Reverting fireplace BACK to an open fire

[robbie]

We have recently purchased property which had a wood burner installed. This has been removed by the previous owner. The chimney does have a liner in it. The flue liner can be seen disappearing into the chimney and there is a gap around it within the chimney itself.

I would like temporarily to revert back to using an open fire from a simple fire basket. Is there anything I need to be made aware of??

In my simple mind I can just remove the few couplings the previous owner left and insert the fire basket.

(This is not relevant to the reverting back question but might help to understand why I ask. The long term is that I have a new inset burner and surround to install which will require a complete new chimney to be built through the house and roof.)

[Deimos]

I used to have an open fire and it was excellent at removing all the warm air from the house.  Get a fire going and it starts a fantastic flow of air up the chimney, which drags all the warm air from the room and house up through the chimney (dragging in cold air from outside through the important vents).  Fantastic way to stay cold whilst burning fuel.

Ian

[robbie]

yeeh I know that but they do look good [:)]

[Jo]

The previous owners of our property either didn't have a wood burner or, more likely took it with them, so I had the same problem. I just had the chimney swept, put a few logs down, and away it went. Not the most efficient way of getting heat in, but a good stop gap till I learnt how to use the wood burning boiler without blowing us up!![blink]

[robbie]

[quote]The previous owners of our property either didn't have a wood burner

or, more likely took it with them, so I had the same problem. I just

had the chimney swept, put a few logs down, and away it went.[/quote]

did yours have a flue liner in the chimney too?? Our does and I am wondering if this needs to be sealed around its outside so the smoke goes up the liner only or if it is fine to leave it so smoke goes either through the flue and/or outside the flue liner.

[Chas]

We changed from open fire to woodburner two years ago - great decision!! Our liner is sealed at the top and cemented centrally in the chimney and at the bottom with a heat resistant plate/board. So although your previous owners may have removed the lower sealing  the liner may well be sealed at the top. Not that I know if that would be significant although it would allow the cavity between liner and chimney to fill with smoke.

[robbie]

[quote]it would allow the cavity between liner and chimney to fill with smoke.[/quote]

it is the cavity which I wonder about and if there is anything I can do. I suppose I could seal the liner at the bottom, but what with and would the liner be adequate for an open fire as it will be a more reduced area than the old chimney, but then as you say, if it is sealed at the top then the only working area anyway is going to be the liner.......

I do think it will probably be fine whether I seal at the bottom or not. If there is any leak of smoke from the old chimney, we would soon see/smell it I suppose...

[Jo]

The sweep removed the old liner as it wasn't in a good enough condition to use.[:@]

[Chas]

[quote user="robbie"][quote]it would allow the cavity between liner and chimney to fill with smoke.[/quote]

it is the cavity which I wonder about and if there is anything I can do. I suppose I could seal the liner at the bottom, but what with and would the liner be adequate for an open fire as it will be a more reduced area than the old chimney, but then as you say, if it is sealed at the top then the only working area anyway is going to be the liner.......

I do think it will probably be fine whether I seal at the bottom or not. If there is any leak of smoke from the old chimney, we would soon see/smell it I suppose...
[/quote]

 My only additional thought is whether you will have sufficient draught for an open fire through the reduced diameter of the liner.  We had a problem with smoke coming into the room initially with our open fire even with the full volume chimney and in the end had to fit a copper canopy at the top of the fireplace.  Anyway good luck with your fire.   

[retread]

Its not the smoke that kills you. I would not operate an open fire without at least a 230mm dia flue with, say, a 160mm fresh air inlet close to the fire.

Carbon monoxide and dioxide are both tasteless, and they have no odour. It was the carbon monoxide in town gas that was such a killer in the old 'stick yer ead in a gas oven' days.

[robbie]

is the '230mm' flue size from anything substantial or just a personal thought??

It does seem rather large when burners can have them less than that and work fine.

Or am I getting confused somewhere [8-)]

[retread]

[quote user="robbie"]is the '230mm' flue size from anything substantial or just a personal thought??

It does seem rather large when burners can have them less than that and work fine.

Or am I getting confused somewhere [8-)]
[/quote]

A stove isnt open all round and thus needs a smaller flue to provide sufficient draft.

The Flue size suggested represents the largest available  in twin wall flue pipe without going to extremes and (I Believe) represents the Norme for an open fire.

[robbie]

Thanks for that [:)]