trangia fuel mix?

[redflex]

I read somewhere you can add water to meths for the SA trangia to make it work cleaner.

If so how much water do you put in with meths?

 

[hilltop]

i heared this too a few years ago but never tried it coz if you add water to petrol it burns a lot hotter, didnt want to ruin trangia burner,

 

[addyb]

I've heard of that also, and I believe the Trangia website has the exact mixture. (But don't quote me)

Myself, I use industrial meths for mine and I've had no need to add water to it. I've also heard that adding water to the fuel reduces sooting of pots, but with industrial meths I've never had that problem.

I wouldn't recommend adding petrol or naptha to the burner because I think it's just too much heat for that little brass burner that we all know and love.

I hope this helps.

Adam

 

[Jon Mawer]

10% water. It also stops the pots going black!

 

[Phil562]

This is far from scientific however it works for me

You all know the normal plastic bottles, that meths comes in, empty the meths into whatever container you use to carry in the woods, then add enough water into the empty meths bottle just to the first indentation of the bottle. Then add that amount of water to your meths container.

Have a look and it will become rather apparent wot I'm waffling about

 

[Goose]

I had heard about adding a little water and it seems to keep the pans cleaner. One thing to be careful of though, remember which bottle you have added water to! I mentioned it to a scouter and he said yes good idea until everyone adds 10% water to the meths, by sixth person there isnt a lot of meths in the water!

 

[mark a.]

It makes sense to add the 10% water to your meths bottle. The official Trangia bottle is fantastic, but I find it hard to know how much meths is in there, so I just add a dash of water straight into the burner. The only thing you have to bear in mind with this is that sometimes the water seems to "sit" on top of the meths in the burner so it's hard to take a spark / match. If this happens swirling it around or adding another dash of meths on top seems to do the trick.

 

[Graham O]

Adding water to the meths in a Trangia, does reduce sooting. However, since the meths now has to boil both the water in the pot, (desirable), plus the water in the meths, (undesirable), fuel consumption is greater. I've always found that cleaning the bottoms of the pans immediately after use, means there is no soot buildup. Cooking with a dirty bottom (!) leads to a soot buildup which is much harder to remove.

 

[gregorach]

All my cookware also gets used on campfires, so it's all black already... What's the big deal?

 

[mark a.]

All my cookware also gets used on campfires, so it's all black already... What's the big deal?

Just that soot buildup means worse heat transmission. Not so much of a worry on a big roaring fire, but on the Trangia you want to maximise the energy use from the meths. So less soot = quicker heating.

 

[gregorach]

Does it really make a noticeable difference? Colour me suprised...

I mean, I can see it in theory, but in practice I'd've thought it would be a very minor effect - much less than, say, the effect of diluting your meths by 10%. But then, I have been known to be completely wrong before.

I should probably say that I've never actually owned or used a trangia.

 

[Great Pebble]

I've used them for about 20 years on and off, with water/without, on meths/different spirits and with both black & clan pans.

Never noticed any difference.

But then despite being a big lad, I've never waited on my lunch with a stopwatch.

 

[Phil562]

The reason I do it, is to stop the soot build as I hate cleaning it off

 

[mark a.]

Can't say I've measured the difference, or could say whether it's significant or not. But the more energy I can get out of the meths the better, plus I'm naturally a clean and tidy person!

Not sure what the water actually does, but I presume it's a benefit not a hindrance. Less soot implies cleaner flame, which implies hotter. But I'm sure there's some clever chemistry behind the real reasons.

 

[Graham O]

I doubt that the flame is hotter because the meths has also had to evaporate the water. Since the flame now contains steam, or more correctly water vapour, it is more likely to be an interaction between the steam and the soot.

 

[Phil562]

Careful lads, this is in danger of becoming one of those sad anorak threads

 

[Graham O]

And there's me just thinking that it was getting interesting!

I think I need to get out more

 

[scruff]

Less soot implies cleaner flame, which implies hotter.

On the contary, a sooty flame has a greater radiant heat and is therefore hotter

I also believe the soot build up on the pan, despite having a very negligible effect, would actually absorb the heat more and have a greater, more 'positive' effect on heat transfer.

However this said soot build up on the actual burner ring would no doubt reduce its effectiveness by a restricting the vapour release.

 

[mark a.]

Ah, there we go! The things you learn. Cheers Scruff!

 

[Graham O]

On the contary, a sooty flame has a greater radiant heat and is therefore hotter

I also believe the soot build up on the pan, despite having a very negligible effect, would actually absorb the heat more and have a greater, more 'positive' effect on heat transfer.

However this said soot build up on the actual burner ring would no doubt reduce its effectiveness by a restricting the vapour release.

A sooty flame is evidence of unburnt fuel, so the overall efficiency of the burning process is less. Plus some of the energy is lost as light, rather than as heat which being radiated in all directions reduces the transfer of heat to the pan.

I think that the soot on the pan will absorb some of the radiant heat, but will slow down the rate of water heating. After all, it is the water in the pan we want to heat, not the soot on it.

As Phil562 said, this could get a bit involved, so perhaps I'll take my anorak off, but can I leave my glasses with the sellotape around the broken arm on? :