Testing Idris with a conventional four wick tube burner. This is most satisfactory and less hazardous than the vapourising burner used for the last test..
In both cases it is the meths vapour that burns. The vapourising burner can produce more vapour than a wick so provided you can get enough air should give more heat.
Idris does not really have enough firebox space to allow more vapour to burn.
My conclusion from these experiments is that four small flames spread around the firebox are better than two big ones either side.
I forgot to add; - I feel that spilling hot Meths is more likely with a vapourising burner than with closely packed wicks in a wick burner. Hence the wick burner has a safety advantage.
She really is running most splendedly, so what were the addvantages and disadvantages of the vaporising and wick burners?
DebenValleyLightRail 2 years ago
In both cases it is the meths vapour that burns. The vapourising burner can produce more vapour than a wick so provided you can get enough air should give more heat.
Idris does not really have enough firebox space to allow more vapour to burn.
My conclusion from these experiments is that four small flames spread around the firebox are better than two big ones either side.
quothick 2 years ago
I forgot to add; - I feel that spilling hot Meths is more likely with a vapourising burner than with closely packed wicks in a wick burner. Hence the wick burner has a safety advantage.
quothick 2 years ago