 of 330
  1. #321
    Registered User MikekiM's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-10-2016
    Location
    East of Montauk, NY
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zelph View Post
    Yes, get rid of the gaping hole that was once used for the handles of a diff pot. That hole diverts the heat off to one side. The air flow is following the path of least resistance.

    Attachment 42652

    got it....

    Quote Originally Posted by MikekiM View Post
    So my 9 minutes was horrible.

    Meant to say my 9 min wasn't horrible...
    _______________________________________
    The difficulty of finding any given trail marker is directly proportional to the importance of the consequences of failing to find it.

  2. #322
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-08-2012
    Location
    Taghkanic, New York, United States
    Posts
    2,864
    Journal Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikekiM View Post
    So my 9 minutes was horrible.
    9 minutes was about as good as it gets, IIRC you were at about 10.5 minutes. Fuel usage on your setup seems high however.

    From the top of the burner to bottom of the pot or from the ground to the bottom of the pot?
    Top of burner to the bottom of the pot is 2.25 inches

    With this setup, I won't be able to reach a distance of 2" from top of burner to bottom of pot and still have a setup that meets my objectives, one of which is everything nests in the pot. As it is, only about 1" of the pot is actually in the cone. It's still far more stable (one of my other objectives) than if I were using a stand of any other sort, so any additional boil time might be a necessary compromise.



    I don't keep the Starlyte in a ziploc.. but I also haven't stored fuel in it, though I know that is one of the benefits. I am not confident enough with this setup to rely solely on what fuel gets decanted to the burner.. I would want to take extra, if only an extra two ounces.

    You mention 'fill it to the rim'. How can you tell how much fuel is the stove to determine whether it is at or about to go over the brim? Zelph has been quite vocal about not overfilling the stove for fear that it will heat up, boil and overflow.



    Certainly not the case for me. I can grab the pot without getting burned, but if I keep my hand at the pot top, I will be sorry..



    I can now see the value in using the restrctor plate. Consider, I am not in a rush so a longer boil time can be ok. And, I don't ever recall actually needing to reach a boil in the field.. hot enough is hot enough.



    Holes are slightly larger than 1/4".. not standard hole punch. I am using the HD hole punch with the depth index on it. Love that thing. The holes are spaced 7/8" OC, single row on only one side of the cone.


    That makes sense and I know that intuitively.. just didn't know how best to diagnose the choke point. I have three top notch canister stoves and I never use them. If I am in a rush, I'll go to the diner.

    So once I have the airflow correct, will the cone need any modification if used with the modified Starlyte?[/QUOTE]

  3. #323
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-08-2012
    Location
    Taghkanic, New York, United States
    Posts
    2,864
    Journal Entries
    11

    Default

    I hit reply before I was done, Take two:

    Well continuing...


    With this setup, I won't be able to reach a distance of 2" from top of burner to bottom of pot and still have a setup that meets my objectives, one of which is everything nests in the pot. As it is, only about 1" of the pot is actually in the cone. It's still far more stable (one of my other objectives) than if I were using a stand of any other sort, so any additional boil time might be a necessary compromise.
    I did think that one of your objectives was to get the whole thing into the pot, so it's a compromise which one may have to accept reduced efficiency to get that. The cone has always been a pain to store/carry and getting it into the pot is nice.

    But what it appears is happening is due to that short distance (1 in), you are getting thermal feedback which is causing more fuel to evaporate then can be combusted with the air you have in the cone. You can try the restrictor plate I mentioned to cut down on fuel usage, and to act as a heat shield from the fuel below. Again it has to be at least 2/3rd of the diameter of the opening to seem to do anything so don't start small, I found its a waste of time. You can also consider the modified Starlyte with the reduced opening, or even a simmer Starlyte if they are still available.

    There is also the option of a 2 part cone where one part slides over the other, reducing the storage length and getting the full cone when cooking.


    I don't keep the Starlyte in a ziploc.. but I also haven't stored fuel in it, though I know that is one of the benefits. I am not confident enough with this setup to rely solely on what fuel gets decanted to the burner.. I would want to take extra, if only an extra two ounces.
    To each their own - HYOH. I only take the Starlyte by itself when I know my cooking demands are low, perhaps AM coffee. IIRC I can usually get 2 burns out of a full Starlyte - Normally 1 use, one backup. Sometimes you just have to go and do it.

    You mention 'fill it to the rim'. How can you tell how much fuel is the stove to determine whether it is at or about to go over the brim? Zelph has been quite vocal about not overfilling the stove for fear that it will heat up, boil and overflow.
    You can see it start pooling in the grating - pretty obvious. I have not found that to be a problem since it's only overfilled at the beginning when everything is cool, the liquid level quickly drops to below the matrix below.



    Certainly not the case for me. I can grab the pot without getting burned, but if I keep my hand at the pot top, I will be sorry..
    Another point of inefficency, too much heat is escaping. I would at this point really consider lowering the flame height with the restrictor plates and see if that helps fuel consumption.



    I can now see the value in using the restrctor plate. Consider, I am not in a rush so a longer boil time can be ok. And, I don't ever recall actually needing to reach a boil in the field.. hot enough is hot enough.



    Holes are slightly larger than 1/4".. not standard hole punch. I am using the HD hole punch with the depth index on it. Love that thing. The holes are spaced 7/8" OC, single row on only one side of the cone.


    That makes sense and I know that intuitively.. just didn't know how best to diagnose the choke point. I have three top notch canister stoves and I never use them. If I am in a rush, I'll go to the diner.

    So once I have the airflow correct, will the cone need any modification if used with the modified Starlyte?
    I did another experiment this morning, the same burn:

    Starlyte full to brim:
    Boil time 2 cups: 8m40s
    Fuel usage 16 g = 0.56 oz weight = 0.7 oz volume

    Starlyte 2nd burn (not refilled, just leftover):
    Boil time for 2 cups: 9m10s
    Fuel usage:16 g (-) = 0.56 oz weight = 0.7 (-) oz volume

    * A full boil did happen, however the stove was running out of fuel at this point and the full boil quickly fell down to boiling in one spot, but still large bubble. Fuel usage was perhaps a bit lower, hence the (-) notation, then the first one as I let it run dry which I could have stopped it at the full boil point.

  4. #324
    Registered User MikekiM's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-10-2016
    Location
    East of Montauk, NY
    Posts
    156

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Starchild View Post
    9 minutes was about as good as it gets, IIRC you were at about 10.5 minutes. Fuel usage on your setup seems high however.
    Yep.. you missed my response above.. That should have said my 9 min wasn't horrible...

    With where I am now, I am going to make a new cone, with the added intake holes, omitting the handle opening and a few less exhaust holes. I have a bunch of tins identical to the Starlyte burner.. I am going to try a DIY restrictor first.. then I'll likely order a modified Starlyte. But one thing at a time.

    A two part cone isn't out of the question. Should be easy to make. Again, one thing at a time..
    _______________________________________
    The difficulty of finding any given trail marker is directly proportional to the importance of the consequences of failing to find it.

  5. #325
    Registered User MikekiM's Avatar
    Join Date
    04-10-2016
    Location
    East of Montauk, NY
    Posts
    156

    Default

    I know I can always add more exhaust holes later, but I'd like to get as close as possible from the start.. if I make a new cone without the handle opening, what's the general rule on the number/size of exhaust holes to intake holes? I have a ton of exhaust holes on this cone.
    _______________________________________
    The difficulty of finding any given trail marker is directly proportional to the importance of the consequences of failing to find it.

  6. #326
    Registered User
    Join Date
    10-17-2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Age
    59
    Posts
    4,648

    Default

    I did some boil tests with my Starlyte and found the heat output dropped substantially as the fuel load dropped. So if you wanted the shortest boil times, you would be better off putting in more fuel than you need, extinguish, and store with excess fuel. One advantage of the Starlyte is you can blow it out like a candle.

  7. #327
    Registered User
    Join Date
    08-08-2012
    Location
    Taghkanic, New York, United States
    Posts
    2,864
    Journal Entries
    11

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by MikekiM View Post
    I know I can always add more exhaust holes later, but I'd like to get as close as possible from the start.. if I make a new cone without the handle opening, what's the general rule on the number/size of exhaust holes to intake holes? I have a ton of exhaust holes on this cone.
    I'm out of town for a few, so no way of checking my cone to answer this.

  8. #328

    Default

    Over the years I've used many different containers for various stove designs. I recently discovered a container to make a simmer ring that fits really nice on the Starlyte burners to include the Starlyte Gold. I've made a dozen for those that might be interested in doing some dry baking:

    http://www.woodgaz-stove.com/simmer-...lyte-golds.php


  9. #329

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by zelph View Post
    Lighting a StarLyte in cold weather.

    It's an appropriate video for some of us within the Polar Vortex System icon_bananaFire.gif

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_c...&v=6kcyj_nYS1A

  10. #330
    Registered User
    Join Date
    09-08-2014
    Location
    Georgia
    Age
    66
    Posts
    458

    Default

    I am a fan of the Starlyte stove because it will not spill and start a fire.I use a simple windscreen and it takes me about 9 minutes to get a boil going.I think my boil times are better with denatured alcohol over Heet.I put my fuel in my pocket to warm it up which is a big help when the weather is cold.If you are in a big hurry there is always isobutane stoves.

Page 17 of 17 FirstFirst ... 7 13 14 15 16 17
++ New Posts ++

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •