The practice and the idea of using a baffle or even a cylinder combustion chamber is not new.


Effects of Design Factors on Emissions from Non-Catalytic Residential Wood Combustion Appliances is the EPA’s May of 1986 report on the topic.  Clicking on the link will take you to the EPA’s website pdf page of this document.

On page 19, the last paragraph it states:

            “A small fraction of stove designs incorporate barrel or tubular shapes. One manufacturer of a round stove postulated that a round firebox increased combustion temperatures, since ‘reflected heat from firebox walls was focused on the middle of the firebox.’ This is not a documented phenomenon.”

  What my patented design specifies; vertical cylinder, all parts are parallel to each other and perpendicular. Also, the baffles are 360 degrees circles set an even distance away from the firebox and the flue pipe exits the combustion chamber in the very center. There are no complicated welding or shaping of the combustion chamber, just a round chamber.

Dakota Stove’s design -with the gaps around the baffles, directing the hot flue gases to the side of the fire box and directing it along side to fire box up until the last baffle and still directing it to the center of the firebox to exchange heat (all in general – complete combustion).

 Others- a lot of stoves have a lever you pull to by-pass a multi directional path to exchange heat and supposedly get secondary combustion and other reasonings – that lever can be forgotten to be  moves and amount other things waste heat out the chimney. There is no lever to by-pass the baffles in Dakota Stove’s design. It is an additional safety factor and just a simpler design.



Here is another link to EPA’s website.
Residential Wood Combustion Study   Task 4 Technical Analysis of Wood Stoves


I am always learning and am finding more information about past testing and expectations of combustion chambers.