Double walled mini volcano kettle

[Chris Morgan]

It's pretty rough out here. (Keeping focused on studying, that is)

On a sadder note, it's looking like I won't be able to get myself a Montgomery Kettle for about 23 years. Hope the foot's okay. We can only imagine what happened on the SHR.

[Devin Montgomery]

Cool! I don't know if you're doing anything with their environmental clinic, but I had Prof. Buchele for a class called Legal Process when he was at Pitt.

Edit: Oops, I missed the sadder note. 20 years for me. :) And yeah, the SHR was gnarly. In the best possible way. Except for the foot, but it's fine.

[Peter Atkinson]

… it made me chuckle to see this on the mKettle site, in the links and reviews section:

"It's AWESOME, I used it this weekend."
Ryan Jordan, Bozeman, MT http://ryanjordan.com/

So maybe there is no conspiracy and everyone is working happily together….

[Ryan Jordan]

Hi All,

mKettle sent me a sample to test. I had nothing to do with the development and this was my first interaction with them.

Test I did. I wrote in a private email to the manufacturer's rep that "it was awesome" (which it is — it works great) and expressed my interest in ordering a bunch for our store. Once he sent pricing, and a delivery date to me, I expressed my intention to issue a PO to the company to purchase some.

Before we sent the Purchase Order, I received an email from Devin and others who saw my Tweet and knew about Devin's kettle, and I started investigating the forums. (No, I don't read all the forums here. It's impossible for me to do so and still be able to go home at night!)

So we held off on the PO until mKettle had a chance to respond with their side of the story and the extent to which Devin's work influenced theirs, and to participate in our forum. I don't know if they have, or not yet. I haven't reviewed the forums to see.

At any rate, I haven't received a response from the mKettle manufacturer about the extent to which Devin's design influenced theirs, so I decided to hold off on ordering it because it would just be a little weird to bring this "exact-looking" product in and then have to explain all about it, "parallel development" why I supported a company that might of ripped off a design without attribution, etc.

Are there any legal issues here? Devin put the design out there in the public domain, but he retains the ownership to what he posted. He simply granted anyone else the license to use it too, but in the latter case, only for the limited purposes of discussion and commentary. Therefore, IF mKettle used Devin's design to create their own kettle, then the law may have been broken. And IF BPL were to participate in the sale of the mKettle, then we too may have been a liable party. Is any of this enforceable? Who knows. And who cares. I'd rather simply take the conservative approach and honor Devin, who has made his own sacrifices over the years to support my company.

FYI the photo and quote on the mKettle website was used without my permission.

Anyway, y'all will have to wait a *little* while to get "lighter kettles" because BPL won't be bringing in the mKettle in the near future.

I have seen the mKettle and used it and can assure you that it's a well-made quality product, and works fine, and can vouch that it's about 13 oz.

[Steven Evans]

Anyway, y'all will have to wait a *little* while to get "lighter kettles" because BPL won't be bringing in the mKettle in the near future.

Good to hear – and a classy move. Devin has a good amount of support here on the forums, so we won't mind waiting a little longer. I actually want one of his original hand made ones, with blemishes and all.

And for the record, I don't think anyone thought you were involved in any part of the mKettle design.

Also, from a pure sales point of view. A 13 oz kettle has nearly no appeal to me, but a 6 oz one…well, I'll drop cash on that in a second.

[Michael Davis]

I agree, Steve.

Devin's kettle seems to me to beat all other methods considering weight, volume, and fiddle factor when one wants to only boil water. I am waiting anxiously for the production phase to begin!

[adam blanton]

Right on, classy move indeed!

[Terry Morton]

I am currently researching the history of a British company called George Marris & Sons.

I came across Backpackinglight as part of my research and have read this discussion with interest.

The Kelly Kettle Co get 10/10 for cheek in protecting 'their' trademark of 'Volcano Kettle'.

The first true Volcano Kettle was made by George Marris & Sons Ltd of Birmingham, England in the 1920's. The catalogue for the British Industries Fair, London, 1937 shows G Marris as exhibiting 'Volcano Kettle' on Stand No A426. These are known as the Sirram Volcano Kettle. I own two of these and they are clearly marked: 'The Sirram Volcano Quick Boil Kettle, Regd Td Mk, Registered Design No 731794'. The records held by the British Library and British Public Record Office show that this Design Number was issued in 1928, I repeat 1928.

The Marris Co acknowledged that the original concept came from a New Zealander (probably John Ashley Hart who started the Thermette Co in New Zealand in 1929).

The Volcano Kettles were intially made from soldered brass and copper but in the 1930's Marris switched to aluminium. The Aluminium ones are embossed 'The Sirram Volcano Kettle'. Sirram is Marris backwards.

The claim by Kelly Kettles on their website that the original Volcano Kettle was made in a little farm on the shores of Lough Conn, County Mayo in ther 1890's smacks a little of 'Irish Blarney'! Yes they were in wide use by fishermen in Ireland from the 1930's but these were the Sirram Volcano Kettle which was sent to Ireland in large numbers. The current Kelly Kettle that is so vigorously protected by Kellys is 99% identical to the 1930's aluminium Sirram.

The US Trade Mark for 'Volcano Kettle' was not applied for by Kellys until 14th April 2007. Even if Kellys were able to argue that they possess a Trademark, they would probably lose any legal battle due to the fact that the term 'Volcano Kettle' has been in wide public use since 1928 as a general term for this type of kettle. This is known in legal parlance as 'genericide' – the process by which trademark rights are diminished or lost as a result of common use. The fact that this term has been in documented common use since 1928 blows the Kelly arguement out of the water.

I get very irritated by the hypocracy of some companies when they take a product and name that has been in use for years, make their own version, and then vigorously protect 'their' design and trademark.

Rant over, off to make a cuppa on my 100% geniune Sirram Volcano Kettle.

[Devin Montgomery]

Hi Terry,

I hope you check back here because you may be one of the few people who is as into the history of this kind of kettle as I am. As is probably clear from the above thread, I designed the smaller, lighter version of this kind of kettle, but the points at issue here have little effect on my interests in that regard. As someone simply very interested in the lineage of my little device, I want the story told to be accurate.

Anyway, I share your incredulity on two points:

1. That Kelly was the first to make this kind of kettle. What is clear is that Hart had a patent for his design on the Thermette. I don't know much about New Zealand IP law, but in the US, to be patentable, something must be novel, and not just among other patented items in that country. The research into prior art looks to the whole world, patented and not. If the NZ patent office is anything like the US's Hart wouldn't have been able to get the patent if the device had been available in Ireland for decades.

2. That Kelly has any claim to the mark "Volcano Kettle" for the reasons you cite. It has long been generic, applied to the whole class of device. Whoever was working in the USPTO that day was either lazy or inept.

And if I may add a third item: Kelly has persuaded at least a few of the contributors over at Wikipedia that their name "Kelly Kettle" (not even Volcano Kettle) should be applied to this whole class of kettle. This is particularly odd because they are at once strongly claiming their own trademark, but at the same time making it generically apply to all kettles of this kind. The article as it is has lost any encyclopedic value and has been reduced to a battle over brand names. A battle which Kelly has apparently won.

I think a far better name for this kind of device, for encyclopedic purposes, is "chimney kettle." Rather than relying on brand names or even the metaphorical "volcano" or "storm," it is perfectly descriptive. Definition of "kettle": a metallic vessel usually used for boiling liquids. The chimney is the design element common to all of these kettles and is indeed their distinguishing characteristic.

That is why, Wikipedia be damned, I refer to the device that I have branded as the Backcountry Boiler as a chimney kettle.

Now my rant: over. :)

[Rakesh Malik]

As for point 2, your last sentence is probably more the rule than the exception. The USPTO has a reputation for being pretty bad about granting frivolous patents and being neglectful about verifying originality. This is a case where prior art should invalidate any of Kelly's claims other than the trademark for Kelly Kettle as applied to their own kettles.

But then again, the USPTO granted Amazon a patent for a one-click button… and British Telecom has a patent on a hyperlink…

But whatever… I'm looking forward to getting one of your kettles. I didn't get in on the pre-order because I got laid off, so I'll have to wait for one of the next couple of production runs.

:)

[Terry Morton]

Hi Devin,

Really good to see that the 'Chimney Kettle'/'Volcano Kettle' is continuing to evolve. Sad that your design appears to have been copied by a fellow Brit. I wish you all the best with your design and endeavours. It was time for someone to come up with a well thought out, well made lightweight design.

The Kelly/Eldon/Ghillie designs appears to be based on the theory of 'take a Sirram Volcano Kettle and just make it smaller'. Unfortunately they didn't realise that the Sirram design was never intended as a hiking/camping design. It was aimed at forestry workers, stalking guides, ghillies, railway workers and road gangs. These people were not going to hike 20 miles and camp out overnight so weight/size was not a major issue. These people just wanted to have boiling water to make a drink. Nowadays those types of workers will take a stainless steel flask. But stainless steel flasks are a recent invention. Before that flasks had glass inserts which were very easily broken (I have no idea how many I broke over the years) – hence the popularity of the volcano kettle. Just making a Sirram smaller doesn't turn it into a hiking design.

I use a Sirram nearly everyday so here is my top tip of the day for cleaning the crud out of the inside of the chimney: If allowed to build up too much, the black crud will act as an insulating barrier between the water jacket and the flames, so it needs to be cleaned off every so often. Every half dozen or so burns I carefully scrape off what I can with the curved part of a shave hook:

The remainder I remove about once a month. The crud is not burnt fat/oil so oven cleaner will not work. It is resins and tars from the wood. The only thing that will shift it is something designed to do the job. The best that I have found is wood burning stove glass cleaner. Buy the paste version, apply it, leave for a couple of hours and wash it all off. Clean as a whistle.

I'm slowly putting together a history of Chimney Kettles and other novel ways of boiling water and will send you the results via your Boilerworks website. A couple of interesting titbits to keep you going:

1. On 11 Dec 2010 the British Army announced the retirement of the M-67 water boiler:

The one above is at Ajax Bay, Falkland Islands, 1982.

It was a US designed petroleum drip fed system of 1960s vintage based on a 1943 version that could be run in an oil drum/dustbin or similar. I saw them still being used in the first Gulf War and I think they are still in use in Afghanistan. They were supposed to be safe if the operating instructions were followed! However, what soldier ever reads the instructions:

"Correct flow of the products of combustion must be established prior to lighting the heater. This is accomplished by swinging the lighter cup (Figure 2) beneath the metering valve so that the cup can be half filled with fuel. This fuel is then ignited and, while burning, placed in the flue compartment. This fire heats the air in the flue compartment in approximately 2 minutes causing a draft to be established. Once the correct flow is established, the burning cup is transferred to the burner compartment, the metering valve opened, and dripping fuel ignited by the cup flame. The cup is then placed into the flue compartment while the fire is automatically established at the burner. Once the fire is established at the burner, correct burning rate is attained by adjusting the valve. The cover is then closed."

Er yes, quite. In practice the valve was opened and a match thrown down the pipe often with spectacular results. Especially if a bored squaddie had snuck in before hand and opened the valve for a minute or two. This meant there was good pool of petroleum at the bottom and that the pipe was full of vapour! The highlight of a boring night guard duty was to watch the cooks trying to light one of these at 4am.

The cooks called them 'Puffing Billys' whilst the squaddies called them 'Tommy the Turbo'. I think the Americans called them 'Kitchen Mortars'. I don't know if the US forces still use them.

2. In WW2 the New Zealand forces in the desert used to start their 'Benghazi Boilers' (Thermettes) by making a small pile of sand and pouring petroleum onto it. They would then place the boiler on top and drop a match down the chimney.

The Official History of New Zealand in the 2nd World War, (War Surgery and Medicine Volume) states that "burns accounted for about 10 per cent of all army casualties, and accidental burns were two-thirds of the total. The most common cause was the use of petroleum for lighting the Benghazi Boiler used for making tea. In spite of repeated warnings petroleum was recklessly used by the troops".

All take heed, petroleum and chimney kettles should be kept well apart!

Regards,
Terry

[Hikin’ Jim]

Very interesting. Thank you, Terry.

HJ

[Devin Montgomery]

Hi Terry,

Well, I retract my earlier statement that you are "as interested as I am" in these kettles. Clearly you are more interested. :) I would love to read more of what you've come across in your research.

Incidentally, the guy who copied my design is an American. He just happens to live in the UK part-time. So there's no need for anyone to slander your countrymen – it was a Yank posing as a Brit! Apparently some kind of double-agent.

And I agree about the suitability of the larger kettles – perfect for a large party in the outdoors. As long as they don't have to pack it in 20 miles. :)

And thanks for the kind words.

Best,
Devin

Edit: Thanks for the cleaning tips, too! I think I'll keep the scraper away from its thin skin, but that cleaner is worth a look for sure. For those of us particularly obsessed with weight, the layer also can add almost an ounce over time. :)

[al b]

Will we see mKettles response to Ryan?

However, wouldn't any lightweight chimney kettle look similar, unless unnecessary slopes/curves where put in to make it look superficially different?

[Franco Darioli]

Here are 3 kettles
Spot the ones that look similar…
in order
the Kelly Kettle (see the pic of the Sirram further up the tread…)

Devin's version

The other one

Franco

[al b]

but my point is you would need to point unnecessary slopes just to look different, rather than letting fu nction define form.

it would seem polite (for mkeetle) to mention that they were inspired by some elses lighter attempt at implementing an existing stove kind.(if true)

as the kettle is prior art since last century, presumable only manufacturing technique could be patented, and as the mkettle is heavier(simpler) then it differs on that front.

did mkettle get the m from montgomery? that would seem rude, but we hace not seen their response

[Devin Montgomery]

Hi Alan,

The guy who runs Mkettle was having some contraption brazed together out of copper before he came across mine, and took every single identifiable feature except for not making it as light since that would be more difficult. There were many ways he could have gone, but he chose to copy mine. You're right that my design choices were the best. But elegant design is design none the less. You can read more about his tactics here. I know he was influenced by mine because not only was mine earlier and public, but he grilled me on the details, and had no idea about some very basic concepts related to its construction before we spoke. Also, the photograph he has posted on his website is there without Ryan's permission and is copyright infringement. IP means little to him.

Best,
Devin

[Franco Darioli]

This article maybe better at explaining how the whole thing evolved and how and why it isn't all that cheap or easy to make them as some have suggested here and elsewhere..
http://www.hikinginfinland.com/2011/02/backcountry-boiler-power-of-myog-and.html

Franco

[al b]

Thanks for explaining that: it would appear mkettle are extremely "guilty as charged" (so I wont buy theirs)

Asking exactly how its made (so that they could then copy most of it, except the lighter aluminium) without stating that intention, seems a bit rude/sharp (an understatement).

However, I think anyone making a myog boiler will initially, at least initially, end up with the plain cylinder shape, as that looks easiest to make, although I wonder if a cone (like the sirram) wouldnt be more efficient (more heat nearer the fire, hence more water here).

A friendly (but inferior) second source might be useful, avoiding demand exceeding your supply, whilst your kettle remains 1st choice, but not from a rude one using sharp practice.

Good luck with your kettles.

[Devin Montgomery]

Thanks, Franco. I hope the article is interesting. It started as an email, but also provides a more coherent history than leafing through forum threads. Though they remain the primary sources. :)

Alan- I didn't mean to jump on you there, it's just a bit of a sore spot. :)

On MYOG – it may not be apparent, but in metal spinning, cones (at least ones with a flat top) are actually the easiest deep parts to make. They can even be done in one pass through a process called "shear spinning." Long cylinders are trickier because you are at once stretching the material to move it down the piece, and compressing it to reduce the radius.

Incidentally, the mkettle guy wasn't doing MYOG, it was exclusively a commercial endeavor and he paid to have everything on his kettle done. His product is what you would get if you took my design to any commercial spinning shop – it's easier for them to use the thicker metal. The guys I ended working with on production deserve props for working with me so patiently. They tolerated a lot of "but when I was doing it" from an amateur who was trying to make their lives more difficult. :)

On efficiency – you're absolutely right that using a simple cone for both the chimney and the outer wall would be more efficient in terms of heat transfer. But they take more material (read: weight) and more effective pack space for the same amount of water volume. Among existing chimney kettles (Sirum, Kelly, Thermette) mine is certainly not the most efficient. It's just the only one I'd want to carry on a long hike.

[al b]

Devin,

After watching your factory visit video, I had and idea for simpler manufacture/ myog kettles:

1) manufacture
conceptionally "split the hollow cylinder in two (down its vertical axis)", giving two semi-circular bottles: like 2 extreme versions of a water canteen with a curved inner side to rest against your thigh. When over the fire pit, these are joined back into a "cylinder with a hole(chimney)" by the (reinforced?) neoprene cover.

The disadvantage is, of course, two spouts to fill (roughly equally), but that seems OK. I wonder if this might allow the thinner aluminium be "drawn"/cold punched/forged like drinks cans, and then the top (with spout) could be "press fitted" whilst hot(contracts on cooling) or whatever way drink cans are done.

2) MYOG:
a)Make a hollow "ring" out of narrow drinks cans(with tops cut off for easy filling).
Red bull cans seem narrow. Alternatively, perhaps narrow-ish aluminum test-tube like tubes are available.

Now you have a kettle with a ring of N individual chambers(joined by glue/solder/other: I dont know which would be best).

The inner walls of the "chimney" would in effect be corrugated, increasing the heated surface area, so hopefully increasing efficiency, but this may be outdone by the outside also being corrugated!!

b) Make a ring-shaped lid for ALL the cans/tubes, possibly with a raised rim around its central hole. Could use heavy duty foil.

These ideas are open to all (I may eventually try the MYOG one), I have no current plans to manufacture any. It would be nice to be credited, if anyone uses them.

NB Its OK I didn't feel "jumped upon".

[KC H]

I do have to admit I was surprised to see that Titanium Goat decided to carry the knockoff mkettle. Given that the mkettle is as heavy as it is and two that it seems to carry a black cloud with it. I do have to admit the the price looks better than the BPL offering, but in the end I would vote with my morals and money.

http://www.titaniumgoat.com/MKettle.html

[Hikin’ Jim]

I notice this on the Ti Goat site:
"Some people feel that the mKettle bears too strong a resemblance to the Backcountry Boiler by The Boiler Werks. We prefer to stay out of the debate as to who came first, and leave it to the respective parties to sort out. In the interim however, we feel it
pertinent to give our customers the chance to make an informed decision, with all options available."

Interesting. Devin, I hope your original design wins out over this cheap, ripoff imitation. Wood fires of the type your kettle uses are generally illegal in S. Calif. (except in developed campgrounds and sometimes not even then), but I'm tempted to buy one just to see you succeed and that loser fail. While imitation is the sincerest form of flattery, I wish you every success and him abject failure.

I for one will be writing a letter of protest to Ti Goat. I encourage others to do the same.

HJ

[Hikin’ Jim]

I have written the following letter to Ti Goat (see below). I encourage others to do the same and to not buy Ti Goat products until such time as they remove the mKettle from their site.

HJ

Dear Sir or Ma'am:

I am both shocked and saddened to see a company like Ti Goat featuring the knockoff mKettle on it's site. The Backcountry Boiler came first and was in good faith put forward for discussion and comment in the ultralight community during its design. The proprietor of mKettle then ripped off that design, even going so far as to contact the designer of the Backcountry Boiler for details on its design. There is no uncertainty as to whose design this is. Ti Goat of all companies, being a purveyor to the ultralight community, should be the last to aid and abet the blatant ripoff of intellectual property within that community.

I for one will not be purchasing any product associated with Ti Goat, and further I will be campaigning to organize a boycott of your firm.

Yours sincerely,

Jim Barbour
Los Angeles, CA

[Cayenne Redmonk]

Who makes a cheap knock off of the TiGoat stoves ?

[Author]

Posts