Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [woodheat] Pressure differential between inside and outside

Expand Messages
  • Donald Russell
    Thank you for your reply Gary I had meant to send that off group but was up late, was tired, and had spent some time composing the message so ended up
    Message 1 of 57 , Feb 28, 2009
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Thank you for your reply Gary

      I had meant to send that off group but was up late, was tired, and had
      spent some time composing the message so ended up forgetting to change
      the default address. Maybe it's better this way and will lead to better
      understanding all around. I will continue with the group and perhaps
      make a comment from time to time but I hope to not get into another back
      and forth argument like that one again.

      yahoogroups@... wrote:
      >
      > Thanks for the reply Don
      >
      > First off, don't stop posting!
      >
      > You are so right it is EASY to get to wound up into this kind of stuff.
      >
      > John is not perfect and he can get a little huffy, BUT
      >
      > He has done a LOT of work on wood heat related issues and pretty much is
      > willing to give it all away to whoever will listen. AFAIK his site is the
      > best non biased wood heating site to be found. For a free site it has
      > a lot
      > of good information that is pretty well organized.
      >
      > I find that he strikes a good balance between sensible real world wood
      > heating and regulation and environmental issues. He tends to get mad when
      > someone who has invested no effort more than a pen sharpening blasts
      > him in
      > public on either a minor issue or an issue the poster has not thought out
      > well. I will have to reread the original posts but John does listen and if
      > Brett has good points I believe John will incorporate them into his
      > knowledge of wood heating. I think his taking it off board and working it
      > out IS a reasonable course from his point of view.
      >
      > I would like to apologize for my snippiness as well. I get wound up
      > too and
      > I should have cooled off before replying. I do notice that going one
      > on one
      > tends to tone me down as compared to talking in the more impersonal group
      > forum.
      >
      > All infiltration studies I have seen show that even the tightest
      > construction is plenty loose for the purpose of wood heating UNLESS
      > exhaust
      > fans are running and even those have to be fairly large not the typical 35
      > range hood or 15 bath fan. If there are technical issues to how John
      > explains the whole back draft intake air scenario they do not dramatically
      > change what people need to do to deal with back draft issues. My own house
      > and setup requires caution on my part until I have a good draft
      > established
      > in the chimney then all is good. I have an old VC downstairs that can
      > smoke
      > the house due to firebox design issues and the ease of building a wood
      > bridge that can then smolder and allow a back draft to start.
      >
      > In conclusion; I have sharpened an ax in public a few times myself and
      > usually have regretted it. Nice to have a discussion with you and keep the
      > home fires burning!
      >
      > gggGary
      >
      > from Wisconsin
      >
      > _____
      >
      > From: woodheat@yahoogroups.com <mailto:woodheat%40yahoogroups.com>
      > [mailto:woodheat@yahoogroups.com <mailto:woodheat%40yahoogroups.com>]
      > On Behalf
      > Of Donald Russell
      > Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 3:14 AM
      > To: woodheat@yahoogroups.com <mailto:woodheat%40yahoogroups.com>
      > Subject: Re: [woodheat] Pressure differential between inside and outside
      >
      > Gary,
      >
      > I know nothing about what kind of chimney the man has or how big and
      > drafty his house is. I only know that which he posted and I relayed to
      > you. You may be absolutely correct.
      >
      > No, I have not conducted any actual tests of air infiltration of any
      > houses whose construction I have been involved with nor do I have the
      > means or opportunity to do so. I am a roofer not a building inspector.
      > I normally do not even see the completed house. I was speaking only from
      > my observations of how tightly the houses are wrapped with Tyvek, how
      > well the windows and doors are sealed when they are installed, and how
      > all the wall penetrations for electrical and plumbing and such are
      > carefully sealed with insulating foam sealant. I'm sure there are many
      > tiny leaks but it is hard for me to believe there is any significant
      > infiltration if the work was done correctly.
      >
      > This whole slightly off subject and elongated discourse was blamed, by
      > some, on me. It could have been stopped at any time just by everyone
      > simply not replying to any one of my posts. I even suggested several
      > times that I wanted to drop it but the comments continued and I felt
      > compelled to try to explain myself. I feel that those people are just
      > as guilty as I for the continuation.
      >
      > I agree almost entirely with most of what John explains on woodheat.org
      > and the woodheatgroup but I do think there are some errors in his
      > science occasionally, and being a former science student (considered by
      > some to be somewhat gifted) a very long time ago, I guess I feel
      > somewhat compelled to correct these errors before they are propagated
      > too far.
      >
      > If you have been following this thing all the way from the beginning,
      > you will see that it started when some man, named Bret, enquired about
      > John's statement that the pressure higher in a house is greater than
      > that in the lower parts. To John's credit, he tried to explain why this
      > is so, but it turned out that Bret, apparently, was a college professor
      > who was very well familiar with the subject and he then challenged
      > John's statement, unfortunately in terms not easily understood by most
      > of us. John's reply to this was rather snippy (hard to imagine that
      > from John) and he suggested to Bret that they take the discussion of the
      > group and onto private email. My guess is that this was because John
      > didn't want to be shown to be wrong on the group, but then you know John
      > way better than I do, I could be wrong. Anyway, nothing more from Bret
      > was heard from on the group.
      >
      > The more I thought about what Bret had said though, the more I realized
      > that he was absolutely right and maybe I was grinding an ax but I
      > couldn't sit by and say nothing. Along the way, sometimes in haste, I
      > too said a few things that may have not been perfectly accurate.
      >
      > Anyway, I will likly never post to the entire group again. This has
      > taken entirely too much of my time and caused too much stress. I have
      > a daughter, son-in-law, and seven of my grandbrats living with me. I
      > have stress enough.
      >
      > I am attaching two documents that are excerpts from howstuffworks.com to
      > support my statements about the pressure thing and the irrelevant
      > balloon analogy that people kept bringing up.
      >
      > I hope this all helps you understand what was going on here.
      >
      > Respectfully,
      >
      > yahoogroups@ <mailto:yahoogroups%40bsupply.us> bsupply.us wrote:
      > >
      > > Seems like I remember that poster. First off; how rare that someone
      > > did not
      > > like the advice a group on the web gave. IIRC the issue may have been
      > > a big
      > > old masonry chimney and a big old drafty house. I don't recall anyone on
      > > here saying you should spend big money on a European stove. The usual
      > > mantra is that your money is best spent, in descending order of
      > > importance;
      > > tighten house, improve insulation, get the best chimney and best stove
      > > location possible. Use dry seasoned wood, Get a properly sized EPA type
      > > stove. So buying a small expensive stove and putting it in a drafty old
      > > house on a large masonry chimney would hardly be considered
      > "following our
      > > advice"
      > >
      > > Related but separate issue. Have you conducted any actual tests on air
      > > infiltration in the "tight" houses you inspect or are you just
      > saying that
      > > they must be tight because code says they are? John has participated in
      > > actual testing that shows that even the tightest houses aren't all that
      > > tight and have plenty of leaks that allow the effects that can create
      > > backdrafting issues. My observations show that bath and kitchen fan
      > > venting
      > > create large air leaks in even the tightest homes and that air leaks are
      > > everywhere even in the best construction with quality materials.
      > Caveat; I
      > > have not conducted any air infiltration testing myself. But I note that
      > > "asian beetle, lady bugs' have no difficulty penetrating my "tight"
      > house.
      > >
      > > gggGary
      > >
      > > from Wisconsin
      > >
      > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      > >
      > >
      > > ----------------------------------------------------------
      > >
      > > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > > Checked by AVG.
      > > Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.3/1975 - Release Date:
      > 2/27/2009
      > 7:05 AM
      > >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
      >
      > No virus found in this incoming message.
      > Checked by AVG.
      > Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.3/1975 - Release Date: 2/27/2009 7:05 AM
      >
    • Donald Russell
      Thank you for your reply Gary I had meant to send that off group but was up late, was tired, and had spent some time composing the message so ended up
      Message 57 of 57 , Feb 28, 2009
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        Thank you for your reply Gary

        I had meant to send that off group but was up late, was tired, and had
        spent some time composing the message so ended up forgetting to change
        the default address. Maybe it's better this way and will lead to better
        understanding all around. I will continue with the group and perhaps
        make a comment from time to time but I hope to not get into another back
        and forth argument like that one again.

        yahoogroups@... wrote:
        >
        > Thanks for the reply Don
        >
        > First off, don't stop posting!
        >
        > You are so right it is EASY to get to wound up into this kind of stuff.
        >
        > John is not perfect and he can get a little huffy, BUT
        >
        > He has done a LOT of work on wood heat related issues and pretty much is
        > willing to give it all away to whoever will listen. AFAIK his site is the
        > best non biased wood heating site to be found. For a free site it has
        > a lot
        > of good information that is pretty well organized.
        >
        > I find that he strikes a good balance between sensible real world wood
        > heating and regulation and environmental issues. He tends to get mad when
        > someone who has invested no effort more than a pen sharpening blasts
        > him in
        > public on either a minor issue or an issue the poster has not thought out
        > well. I will have to reread the original posts but John does listen and if
        > Brett has good points I believe John will incorporate them into his
        > knowledge of wood heating. I think his taking it off board and working it
        > out IS a reasonable course from his point of view.
        >
        > I would like to apologize for my snippiness as well. I get wound up
        > too and
        > I should have cooled off before replying. I do notice that going one
        > on one
        > tends to tone me down as compared to talking in the more impersonal group
        > forum.
        >
        > All infiltration studies I have seen show that even the tightest
        > construction is plenty loose for the purpose of wood heating UNLESS
        > exhaust
        > fans are running and even those have to be fairly large not the typical 35
        > range hood or 15 bath fan. If there are technical issues to how John
        > explains the whole back draft intake air scenario they do not dramatically
        > change what people need to do to deal with back draft issues. My own house
        > and setup requires caution on my part until I have a good draft
        > established
        > in the chimney then all is good. I have an old VC downstairs that can
        > smoke
        > the house due to firebox design issues and the ease of building a wood
        > bridge that can then smolder and allow a back draft to start.
        >
        > In conclusion; I have sharpened an ax in public a few times myself and
        > usually have regretted it. Nice to have a discussion with you and keep the
        > home fires burning!
        >
        > gggGary
        >
        > from Wisconsin
        >
        > _____
        >
        > From: woodheat@yahoogroups.com <mailto:woodheat%40yahoogroups.com>
        > [mailto:woodheat@yahoogroups.com <mailto:woodheat%40yahoogroups.com>]
        > On Behalf
        > Of Donald Russell
        > Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2009 3:14 AM
        > To: woodheat@yahoogroups.com <mailto:woodheat%40yahoogroups.com>
        > Subject: Re: [woodheat] Pressure differential between inside and outside
        >
        > Gary,
        >
        > I know nothing about what kind of chimney the man has or how big and
        > drafty his house is. I only know that which he posted and I relayed to
        > you. You may be absolutely correct.
        >
        > No, I have not conducted any actual tests of air infiltration of any
        > houses whose construction I have been involved with nor do I have the
        > means or opportunity to do so. I am a roofer not a building inspector.
        > I normally do not even see the completed house. I was speaking only from
        > my observations of how tightly the houses are wrapped with Tyvek, how
        > well the windows and doors are sealed when they are installed, and how
        > all the wall penetrations for electrical and plumbing and such are
        > carefully sealed with insulating foam sealant. I'm sure there are many
        > tiny leaks but it is hard for me to believe there is any significant
        > infiltration if the work was done correctly.
        >
        > This whole slightly off subject and elongated discourse was blamed, by
        > some, on me. It could have been stopped at any time just by everyone
        > simply not replying to any one of my posts. I even suggested several
        > times that I wanted to drop it but the comments continued and I felt
        > compelled to try to explain myself. I feel that those people are just
        > as guilty as I for the continuation.
        >
        > I agree almost entirely with most of what John explains on woodheat.org
        > and the woodheatgroup but I do think there are some errors in his
        > science occasionally, and being a former science student (considered by
        > some to be somewhat gifted) a very long time ago, I guess I feel
        > somewhat compelled to correct these errors before they are propagated
        > too far.
        >
        > If you have been following this thing all the way from the beginning,
        > you will see that it started when some man, named Bret, enquired about
        > John's statement that the pressure higher in a house is greater than
        > that in the lower parts. To John's credit, he tried to explain why this
        > is so, but it turned out that Bret, apparently, was a college professor
        > who was very well familiar with the subject and he then challenged
        > John's statement, unfortunately in terms not easily understood by most
        > of us. John's reply to this was rather snippy (hard to imagine that
        > from John) and he suggested to Bret that they take the discussion of the
        > group and onto private email. My guess is that this was because John
        > didn't want to be shown to be wrong on the group, but then you know John
        > way better than I do, I could be wrong. Anyway, nothing more from Bret
        > was heard from on the group.
        >
        > The more I thought about what Bret had said though, the more I realized
        > that he was absolutely right and maybe I was grinding an ax but I
        > couldn't sit by and say nothing. Along the way, sometimes in haste, I
        > too said a few things that may have not been perfectly accurate.
        >
        > Anyway, I will likly never post to the entire group again. This has
        > taken entirely too much of my time and caused too much stress. I have
        > a daughter, son-in-law, and seven of my grandbrats living with me. I
        > have stress enough.
        >
        > I am attaching two documents that are excerpts from howstuffworks.com to
        > support my statements about the pressure thing and the irrelevant
        > balloon analogy that people kept bringing up.
        >
        > I hope this all helps you understand what was going on here.
        >
        > Respectfully,
        >
        > yahoogroups@ <mailto:yahoogroups%40bsupply.us> bsupply.us wrote:
        > >
        > > Seems like I remember that poster. First off; how rare that someone
        > > did not
        > > like the advice a group on the web gave. IIRC the issue may have been
        > > a big
        > > old masonry chimney and a big old drafty house. I don't recall anyone on
        > > here saying you should spend big money on a European stove. The usual
        > > mantra is that your money is best spent, in descending order of
        > > importance;
        > > tighten house, improve insulation, get the best chimney and best stove
        > > location possible. Use dry seasoned wood, Get a properly sized EPA type
        > > stove. So buying a small expensive stove and putting it in a drafty old
        > > house on a large masonry chimney would hardly be considered
        > "following our
        > > advice"
        > >
        > > Related but separate issue. Have you conducted any actual tests on air
        > > infiltration in the "tight" houses you inspect or are you just
        > saying that
        > > they must be tight because code says they are? John has participated in
        > > actual testing that shows that even the tightest houses aren't all that
        > > tight and have plenty of leaks that allow the effects that can create
        > > backdrafting issues. My observations show that bath and kitchen fan
        > > venting
        > > create large air leaks in even the tightest homes and that air leaks are
        > > everywhere even in the best construction with quality materials.
        > Caveat; I
        > > have not conducted any air infiltration testing myself. But I note that
        > > "asian beetle, lady bugs' have no difficulty penetrating my "tight"
        > house.
        > >
        > > gggGary
        > >
        > > from Wisconsin
        > >
        > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        > >
        > >
        > > ----------------------------------------------------------
        > >
        > > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > > Checked by AVG.
        > > Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.3/1975 - Release Date:
        > 2/27/2009
        > 7:05 AM
        > >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
        >
        > No virus found in this incoming message.
        > Checked by AVG.
        > Version: 7.5.557 / Virus Database: 270.11.3/1975 - Release Date: 2/27/2009 7:05 AM
        >
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.