TEST REPORT TEST OF A CATALYTIC WOOD BURNING STOVE FOR EMISSIONS AND EFFICIENCY

PER EPA METHODS 28 AND 5G-3, FEBRUARY 1988

Client: Woodstock soapstone Attention: Rafael Sanchez
TESTED BY: Services Polytests 411 St-Jacques Napierville, QC, J0J 1L0 TEST DATES : Oct. 16 to nov. 1st , 2013 REPORT DATE : January 23rd 2014 Project number : P-1212

All service are subject to the following general po licy: Reports are submitted for exclusive use of th e clients to whom they are addressed. Their significance is subject to the adequacy and represe ntative character of the samples and to the compreh ensiveness of the tests, examinations or surveys made. This document may not be reproduced e xcept in its entirety without the written permissio n from Services Polytests. 

### Tested/ written by :

Danick Power, Jr Eng



### Verified by :

Gaétan Piédalue, P.EngNapierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 2 of 29 

# S UMMARY 1 Introduction ......................................

................................................... .................................................. 4 1.1 General ...........................................

................................................... ............................................ 4 1.2 Test unit information .............................

................................................... .................................... 4 1.3 Results ...........................................

................................................... ............................................. 4 1.4 Pretest information ...............................

................................................... ..................................... 4 2 Summary of test results ...........................

................................................... ........................................... 5 2.1 Emissions .........................................

................................................... ........................................... 5 2.2 Weighted average calculation.......................

................................................... ............................. 6 2.3 Test facility conditions ..........................

................................................... ..................................... 7 2.4 Fuel qualities ....................................

................................................... .......................................... 7 2.5 Dilution tunnel flow rate measurements and sampling data (5G-3) ...................................... ...... 8 2.6 Dilution tunnel dual train precision ..............

................................................... ............................. 8 2.7 General summary of results ........................

................................................... ............................... 9 3 Process description ...............................

................................................... ............................................ 10 3.1 Discussion ........................................

................................................... ........................................ 10 3.2 Unit dimensions ...................................

................................................... .................................... 10 3.3 Air supply system .................................

................................................... .................................... 11 3.4 operation during test .............................

................................................... .................................. 12 3.5 Star-up operation .................................

................................................... .................................... 13 3.6 Sampling locations ................................

................................................... ................................... 13 3.7 Drawings ..........................................

................................................... ........................................ 13 3.8 Emissions efficiency testing equipment list .......

................................................... ...................... 13 4 Sampling methods ..................................

................................................... .......................................... 13 4.1 Particulate sampling ..............................

................................................... .................................. 14 5 Quality assurance .................................

................................................... ............................................ 14 5.1 Instrument calibration ............................

................................................... ................................. 14 5.1.1 Gas meters ........................................

................................................... ................................... 14 5.1.2 SCALES ............................................

................................................... ..................................... 14 5.1.3 Gas analyzers .....................................

................................................... .................................. 14 5.2 Test method procedures ............................

................................................... .............................. 14 5.2.1 Leak check procedures .............................

................................................... ........................... 14 5.2.2 Tunnel velocity flow measurement ..................

................................................... ................... 14 5.2.3 Pm sampling proportionality C5g-3) ................

................................................... .................... 14Napierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 3 of 29 

# List of appendix APPENDIX 1: Raw data, forms and results APPENDIX 2: Proportionality results APPENDIX 3: Calibration data APPENDIX 4: Unit pre burn APPENDIX 5: Participants APPENDIX 6: Drawings and specifications APPENDIX 7: Operator’s manual APPENDIX 8: Photographs of test set up APPENDIX 9: Test load photographs APPENDIX 10: Laboratory Operating Procedures APPENDIX 11: Sample calculations APPENDIX 12: Volume calculations APPENDIX 13: Operating instruction APPENDIX 14: Drawing Air flow pattern APPENDIX 15: Application for wood stove programNapierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 4 of 29 

# 1 I NTRODUCTION 

## 1.1 G ENERAL Laboratory

• Location: Services Inc., 411 St-Jacques st, Napie rville QC, Canada JOJ 1LO
• Elevation: 100 feet above see level Test program

• Purpose: unit qualification E.P.A. Phase II
• Test dates: October 16th to November 1st, 2013
• Test methods used: o Particulate emissions: methods 28 and 5G-3 as refe rred into 40 CFR Part 60 Subpart AAA o Efficiency: CSA B415.1-10 

## 1.2 T EST UNIT INFORMATION General

• Manufacturer: Woodstock Soapstone
• Product type: catalytic hybrid wood stove
• Combustion system: primary air with secondary air baffle and Catalyst (hybrid system)
• Unit tested: 210 Particularities

• Options: Esthetic, optional side panel
• Product line similarities: N/a 

## 1.3 R ESULTS Emission results obtained

• Weighted average emission rate: 1.03g/hr
• Maximum rate cap: 2.38gr/hr run 6 max burn rate 4.0 6kg/hr Conformity: E.P.A. Phase II 

## 1.4 P RETEST INFORMATION Unit condition: The unit was received by carrier 2 013 October 7th . The 50hrs of aging is made in wee k of October 7th, 2013.Napierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 5 of 29 Set up

• Venting system type: steel pipe and insulated chimn ey
• System height from floor: 15 feet
• Particularities: The unit was tested with the Top flue configuration Break in period

• Duration: the unit received from the manufacturer and run for at least 50 hours at a category 2 burn rate with adequate documentation of fuel addit ions and flue and unit temperatures during the week of October 7th, 2013.
• Fuel: cordwood 

# 2 S UMMARY OF TEST RESULTS 

## 2.1 E MISSIONS 

### Run Number Test Date Burn Rate Adjusted Heating (kg/hr) Emission Efficiency Rate (g/hr) (% Overall) 1 16-10-2013 0,939 0,83 84,5% 3 21-10-2013 2,148 0,81 78,6%
4 22-10-2013 1,703 1,05 80,1% 5 23-10-2013 0,796 0,73 82,9% 6 24-10-2013 4,064 2,38 74,7% 7 30-10-2013 1,851 1,36 80,0% 8 01-01-2013 1,264 1,17 81,2%Napierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 6 of 29 

## 2.2 W EIGHTED AVERAGE CALCULATION 

### (E) Ave. Heat (K) Burn Emission Output Weighting Test No. Rate Rate g/hr (OHE) (BTU/HR) Prob. Factor 5 0,80 0,732 82,9% 12340 0,2171 0,3219 1 0,94 0,826 84,5% 14890 0,3219 0,3679 8 1,26 1,173 81,2% 19287 0,5850 0,5190 4 1,70 1,050 80,1% 25636 0,8410 0,2972 7 1,85 1,355 80,0% 27820 0,8823 0,0907 3 2,15 0,811 78,6% 29540 0,9317 0,1127 6 4,06 2,376 74,7% 57028 0,9950 0,0683 sum 1.03 g/hr

Weighted Average Emissions Rate: 1.03gr/hr Weighted Average Overall Efficiency: 82%Napierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 7 of 29 

## 2.3 T EST FACILITY CONDITIONS


### Run Room Barometric Relative Air Velocity Number Temperature pressure humidity Before After Before After Before After Before After (F) (F) (in.Hg) (in.Hg) (%) (%) (ft/min) (ft/min) 1 77 67 29,973 29,796 47,2 84,6 9 38,3 3 73 83 30,062 29,914 40,4 38,4 8 11 4 74 83 29,707 29,678 41,7 31,6 14 11 5 74 80 29,737 29,766 30,2 60,2 8 13 6 73 83 29,707 29,707 28,9 24,5 13 19 7 81 86 30,268 30,180 25,8 21,4 32 11 8 76 84 29,205 29,235 49 30 12 15



## 2.4 F UEL QUALITIES Run Pre-test Load Test Load
Number Loading Moisture Coal Weight Density Moisture Piece Number Number

Weight Content bed Wet Wet Content Length of of Wet Dry Weight Basis Basis Dry (in.) 2X4's 4 x4's Basis Basis (lbs) (lbs) (lbs/cuft) Basis (lbs) 

### (%) (%) 1 15,00 20,57 4,8 23,00 7,188 21,18 20,5 0 4 3 16,30 22,89 4,5 21,95 6,859 21,44 20,25 0 4 4 16,25 21,97 4,6 22,05 6,891 22,36 20,25 0 4 5 15,50 21,54 4,7 21,95 6,859 22,45 20,25 0 3Napierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 8 of 29 

### 6 18,35 23,89 4,8 22,75 7,109 22,88 20,25 0 4 7 18,15 21,97 4,8 22,35 6,984 22,62 20,25 0 4 8 15,00 20,77 4,9 22,85 7,141 23,66 20,25 0 4



## 2.5 D ILUTION TUNNEL FLOW RATE MEASUREMENTS AND SAMPLING DATA 

## (5G-3) Average dilution tunnel measurements Sam pie Dat a Run Burn

Volumetrie Total Volume sampled Particulate catch Number Rate Flow Rate Temperatures (DSCF) (mg)

(Min) (dscf/min) (°R) 1 

## 2 1 2 

### 1 

## 550 141,11 556,00 117,915 114,428 5,70 4,90
3 

## 229 137,59 573,63 51,043 49,492 2,40 2,20
4 

## 288 138,72 562,86 61,426 59,664 3,80 3,70
5 

## 613 139,72 552,63 132,608 128,666 5,30 5,10
6 

## 124 129,06 615,84 23,931 23,196 4,50 3,90
7 

## 268 141,85 564,18 58,574 56,791 4,70 4,80
8 

## 398 133,93 557,38 86,269 84,213 6,50 6,00



## 2.6 D ILUTION TUNNEL DUAL TRAIN PRECISION Run Sam pie Ratio Total Emission (g) Number Train 1 Train 2 Train 1 Train 2 % Devia tion 

### 1 658,19 678,25 3,75 3,32 6,05% 3 617,29 636,65 1,48 1,40 2,81% 4 650,39 669,61 2,47 2,48 0,12% 5 645,88 665,67 3,42 3,39 0,41%Napierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 9 of 29 

### 6 668,70 689,92 3,01 2,69 5,59% 7 649,00 669,38 3,05 3,21 2,60% 8 617,87 632,96 4,02 3,80 2,80%



## 2.7 G ENERAL SUMMARY OF RESULTS Run Burn Average Change in Initial static pres sure Primary Run Number Rate Surface surface Draft tunnel Air Time

(kg/hr) Temperature Temperature (in. H 2 O) (in. H 2 O) Setting (min)



### (F) (F)
1 0,939 316,47 -32,6 0,052 0,032 Pull handle 1/4" 550

3 2,148 389,73 80,4 0,065 0,036 Pull handle 1.5" 229

4 1,703 367,00 75,5 0,065 0,036 Pull handle 3/4" 288 5 0,796 314,93 -96,0 0,065 0,029 fully close 6 13 6 4,064 480,93 110,8 0,078 0,034 Fully open 12 4

7 1,851 394,76 29,3 0,067 0,032 Pull handle 3/4" 268

8 1,264 334,42 64,7 0,042 0,036 Pull handle 1/2" 398Napierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 10 of 29 

# 3 P ROCESS DESCRIPTION 

## 3.1 D ISCUSSION At the beginning of the test program, the manufactu rer aiming a category 2 for the first test with the primary inlet little open. For the second test the manufacturer was looking for a category 1 and the primary inlet was fully close, but at 10Lbs the lo ad stop burning and this test was a failure due to stop burning. Run 3 was aiming for a category 3 but fall in a category 4. For the run 4, the category 3 was meet with success. At run 5, a category 1 is aiming and meet with success at 0.796Kg/hr. Run 6 is the maxim um burn rate with the primary inlet fully open. Run 7 & 8 were made to confirm the overall efficiency in category 3.



## 3.2 U NIT DIMENSIONS Baffle
• Location: between top of combustion chamber and he arth
• Restriction: 2 X (2 1/2 in x 6 1/2 in.) at the fron t of unit
• Dimensions: covers the hearth area minus the restr iction at front
• Material: Stainless steel
Bricks
• Inside Firebox chamber refer to appendix 6 (soapsto ne guide) Flue gas exhaust
• Location: top flue located at the top, or back flu e located at the back
• Dimensions: 6 in. diameter
• Material: cast iron
Gasket
• Location: door, window, casing and catalyst. Ref er to appendix 6 (gasket list) for details.
Overall unit dimension
• Firebox dimensions : 22.5 in wide x 17.75 in. deep x 11.34 to 16.30 in. high
• Usable volume : 3.22 cuft
Convection fan
• Manufacturer : No blower supplied with unit
• Model : N/a
• Air flow : N/aNapierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 11 of 29 Catalyst
• Dimensions: 5.25 X 10 X 2.625 in.
• Number cell/sqin: 49 cpsi
• Location: on the top of combustion chamber
• Make, model: PG-K-535 Catalyst , Durafoil
• Accessibility: To remove, lift the top and slide f rom the opening

Catalyst bypass mechanism
• 20 in. x 3 in.
• Location: on the top of combustion chamber
• Method of control: A trap that closes by gravity, activated through a dandle in front of the unit above the window.


## 3.3 A IR SUPPLY SYSTEM Description

• Primary air: window wash design with air intake at the back of unit
• Secondary air: secondary baffle design with air in take at the back of unit Characterization The following table shows the inlet and outlet sect ions of each system. The air introduction system number is referred on a set of drawings in Appendix 6. AIR INTRODUCTION SYSTEM INLET (1) sq. in. OUTLET Identification Type Imin Imax Controlled (sq. in.) A * Primary nozzles 0.500 0.500 no 0.027 (2 holes of 0.187 dia.) B * Primary Airwash 0.000 3.820 Manual adjustment 5.313

(0.3125" X 17") C * Secondary fireback 0.175 4.064 Manual adjustment 3.655

(113 holes of 0.203" dia.) D * Catalyst Air 0.000 1.790 Automatic adjustment (Bimetal coil) 1.533

(20 Holes of 0.3125" dia.) * This section would be filled by measuring and com paring with the manufacturer’s drawings included in the test report . Legend Identification: Tag name referred on drawings in Ap pendix 14, section airflow pattern Type: Characterization of air intakeNapierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 12 of 29 Imin: Minimum air intake of a particular air channe l Imax: Maximum air intake of a particular air channe l Controlled: Determines if a provision for air contr ol is present Outlet: Total air outlet of a particular air channe l Note: surfaces are expressed in sq. Inches



## 3.4 OPERATION DURING TEST Run #1 This run was performed on October 16 th , 2013. It lasted 550 minutes and a category 2 bu rn rate was obtained at 0.94kg/hr, With emission 0.83g/hr.

Run #2 (failed test) This run was performed on October 17 th , 2011. The load of the unit stop burning at 10Lbs , a category 1 was targeted

Run #3 This run was performed on October 21st , 2013. It lasted 229 minutes and a category 4 burn rate was obtained at 2.15kg/hr, With emission 0.81g/hr. For this test a category 3 was targeted and missed, th e primary air inlet was not fully open. another test for category 3 and 4 will be done.

Run #4 This run was performed on October 22 nd , 2013. It lasted 288 minutes and a category 3 bu rn rate was obtained at 1.7kg/hr, With emission 1.05g/hr.

Run #5 This run was performed on October 23 rd , 2013. It lasted 613 minutes and a category 1 bu rn rate was obtained at 0.796kg/hr, With emission 0.7g/hr.

Run #6 This run was performed on October 24 th , 2013. It lasted 124 minutes and a category 4 bu rn rate was obtained at 4.06kg/hr, With emission 2.4g/hr.

Run #7 This run was performed on October 30 th , 2013. It lasted 268 minutes and a category 3 bu rn rate was obtained at 1.85kg/hr, With emission 1.4g/hr.Napierville, Jan. 23rd, 2014 Client : Woodstock Soapstone

Project :P-1212

Page 13 of 29 Run #8 This run was performed on November 1 st , 2013. It lasted 398 minutes and a category 3 bu rn rate was obtained at 1.26kg/hr, With emission 1.2g/hr.

• Details: Refer to the front page of each test run data sheets found in appendix for the detailed test sequence showing air supply settings and adjus tments, fuel bed adjustments and operational specifics of the test unit. Test fuel cribs

• Type of wood: Douglas fir, grade c or better, 19 t o 25% dry basis moisture content
• Description: for each test, description of the fuel crib is found on the front page of each test run data sheet together with photograph in appendix.


## 3.5 S TAR 

## - UP OPERATION The complete manufacturer’s firing procedure of eac h burn rate category is fully described in appendix 13. Sampling systems 

## 3.6 S AMPLING LOCATIONS Particulate samples are collected from the dilution tunnel at a point 15 feet from the tunnel entrance . The tunnel has two elbows and two mixing baffles in the system ahead of the sampling section. The sampling section is a continuous 10 foot section of 6 inch d iameter pipe straight over its entire length. Tunne l velocity pressure is determined by a standard pitot tube located 48 inches from the beginning of the sampling section. Thermocouple is installed on the pitot tube to measure the dry bulb temperature. MC is assumed, as allowed, to be 4%. Tunnel samplers a re located 56 inches downstream of the pitot tube and 16 inches upstream from the end of this section

. 

## 3.7 D RAWINGS Various drawings of the stack gas sampling train and of dilution tunnel system are found in Appendix 1. 

## 3.8 E MISSIONS EFFICIENCY TESTING EQUIPMENT LIST The complete test equipment list together with all corresponding calibration data can be found in Appendix 3.



# 4 S AMPLING METHODS