I don't really want to spend the money for a Caldera Cone, especially since it's only good for one pot size. So I think I'll make my own.

Googling got me to a good paper pattern for cutting one out. See the thread here:

http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/forum/forummessages/mps/UTN/22357/URN/5/dt/4/srchdte/0/cp/1/v/8/sp/

There's a bit of computer homework involved, but it's not too hard. You can print out a paper pattern after you input the dimensions for your stove & pot. So far I haven't got a full size pattern printed yet--still have to deal with translating from European paper sizes to my printer. But that's part of the diy-ness of this project.

I plan to make what the pattern-program-writer calls a "Caldera Clone" for my old 2-qt pot and one for the AGG 3 cup pot I'm getting.

There's another method here:

http://www.hammockforums.net/forum/showthread.php?t=7145&highlight=caldera

Have fun with them.

Doug

And another way of doing it..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VerP7-aiEBw
Franco

And another way of doing it..
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VerP7-aiEBw
Franco

Correct--that's the video by the guy on the hammockforums. There is discussion about it at the thread there I linked to.

Doug

I don't really want to spend the money for a Caldera Cone, especially since it's only good for one pot size. So I think I'll make my own.

Googling got me to a good paper pattern for cutting one out. See the thread here:

http://www.outdoorsmagic.com/forum/forummessages/mps/UTN/22357/URN/5/dt/4/srchdte/0/cp/1/v/8/sp/



http://i442.photobucket.com/albums/qq144/lustreking2k/calderaclonepaper.jpg

So far, so good. I just have to cut it out of the flashing.

Also made a Caldera Cone over the weekend using the Youtube video.

Came out pretty well.

I work with computers during the week. It was nice to do it the old fashioned way.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VerP7-aiEBw&feature=channel_page

I think this is the same link as on hammock forums mentioned above.

Here is a cladera cone for the kmart grease pot.

http://whiteblaze.net/forum/showthread.php?t=22463&highlight=cone+windscreen

I wouldn't mind paying retail for a Caldera Cone, but I want to stick with my Zelph's Starlyte.

I wonder if the stock version of the Snow Peak 700 or 600 Caldera Cone would be the appropriate height for a Starlyte?

I wouldn't mind paying retail for a Caldera Cone, but I want to stick with my Zelph's Starlyte.

I wonder if the stock version of the Snow Peak 700 or 600 Caldera Cone would be the appropriate height for a Starlyte?

It would be a bit tall for the Starlyte. IOW the Starlyte is a shorter stove than the stove that comes with a Caldera Cone and the included stove, IMO, is more suited to a greater 'stove to pot' distance as well.

You could always shim the Starlyte up with something to make up the difference.

It would be a bit tall for the Starlyte. IOW the Starlyte is a shorter stove than the stove that comes with a Caldera Cone and the included stove, IMO, is more suited to a greater 'stove to pot' distance as well.

You could always shim the Starlyte up with something to make up the difference.

Well, I bought a Caldera Cone for my Snow Peak 700. I trimmed 1" off the bottom to lower the pot closer to the Starlyte. I haven't drilled any ventilation holes around the bottom of the cone yet. I wonder if the Starlyte would need more or less ventilation than the 12-10?

The Starlyte, Cone, and Cook Pot are right at 5 oz. It's fast to.

Coldspring, would you mind posting a pic of your system when you are done? Many thanks!

Hello everyone. Glad to see my Caldera Clone script is getting some use; thanks to sierraDoug for posting details here.

Just a quick comment on the YouTube video that Franco posted; it's a great video, and shows a good way of making a Clone, but, like other examples of this method I've seen on the internet, it's not quite correct, in that the resulting cone won't be quite as the design intended.

The problem is that he measures the two radii from the apex to the vertical intersections of the 'cone design' (the black lines). This means that the side wall of the cone is too short.

It's a simple problem to fix; measure the radii from the apex to the intersections of the top line and the base line with the red lines of the cone design. This will ensure that the side wall of the cone is the correct height, and make the resulting cone closer the the design intent.

Granted, the difference is only small (a few millimetres, usually), but I like things to come out the way I intend them to come out...

My Clone template (nice example from lustreking) uses a different geometric approach, but the result is the same.

Okay I'm using my dumb question coupon of the week:

Why use a conical windscreen instead of a cylindrical windscreen?

Strength and stability

Just a quick comment on the YouTube video that Franco posted; it's a great video, and shows a good way of making a Clone, but, like other examples of this method I've seen on the internet, it's not quite correct, in that the resulting cone won't be quite as the design intended.


Granted, the difference is only small (a few millimetres, usually), but I like things to come out the way I intend them to come out...

.

It's the engineer in you;)

Quick question for you, does a conical have more strength than a cylindrical pot/pan support equal to the largest outside diameter?

Example: Squeezebox having the same OD as a Caldera type with OD at it's base being equal to OD of Squeezebox? (you know what I mean;))

Strength and stability

Ah thanks, it's a potstand/windscreen in one, gotcha!

It's the engineer in you;)

Indeed... ;-)

> Quick question for you, does a conical have more strength than a cylindrical pot/pan support equal to the largest outside diameter?

Quick answer: It depends...

Long answer:

A Clone is probably more stable, since the conic shape is hard to topple or deform by tipping. A simple cylinder tends to deform much more easily. Think of the cone as a 'round triangle', and then remember that the corners of a triangle cannot move, unlike the corners of a square object.

It terms of loading from the top, that's a tricky one. If you place a load on a Clone, since the sides are angled, it will cause an outward force, as well as a downward force. This may cause the Clone to open up, either by opening a mitre joint, or by tearing a tabbed joint. Even if this doesn't happen, the sides are likely to collapse eventually, since they're only thin foil, and there's only so much strength that the gently curved edge can provide.

If you place a similar load on the Squeezebox, you will only get a vertical loading, since its sides are only vertical. Those folded triangular sections make the sides rigid, and less likely to deform under load. On the other hand, the contact areas that support the pan are quite small, so these will probably collapse first. But, overall, I'd suggest that the SqueezeBox is stronger than a Clone in this respect.

Then there's the issue of side impacts. I'd suggest that a simple cylindrical windshield is weakest, since there's only a simple curve, then a Clone, being profiled in two directions, and finally, the Squeezebox, due to all those folded reinforcements.

However, both the Clone and the Squeezebox are more than strong enough to support a pan of water, and both are stable enough, too. A simple cylinder would have to be made of more robust material to provide equivalent support and stability, I think (stability comes partly from the shape and centre of gravity of the thing, and partly from the stiffness of the material used to make it). If I were trying to optimise the weight of the thing, I'd have to do some proper design analysis, or practical tests, but both items are light enough for me, and I don't like destruction testing things I've made; I prefer to use them instead...

Just don't stand on any of these things, or kick them about your campsite...