Samphire Stoves

N

nathanlee

Well-Known Member
Joined
9 Jun 2008
Messages
4,990
Visit site
www.samphireseastoves.co.uk


I have absolutely no connection to this company, I just stumbled across an ad on eBay. They seem to be a new stove manufacturer, based entirely in England, and offering much cheaper, and IMO better looking than Taylors.

Thought it's worth a look, and it's especially nice to see a UK manufacturer.

I might flog my taylors heater, and get one of these myself. No pressurised paraffin tank is a welcome bonus!
 
Don't understand how the paraffin is initially vapourised and the mechanics of getting it from the tank to the burner wihtout a pressure pump.

Would also be more impressed if the website had fewer typos and better grammar.
 
chinita said:
Don't understand how the paraffin is initially vapourised and the mechanics of getting it from the tank to the burner wihtout a pressure pump.
Click to expand...

Tank is higher than burner, so gravity.

Fuel passes through a 'vaporiser tube' or similar. It is initially heated by meths and once the paraffin is burning becomes self sustaining by conducted heat. As the video illustrates, the art with such burners is getting the starting sequence just right. Many backpacking stoves are similar.
 
I've had a look at the tech documents, and the video.


Lighting is achieved by meths pre-heating the burner plate, and ignition achieved by removing the front door plate and then refastening it.


The fuel is fed by gravity from a tank located approx 300mm above the top of the burner unit. His notes go on about the need to locate the tank above the stove (obviously) and he suggests on a small boat there may be a space problem. In that case, I'd suggest a small (say 250-400 ml) 'day tank' located above the stove, fed from the main paraffin tank by a small manual air pump as found onthe Taylors, and old-fashioned blow lamps. This would give 3 to 4 hours running, and allow for installation of the stove in places where it would be difficult to place the standard tank. A day tank would also be a safety feature as it limits the running time of the stove.

Otherwise, it looks a good functional design, with attractive shape and looks. I think I'd prefer a model in stainless steel, not aluminium, as paraffin has an open air burning temperature of around 300C, and aluminium a melting point of c 650C, and steel at around 1500C. Just to be safe in case of a runaway burn caused by overdraft conditions.
 
But the point is, aside from being a new and different product on the market, it's a one man band going out there and doing what makes all countries great. Yes, it's on a small scale, but he's made a good, competitive product, and I wish him well.

It's not a nationalist thing either. The guy I won my wind vane off, Mr vee, and have so far shamefully not had chance to use, is another such innovative character from the Netherlands. He's not sitting still, he's finding better ways. Find an opening in the market, and go for it.

Small boat progress has all but stopped due to large companies growing to a near monopoly and developing only for markets they see the biggest profit in; new AWB's. This is all fine and good, but there is a great big market of us poorer sailors that get neglected, and I love this sort of entrepreneurship.

I can't afford one at the moment, but as soon as I can, I'd love to place an order.

Same with NASA marine too. They are falling behind on the innovation, but at least they're trying to service the lesser end of the market. A lot of us wouldn't have instruments without their price point.

Too political? Maybe, but I really do believe it.
 
very much agreed, Nathan, and I hope he has got a decent business model to progress. There is bound to be customer feedback and some development of design, and if there were a major malfunction in the first year or so, the consequential bad PR could sink him.

I hope not because, as you say, we can do with small engineering businesses being successful in this country.
 
+1

nathanlee said:
But the point is, aside from being a new and different product on the market, it's a one man band going out there and doing what makes all countries great. Yes, it's on a small scale, but he's made a good, competitive product, and I wish him well.

It's not a nationalist thing either. The guy I won my wind vane off, Mr vee, and have so far shamefully not had chance to use, is another such innovative character from the Netherlands. He's not sitting still, he's finding better ways. Find an opening in the market, and go for it.

Small boat progress has all but stopped due to large companies growing to a near monopoly and developing only for markets they see the biggest profit in; new AWB's. This is all fine and good, but there is a great big market of us poorer sailors that get neglected, and I love this sort of entrepreneurship.

I can't afford one at the moment, but as soon as I can, I'd love to place an order.

Same with NASA marine too. They are falling behind on the innovation, but at least they're trying to service the lesser end of the market. A lot of us wouldn't have instruments without their price point.

Too political? Maybe, but I really do believe it.
Click to expand...
 
Samphire Seastoves

Thanks for the interest in my stove design, especially Nathan for bringing it to light.
In response to some of the queries/comments:
Aluminium is as safe as any metal for my type of burner design as having no carburetor to flood the burner a runaway fire is impossible. To melt 8kgs of aluminium you would need many times more the stove power which could not be sustained due to limitations in oxygen intake.
Stainless steel is a very poor conductor of heat, a stove made from this would need about three times the fuel to produce a similar output. shiny reflective surfaces radiate very little heat as I found out whilst testing an unpainted stove.
I have had my own stove installed on my 29ft boat for over a year now and I am confident enough to leave it running all night in the dead of winter.
Apologies if any typos or lack of grammar in the above, English was not my strong point at school but luckily engineering was!!
Steve
 
sgibbs said:
Thanks for the interest in my stove design, especially Nathan for bringing it to light.
In response to some of the queries/comments:
Aluminium is as safe as any metal for my type of burner design as having no carburetor to flood the burner a runaway fire is impossible. To melt 8kgs of aluminium you would need many times more the stove power which could not be sustained due to limitations in oxygen intake.
Stainless steel is a very poor conductor of heat, a stove made from this would need about three times the fuel to produce a similar output. shiny reflective surfaces radiate very little heat as I found out whilst testing an unpainted stove.
I have had my own stove installed on my 29ft boat for over a year now and I am confident enough to leave it running all night in the dead of winter.
Apologies if any typos or lack of grammar in the above, English was not my strong point at school but luckily engineering was!!
Steve
Click to expand...

Thanks and welcome to the forums Steve.

It's great to see someone going out there, working out how best to make something, and then doing it.

All power to your elbow chap.

RD
 
I dont quite understand the physics behind this - why should a stove made of stainless steel need three times the amount of fuel to produce a similar output to one made of aluminium please? If, as you say, its because stainless is a poor conductor then where is the heat which is not going into the cabin going - not out of the tiny chimney surely?

sgibbs said:
Thanks for the interest in my stove design, especially Nathan for bringing it to light.
In response to some of the queries/comments:
Aluminium is as safe as any metal for my type of burner design as having no carburetor to flood the burner a runaway fire is impossible. To melt 8kgs of aluminium you would need many times more the stove power which could not be sustained due to limitations in oxygen intake.
Stainless steel is a very poor conductor of heat, a stove made from this would need about three times the fuel to produce a similar output. shiny reflective surfaces radiate very little heat as I found out whilst testing an unpainted stove.
I have had my own stove installed on my 29ft boat for over a year now and I am confident enough to leave it running all night in the dead of winter.
Apologies if any typos or lack of grammar in the above, English was not my strong point at school but luckily engineering was!!
Steve
Click to expand...
 
samphire seastove

dear comrade red
aluminium conducts heat 5 times better than stainless steel. If the stove was stainless steel the heat produced in the interior by the burner would mostly stay in the interior as this metal will not conduct the heat so readily to the outer surfaces where its needed. A simple experiment to prove this fact would be to hold 2 equal size rods one of ally one of stainless over a candle and find out that one can be held a lot longer than the other. Also heat that is not being absorbed properly will be lost via the flue.
 
Boo2 said:
Well, good luck to the manufacturer and I don't want to pick holes, but that stove requires 2 types of fuel (meths and paraffin) in addition to the diesel and gas I will already be carrying so that makes it a non-starter for me :(

Boo2
Click to expand...

But when you have a eureka moment and decide to have a Taylors cooker you can get rid of the gas! Needs a leap of faith though - plus deep pockets, but once you have had a Taylors everything else is second best.
 
Does this argument stack up? How can the heat produced "stay in the heater"? Newtons 3rd law - energy cant be destroyed - the interior of the heater must heat up and then heat up the stainless steel which will get hotter than aluminium and radiate equal amount of heat - ultimately - into the cabin. From experience with a stainless Bengco heater - it cannot go up the chimney to theextent suggested - it is just warm at the top.

sgibbs said:
dear comrade red
aluminium conducts heat 5 times better than stainless steel. If the stove was stainless steel the heat produced in the interior by the burner would mostly stay in the interior as this metal will not conduct the heat so readily to the outer surfaces where its needed. A simple experiment to prove this fact would be to hold 2 equal size rods one of ally one of stainless over a candle and find out that one can be held a lot longer than the other. Also heat that is not being absorbed properly will be lost via the flue.
Click to expand...
 
I guess that to illustrate the argument, suppose the stove was made from insulating bricks? Then presumably none, or very little, of the internal heat would reach the outside of the bricks and all the heat would go up the chimney.
 
sgibbs said:
dear comrade red
aluminium conducts heat 5 times better than stainless steel. If the stove was stainless steel the heat produced in the interior by the burner would mostly stay in the interior as this metal will not conduct the heat so readily to the outer surfaces where its needed. A simple experiment to prove this fact would be to hold 2 equal size rods one of ally one of stainless over a candle and find out that one can be held a lot longer than the other. Also heat that is not being absorbed properly will be lost via the flue.
Click to expand...

I think you mean that the stainless steel simply takes longer to reach the same temperature as the aluminium, so there is more heat lost up the chimney during this time. I e warm up takes longer and efficiency is lower.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Top