wood list for charcoal

[MadMat]

Some time ago, I came across a website that had a very comprehensive list of different woods and the pyro quality of charcoal they produced. Unfortunately, I had some pc problems and lost all my book marks. Does anyone know the link for such a list?

[marks265]

Is this what you are after?

[MadMat]

Not the list I had but this one is pretty good! thanks

[OldMarine]

There was another good list on a muzzleloading site somewhere.

[Mumbles]

Any chance you have some more details? Anything might help. Danny's is the best freely available list I know of. There are a couple of books and journals that are excellent as well.

[RichardH08]

Here's another one that might help.

[Arthur]

Lists are OK as far as they go! However if the particular tree isn't local to you then the costs become silly.

 

Also I found a big difference between charcoaled 6 - 10mm willow sticks and charcoaled big log willow wood -the small sticks made much faster charcoal. Even if you get a list there is no certainty that all the woods will grow freely in your area.

[mikeee]

The local environment will also have an affect on the quality of the wood/charcoal.

There are many variables along the way when turning any wood into "good" charcoal.

How much moisture does the tree get during the year, what is the mineral content of the soil

the tree is growing in, what time of year did the tree get harvested, how dry was the wood

when converting it into charcoal, what size of wood pieces were used to convert into charcoal,

how much air was introduced into the cooker during the conversion, what was the humidity and

temperature during the charcoal conversion, how much heat was used to convert the wood,

how long was the charcoal exposed to heat during the conversion, what type of cooker was used to

convert the wood to charcoal? Then we have what part of the tree was used for making the charcoal.

[MadMat]

Arthur and Mikee yes, I have found differences as both of you have described. I posted this once before, but I feel it's worth repeating; wood that is semi-rotted seems to make much faster BP than the same wood in pristine condition. I usually make my charcoal from black willow located around a pond on the edge of the farm. I once collected branches that had fallen and were at the point where the bark was falling off easily and the wood still solid but easier to break up. The charcoal from this wood made much faster BP. I have tried the same thing with red cedar (it grows everywhere around here in Mo). Two years ago the county road crews trimmed back a bunch of cedar branches along the roads. After those branches had laid around until in the same condition as I described above. I got the same result with charcoal made from them.

Edited March 11, 2017 by MadMat

[lloyd]

That might be because the bacteria and molds causing the 'rotting' have consumed all the sugars and other carbohydrates, leaving only indigestible resins and cellulose.

 

Lloyd

[MadMat]

Lloyd, I have thought about that. I am also wondering if the mere "softening" of the wood has something to do with it as well. The charcoal made from semi-rotted wood comes out much easier to grind. Maybe even at the microscopic level, the charcoal is more "porous" making better intimate contact with the oxidizer?

 

**Well I guess both ideas are inclusive. The micro-organisms would punch holes in the cellular structure of the wood... yada yada.

Edited March 11, 2017 by MadMat

[Sulphurstan]

I'm looking for charcoal which makes as less sparks as possible, when loaded in a nozzled fountain. I' ve been making a fountain with Lancaster microstars but the orange golden charcoal sparks spray was nearly hiding the nice pops of the microstars. My charcoal was wine, mix was as explained in lancaster.

Is willow better, or do i have to tune the particles sizes?

I would try to get even less orange charcoal spray than http://www.amateurpyro.com/forums/topic/12307-flashing-microstars-lancaster/?p=168487

[NeighborJ]

Willow or ERC milled to airfloat are your best bet unless you use lamp black. LB will likely burn at a similar rate while The others will burn faster.

[DavidF]

It has been said that fast charcoal is fast charcoal, and that particle size is of little concern. This is simply not true- but it was said by a pyro demi-god. It was said by another guru that balsa charcoal does not make fast powder- which is also not true.

It's also been said a few times now that softened wood makes faster charcoal than pristine wood. Now, that DOES make sense.

 

Hard wood like oak, milled well, can make excellent black powder- proven. Who wants to do it, though?

 

Wood that is softer and easier to reduce to fine particles- like balsa- makes faster powder with less milling than harder wood milled the same way for the same time. I'm not talking about milling black powder. I'm talking about milling charcoal. Since the milling of the charcoal (and the type) is the main determining factor for the speed of black powder, learning to get the most value from it will be of great benefit.

 

Most folks mill their charcoal with the sulfur and the potassium nitrate. That's the fastest and easiest way to make black powder. However, in many cases, the full potential of the charcoal does not come close to being reached. On the flip side, how often does the full potential really need to be reached?

 

I've spent years chasing my tail and learned a heck of a lot about black powder and charcoal. I can make black powder that's hotter than the next guy's, guaranteed. But, the guys that make only 'medium' black powder sure can and do make some great fireworks with it!

 

My favorite is staghorn sumac.

[lloyd]

Boy! I hope I wasn't one of the ones who said those 'goofy' things! When I read them, I immediately fear I made some stupid comment in the past that Dave-of-the-everlasting-memory wouldn't forget! <grin>

 

Lloyd

[DavidF]

Nope! Actually, you disagreed with 'goofy thing' #1, Lloyd. Testing, testing, 1,2,3,4....

[lloyd]

Oh, I'm still here and conscious, David. I just don't "keep a log" of what I've said in the past. And sometimes, I tread on my own toes!

 

Lloyd

[OldMarine]

Perfect thread for my question. I was gifted a few 5 gallon buckets of wine corks and got to wondering if they'd make good charcoal. All the leads I've followed led to APC and several unanswered questions by Mikeee on the subject. There were several anecdotal claims of cork coal being comparable to balsa but no hard data. Does anyone have personal experience with cork coal?

[Sulphurstan]

Neighbour. Thank you for your answer. I'll try these out.

 

OM. I do have lots of cork as well, still haven't retorted it... Maybe one day. But I'm pretty happy with my willow for fast BP, so I'm not in the hurry for the cork... Nevertheless, just for the fun of experience I should try it and make the burn test.. If I get to this, I'll share on the forum.

Edited April 20, 2017 by Sulphurstan

[lloyd]

Patrick,

If it doesn't work for fuel, you could always start your own blackface troupe, and use it as the 'classic' makeup of the day!

 

Lloyd

[OldMarine]

[Sulphurstan]

5 Charcoals, 10 Burntests.

 

After having seen cork mentionned, I finally got to retort some, ball mill it, and finally, made a whole experience for comparing 5 charcoals.

 

Purpose is not to get the quickest BP possible, just to compare burn rates, with one variable only (charcoal) and also measure how much wet screening improves the rates. Highly experienced members here, who made far more tests than I did, will probably say, that 35 cm/s for willow BP is slow (yes, but keep in mind, not ball milled together, maybe not the best willow tree also...).

This here is just to make comparison.

 

 

0) 3.0 grams of composition were burnt each time (the batches for mixing were 25.75 grams for each of the 5 mixes)

 

1) Test plate was a 30 cm long / 5 mm deep ditch, with 2 mm green visco fuse inserted at one end:

 

2) Compositions were 75/15/10 + 3 dext

 

3) KNO3 was lab grade, ball milled 12 h

 

4) Sulfur was 99.8 %, 63 µm

 

5) Charcoals were

5.1) Willow, home made, retorted, ballmilled 6h

5.2) Wine, commercial, < 100 µm

5.3) Cork, home made, retorted, ballmilled 6h

5.4) BBQ, commercial, wood unknow, ballmiled 6h

5.5) Lampblack, commercial, < 0.09 µm (90nm)

 

6) ROUGH MIXES: 4 ingredients screened through a 1000µm mesh , 5 times

 

7) PULVERONE: Rough mix that was wet screened through a 1000 µm mesh with 50water / 50isopropanol; once dry, screen to be calibrated 500µm - 1000µm particles only

 

THE TESTS:

(Sorry in advance for videos, not super stable and sharp, and light conditions were changing rapidly that evening)

 

TEST 1: WILLOW ROUGH MIX. 2.6 cm/s (boring :-(!!!!)

 

TEST 2: WILLOW PULVERONE 35 cm/s

 

TEST 3: CORK ROUGH MIX 1.4 cm/s (even more boring!)

 

TEST 4: CORK PULVERONE 35 cm/s (same rate as willow, increased 26 times, in regards to rough mix -> this is to show our newer members, what wet screening is for)

 

TEST 5: WINE ROUGH MIX: 2.5 cm/s

 

TEST 6: WINE PULVERONE: 18 cm/s (here we clearly see the difference with willow or cork...)

 

TEST 7: BBQ ROUGH MIX: 2.1 cm/s

 

TEST 8: BBQ PULVERONE: 15 cm/s

 

TEST 9: LAMPBLACK ROUGH MIX: sorry, video is pretty long lasting....not ignited with green visco, but nice ignition locally, once heated up with the gas flame

 

TEST 10: LAMPBLACK PULVERONE: 26 cm/s (surprinsingly "quick") and with a nice crispy burning sound

 

 

CONCLUSION

- Cork should be investigated more further: ballmilled with Sulfur, then mixed with kno3 and dextrin then wet screened..... or ballmill all 3 ingredients together etc... etc.... the usual recipes.

- Probably other conclusions to be found...

Edited April 28, 2017 by Sulphurstan

[OldMarine]

How did the cork perform in comparison to others? I'm on mobile data and would be in the poorhouse if I download all the vids.

[lloyd]

PATRICK! He put the performances in TEXT. You don't need the vids!

 

<grin>

Lloyd

[OldMarine]

All I'm seeing are Mp4 files.