Replacement for nichrome coil...

[Scubabatdan]

If the nichrome or any other heating element would be pooled with liquid, it wouldn't have the necessary heating power to vaporize the liquid.

I envision a hole in the middle of the heating rod to allow the air to draw the same small amount of liquid onto the hot part as in regular atties. The steel wool and bridge will have to be moved higher (~7mm higher - 10mm in ceramic heater compared to ~3mm with the usual nichrome wire). So carts will have to shrink too or be used for dripping.

Just my 2c.

I would have to disagree, ever have a flooded atty? It still produces vapor (with a nice gurggling sound) Just tested that, I put 8 drops directly in my atty, produces vapor just fine. When I say pool, I mean stays wet, I have tested a battery powered soldering iron tip and it vaporizes instantly, so I do not think there will be a problem. I doubt that it will flood, and with the air holes angles at the wicking material it should produce the same effect wicking effect.

As stated previously the rod design is what it is, there can not be a hole in the middle of it, the design is fixed. Since it is min 10mm long, a side ways approach is to long and also out of the question. An 801 atty will be able to handle the 10mm heating rod and ceramic "holder" with out having to sacrifice cart material,or having a bridge, as the rod would be contrating the batting material. Since the manufaturer can make the end of the rod cool, it will not burn the material.

I recommend moving forward with a 11mm long heating element with 4mm of space reserved at the bottom for electrical (Manufature required), 5mm heating, and 2mm cold area on the tip to contact the batting material.

Dan

[jacko]

Decide what we are moving forward with, and we'll make it happen. personally, I don't care if it is 10 or 11mm... I think we can make either work. If it is 10mm I think a connector can make up the diff. .... but whatever you want.

[jacko]

Quit,
Since you have been in touch with the mfr., do they have any recommendations.... and do they charge extra for the 2mm cool area at the end? I know you shared information with them on what we are wanting to do, so can he offer anything to make this do-able?

[roadkilldeluxe]

I like Dan's design, my main concern is how difficult it would be to shape the custom ceramic that sits around the heating element. Also, I am worried about the possible waste of heat/energy if we add extra ceramic material to the tip of the element.

Here's one more design, I think it's as simple as can be. I haven't modified the airflow from the traditional design. We would need to add a "bridge" either to the cart or one to sit on the element, touching the cart when inserted. An old atomizer would be gutted completely except for the wires and the new heating element would be soldered to them.


And here's an updated template:

[jacko]

I like Dan's design, my main concern is how difficult it would be to shape the custom ceramic that sits around the heating element. Also, I am worried about the possible waste of heat/energy if we add extra ceramic material to the tip of the element.

Here's one more design, I think it's as simple as can be. I haven't modified the airflow from the traditional design. We would need to add a "bridge" either to the cart or one to sit on the element, touching the cart when inserted. An old atomizer would be gutted completely except for the wires and the new heating element would be soldered to them.


And here's an updated template:

I like that idea. less modification, and we use the current connector (or use RF jack).... That makes sense. I wish I had one to work with.

[roadkilldeluxe]

I wish I had one to work with.

That makes two of us. I'm currently trying to get my "light bulb" heating element built so I can start experimenting since they are of a similar form factor.

[Quit4myKids]

I'm starting to feel that this thread is starting to get a bit unfocussed. Guys, let me clarify my long-term goal, it's very simple. I want to design and manufacture the "perfect" e-cigarette, and I truly believe that given the vast pool of knowledge within this forum that it can be built. I think that active contributors (via contributed knowledge, finances, or other assets) can be financial beneficiaries of the final result, as no single individual has the ability to solve all the problems and manufacture the perfect device. Once all the issues are resolved, and we have the best of everything, why should ECF members be the only ones to reap the benefits of the device.

A number of innovations have resulted in commercial products, and many of them are simply excellent. To my knowledge, they are all (except perhaps for Imeo's AFS) power related, or simple changes to an existing piece of the e-cig. I want to do something different. The nichrome coil is poorly designed. Hell, it's a piece of junk that was designed to fail, so the chinese manufacturers could produce and sell more atomizers. I think I found a solution for that. I agree that other parts of the atomizer (airflow, wicking, insulation) are not well thought out, and indeed there are issues with feeding fluid from the carts, mouthpiece filtering, etc... but let's tackle these issues one at a time.

My thought is to keep things as simple as possible at first, and focus on a single issue. We will attack the other problems one at a time, a single problem per thread. We have a vast pool of resources at this forum, but nobody has stepped up to try to organize an effort. That's what I'm trying to do, is organize the effort. I'm not a mechanical, electrical, thermodynamic, or fluid dynamics engineer, or indeed an engineer of any type. I do recognize that all these engineering talents exist in this forum, and that the most talented minds tend to be single-minded within their scope. What I bring to the table is a solid understanding of project and resource management, the ability to keep projects and people focussed and on task, and to source resources and problem solve using unconventional thinking. I'm also relentless, which can be a good or a bad thing, depending on which side of the conversation you sit.

I propose that we table the discussions of airflow, and other atomizer issues for another thread. Dan, I agree that this needs to be resolved, and I believe that redesigning the atomizer housing is the only way to do that. You have done a great deal of work here, and I would like to leverage that work and your experience after we figure out what to do about the heater.

I believe the first step is to figure out specifications on what we need to order in the sample batch. If we need to change a spec, we can do that and order another batch, but it's $25 for each piece, and we can only get 10 in a batch, so we need to give some thought to what we want. Let's get the product in the hands of people that have the skills and equipment to do the testing, experiment with various wicking methods, and can work with input from the rest of us to come up with the right solution. I suspect the first devices we order are not going to be the right ones for the final solution, and I anticipate there will need to be several different orders, based on what we find out. It's all part of the development process; test, analyze, revise, test, analyze, revise....

Step One: Thermal testing.

Let's find out what happens when we apply power and get the thing to temp. What happens when we drop some fluid? Is the end result vape-able, or is it burned? What about when it's saturated? What happens when we soak it, run it dry, soak it , run it dry, etc... 100 times? Does it get gooey? Since the heater is much larger than the coil, are we even going to be able to touch the atty tube when it heats up? Is it going to heat up quickly enough to be usable if it's saturated?

We have lots of questions to answer, just about this heater, before we can move on to other things. If we find that we cannot use this device, then all the other work that is being done here may be for naught.

We need a consensus on the following in order to place the order:

Diameter (min 3.8mm):
Length of heating area (minimum 6mm):
Length of non-heated tip (I assumed 0, but there is some discussion):
Length of non-heated base (minimum 4mm):
Optimal Surface temperature (it seems 160-200C, but I need a number):
Voltage (3.7v to maintain compatibility):
Ohms (I saw 2.5-3 was good? Can someone confirm?):

As soon as I have a concensus of what we should order (at least the first time out), I will verify that everyone that PM'd me still wants the device that is being ordered, and try to get at least one to everyone that wants one. It will take a week to product after they receive payment, and probably another 7-10 days to get here from China. I'll test each one at the appropriate voltage, just to make sure it's not DOA, and send them out as soon as I get them.

Thanks again everyone, for your participation and support!

Q4mK

[Quit4myKids]

By the way, I don't mean to bash anyone here. I think there has been fantastic progress made extremely quickly. I like Dan's idea of using a non-heated area at the tip to wick to the heated area. I'm a little concerned that the non-heated ceramic may still be too hot, since the heat will probably be conducted to a great degree through the ceramic material. Also, consider the distance from the existing nichrome coil to the tip of the bridge is more than 2mm, and we still experience melted carts when the atty overheats.

Dan, the -minumum- heated area is 6mm, not 5mm, so you would have to reduce the non-heated tip to 1mm, further exacerbating the problem. Perhaps lining the inner wall of the atty tube with a ring of stainless steel wicking material, coming to a point (bridge) to contact the cart wicking, and then running two smaller runs of ss wick to a 1-2mm wide ring surrounding the center of the heated area on the ceramic?

RoadKill, I really want to use your template, but it isn't an 801. My BE112s are the only attys I have to play with, and what I originally spec'd the heater for use in. My Photoshop mojo isn't up to par with your's, Dan, but here's my attempt:


The brown thing to the left is the battery connector. The existing ceramic pot fits inside without the spacer that is there now. The heater fits nicely into the existing pot, and can be soldered easily to the connector. The heater leads should even match the old lead holes in the pot. The ss wicking would be difficult to arrange, but I was thinking that it could be assembled around a solid stainless core, and somehow blocked on the side of the tube to keep it from being pushed towards the battery connector, contacting the heater. This would limit the amount of liquid in contact with the heating surface, and keep the heat a bit further from the cart. I'm still mostly concerned that this thing is going to be running to hot for the surface area that is being heated. My suspicion is that the atty tube is going to burn fingers with this inside.

Q4mK

[kinabaloo]

The temp is controlled by the circuit embedded in the ceramics. They measure temp at the surface of the ceramic.

Aha - this gets my attention !

Can you elaborate on how the temp is set - at manufacture only? And is this tied to the applied current or independent.

Besides temp control, direct juice feed has also long been an approach that I thought would be beneficial. Dan has some interesting ideas in this respect. But first is to get a basic element and test the basic proof of concept. Dimension wise and cool spot both at a minimum. The other factors - it all depends on how the temp control circuitry works. So do post more details on that.

[jacko]

Amen Dan.
A lot of this discussion has been speculation.
I vote for getting some of these and getting some R&D going.

We have lots of questions to answer, just about this heater, before we can move on to other things. If we find that we cannot use this device, then all the other work that is being done here may be for naught.

Diameter (min 3.8mm): This sounds acceptable to me.
Length of heating area (minimum 6mm): DITTO
Length of non-heated tip (I assumed 0, but there is some discussion): I am thinking at this point we are assuming...so, it doesn't matter that much as far as I can tell.
Length of non-heated base (minimum 4mm): 4mm
Optimal Surface temperature (it seems 160-200C, but I need a number): ??
Voltage (3.7v to maintain compatibility): I vote for 3.7v
Ohms (I saw 2.5-3 was good? Can someone confirm?): I am thinking 3-4 (it seems that 3.7 should be good for the 3.7v battery) - should you ask mfr to suggest the resistance, given the 3.7v and the temp we want?

My suspicion is that the atty tube is going to burn fingers with this inside. - I am thinking a ceramic tube to house some of this.