Just made my first can stove

[Phsskipper]

After reading much discussion on the benefits of cutting weight using a can stove, I decided to make one.

I looked around the web and found a video of one being made and worked from that. Thanks to minibulldesign.com!

I made it today and after a bit of tweaking I made my lunch. Very cool. I just shaved 1.5 lbs from my pack. Thanks to all who have posted information and encouragement.

Forrest

[SGT Rock]

Good luck with the stove:D you are hooked and will probably end up making more.

[Phsskipper]

I can already see it coming. Planning on a second smaller stove to heat a second smaller pot for cocoa ect. I made my first one from Foster's cans much larger diameter and will allow for a slightly larger pot as I may be cooking for two or three.


Will probobly use soda cans this next time.

Forrest

[SGT Rock]

Go for the V8 cans LOL.

[Pencil Pusher]

I just lit mine up tonight. I've had the thing from online purchase for several months but never got around to trying it out. For the not-so-mechanically-inclined, it was a real marvel to watch the thing light up for the first time. Though I skeptically laughed both when I saw it online and received it in the mail...

[erichlf]

With in the first week of making my first can stove I had made 8 more. My wife was getting kind of mad at me for it. I kept running to the store to get more small cans, and was neglecting her. But, by the end of it all, I developed a stove that boils 3 cups of water in 5 mins, and burns out at 8 mins with only 1/2 oz of alcohol at 70F.

[whiteagle]

...by the end of it all, I developed a stove that boils 3 cups of water in 5 mins, and burns out at 8 mins with only 1/2 oz of alcohol at 70F.
Not to hijack this guy's thread, but how exactly?

[SGT Rock]

I would just caution that what people think they can achieve with a stove's performance and what it actually achieves if measured can be different altogether. Just based of probably over a hundred tests of various designs, I doubt that 24 ounces of water can be heated (throughly - throughout the pot) to 212.5F with 15ml of alcohol, and do so constantly in a variety of weather conditions. I often have tested claims of 15ml boils on 16 ounces and found that while there are bubbles forming and turmoil in the water, the tested temperature tested 1/4" below the surface in the center of the pot is only at about 200F at best.

[grrickar]

Alcohol stove making is an addiction. I have made about 35 in the last three weeks (yes, 35). Why so many? Because I am playing around with various things: insulation versus none, hole size, pattern, stove height, etc. My favorites (and best burning ones) are made from Knudsen juice cans (thick aluminum) and the holes were drilled with a 1/16th drill bit. All of my stoves so far have been top burner. I have given quite a few away, and got several people curious about them. Besides the alcohol, there really isn't anything to buy until you start making windscreens and pot stands. I used an alcohol stove on a recent camping trip and used tent stakes stuck unto the ground as a pot stand. Worked fine, but I really could have used a windscreen.

[Oracle]

I often have tested claims of 15ml boils on 16 ounces and found that while there are bubbles forming and turmoil in the water, the tested temperature tested 1/4" below the surface in the center of the pot is only at about 200F at best.
Remember, Sgt. Rock, water boils at different temperatures depending on your altitude. The higher the altitude, the lower the boiling temperature. Water boils at 212 F at sea level. A rolling boil is still a rolling boil, however, and 200 degrees is more than hot enough to do anything you need to do with boiling water.

[bstwo]

ASA

Alcohol Stove Addiction....................glad to see that I am not alone!

BS
http://webpages.charter.net/fam-strick/web/index.htm

[SGT Rock]

Remember, Sgt. Rock, water boils at different temperatures depending on your altitude. The higher the altitude, the lower the boiling temperature. Water boils at 212 F at sea level. A rolling boil is still a rolling boil, however, and 200 degrees is more than hot enough to do anything you need to do with boiling water.
Hey, no disagreement on that, but I wouldn't want to claim my stove boils on 15ml when I tested it where water will boil at only 200 degrees because when someone tests it at 500' and never achieves a boil, then that person has a legitimate complaint about a stove or my recommendations on a review. All I am saying these sorts of simple claims are often subjective instead of objective. That is why I am very particular about how I test my stoves and what I claim. I can get my stove to achieve 212.5F in 10 minutes in a total pint of water using 15ml. I can get my stove to heat water to 200 degrees in 5 minutes, but I won't claim it as a boil. I can actually achieve 200F on 12ml at room temperature without wind and starting water temperature at 52F. So should I claim my stove boils and then in italics and small print put: this performance quote only applies at 5,000' at 72F with 68F water and no wind. Your actual results may vary.

My point is you can change the parameters of a test to get one result which cannot be replicated on the trail. I found this out back in 2001 when I first started testing stoves and at the time I thought the Cat Stove was the king. Once I started using a temperature probe and testing things by other than simple observation while trying to make the tests as standardized as I could, I found a difference in performance that most others never account for when talking about their stove performance. Since then I have read a lot of 15ml boil claims, but have only seen a few that truly deliver when you put them under conditions that simulate as close as possible trail conditions.

No bag on his stove at all, just pointing out that the performance seemed a bit unrealistic for someone to expect these sorts of results on the trail.

[Oracle]

I'm not arguing with you Sgt. Rock, I've just had to argue with govt. inspectors about why a steam disinfection machine would not reach 212 degrees 1000 feet above sea level :).

[SGT Rock]

I'm not arguing with you Sgt. Rock, I've just had to argue with govt. inspectors about why a steam disinfection machine would not reach 212 degrees 1000 feet above sea level :).
And knowing them I am sure they didn't take the logical answer very well.

I once called the bull **** flag during a class on a decontamination machine because the instructor told the class that it sprayed 300 degree water at 3,000 PSI. I tried to explain why that was impossible and he may want to re-read his -10.

[whiteagle]

Geez Rock, as helpful as you have been for me learning about hiking it hurts to correct you, but at 3000 psi, water should boil about 700 deg F.

It works off the same principle as water boiling cooler at a higher elevation. The less the pressure, the less energy (aka heat) it takes for the water to change to a gasseous state, and the opposite is true.

Seriously though, I really do appreciate your site, especially the ion stove.

Daniel

[SGT Rock]

But, this is my line of thinking: when the water comes out at 3,000 PSI, it is not contained at 3,000 PSI where it could maintain the pressure such as in a steam tank. Sure the water is traveling to where it might have 3,000 psi of force, but once it leaves the hose it cannot be at 300F or it would become steam. Isn't this logical?

[whiteagle]

Oh geez, I was so happy to put my new mathymatikal skills to the test, that I forgot to actually think about the problem. Yeah, you're right. Could easily be 300F in the tank, but once it leaves, poof!

Since this thread is about stoves, and I have your attention, what does the pressure in pressurized stoves allow for? I have yet to complete a non-pressurized stove. I started one and got halfway through, but the drill slipped and killed it. I've based almost all of my numerous (read 4) designs off the penny stove.

Also, I get the obvious implications, but what does the jet hole size determine? I've tried between a 1/16th and a #84 .000000000001" (or something like that) size bits, and I can't figure out which is better. My original thinking was that more but smaller holes would allow for a more even heat distrobution and be more efficient, but I don't know.

Thanks,
Daniel

[SGT Rock]

The pressure basically helps the stove to feed off the vaporized fuel. Which means it basically does the same thing a non-pressurized fuel stove does, just that now the fuel is forced out at a higher rate once the pressure builds which means the fuel burned faster and it COULD get hotter depending on how fast it feeds. BUT since most of these stoves are made from aluminum, and aluminum deteriorates under high heat and pressure over time, the stove life might not be what you would want. I have corresponded with a couple of users that have had some pressurized alcohol stoves "melt down" after about 500 trail miles. I don't recommend pressurized versions because you can get the same heat from a non-pressurized stove like the Cat that uses laminar flow to achieve the same high output without all the extra work.

If you build a non-pressurized alcohol stove, then you can play with the total area of holes to meter out how fast your stove burns a certain amount of fuel. But this is also influenced by interaction with the pot (pot height) and with windscreen. And performance can also be influenced by the type of pot you have. Since all these things can be tuned, you just need to decide how fast you want to boil, if you want to simmer, and how much fuel you want to use. Then you can play with the system to "tune" it to get the performance you need.

[erichlf]

Before I say anything more about my stove, I will do some more testing, and be much more scrupilous about the way I test things. I will right it all up and then I will post on here about the stove. The stove is nothing special, and in fact is pretty much the Ion Stove's original design, slightly changed. I built this stove a few weeks ago, and so do not want to go off my memory only. So, by writing up my new experiment I hope that some nay sayers will be a little more accepting of my results. By the way I was quite surprised myself, and is another reason I am going to retest.

[erichlf]

I would just caution that what people think they can achieve with a stove's performance and what it actually achieves if measured can be different altogether. Just based of probably over a hundred tests of various designs, I doubt that 24 ounces of water can be heated (throughly - throughout the pot) to 212.5F with 15ml of alcohol, and do so constantly in a variety of weather conditions. I often have tested claims of 15ml boils on 16 ounces and found that while there are bubbles forming and turmoil in the water, the tested temperature tested 1/4" below the surface in the center of the pot is only at about 200F at best. Okay, I did some more tests. I infact reached very similar results, but I would doubt many others would be able to achieve those. I live at 5030ft. My barometric pressure was 843 mBar, and temperature was 73F, this last time I tested. This puts the boiling point below 200F. The H2O reached boil after 4.5 mins, but then the stove burned out after 5.5 mins. Due to the fact the stove burned out so quick after boiling I would question its ability to boil on a cold day and at higher pressures. Not sure what the difference was before when it burned out at 8 mins. Would be nice to figure that one out. I had one stove I designed burn out after 15 mins. I think boiling time was 8 mins all with 0.5 oz alcohol, but it was very low profile and I felt it was dangerous. Not worth it if it is going to burn down the woods around you.

[SGT Rock]

Thanks for the report :D