All things considered, I think repeatability is actually more critical than high accuracy. Both are desirable but, in this case, high accuracy just isn't possible. I do think it can be reasonably accurate enough for our purposes though.
New studies find carcinogens in vg and pg at high temps, even in tootle puffers
- Thread starter mikepetro
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
Interesting snippet on Pro tanks.
Mike's test showed the stock silica wicks were pretty bad and the rebuilt cotton wicks fared much better.
I set up a couple of new vapers with Spinners and PT minis. I was planning to keep them supplied with juice and rebuilt heads for a while until they decided they would stick with vaping.
I looked at vendors to see what heads cost these days. Seems they have recently stopped making the old silica wick heads. They are still available at a few places but mostly you see new style heads with organic cotton wicks. Maybe Kanger figured out silica is a problem. Who knows, maybe they read this thread.
Mike's test showed the stock silica wicks were pretty bad and the rebuilt cotton wicks fared much better.
I set up a couple of new vapers with Spinners and PT minis. I was planning to keep them supplied with juice and rebuilt heads for a while until they decided they would stick with vaping.
I looked at vendors to see what heads cost these days. Seems they have recently stopped making the old silica wick heads. They are still available at a few places but mostly you see new style heads with organic cotton wicks. Maybe Kanger figured out silica is a problem. Who knows, maybe they read this thread.
As far as I know they just changed the name of them.
They are now MT32. Just to confuse the issue.
Out of town. But once again I had an Epiphany in the shower.
My Mason jar test rig is flawed!
The probe has 2 ports on top, and a square box. The ports go to a formaldehyde sensor, and the box contains a temp and humidity sensor.
Turns out temp an humidity are an important part of the algorithm for calculating formaldehyde. I read the formula yesterday.
So, the ports are sampling the Mason jar, but the temp and humidity is being sampled from ambient room conditions. The temp might be close but the humidity is bound to be very different from what's in the jar.
Back to the drawing board for a proper test chamber.......
Test it right and this meter might actually work ok.
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
My Mason jar test rig is flawed!
The probe has 2 ports on top, and a square box. The ports go to a formaldehyde sensor, and the box contains a temp and humidity sensor.
Turns out temp an humidity are an important part of the algorithm for calculating formaldehyde. I read the formula yesterday.
So, the ports are sampling the Mason jar, but the temp and humidity is being sampled from ambient room conditions. The temp might be close but the humidity is bound to be very different from what's in the jar.
Back to the drawing board for a proper test chamber.......
Test it right and this meter might actually work ok.
Sent from my SM-T810 using Tapatalk
Showers are so great for epiphanies... LOL. I'm so glad I'm not you, Mike, figuring this out, but I'm sure you are enjoying it... Thanks for all the Deep Thinking. 
Anna
Anna
I hate to be that guy, but as a relatively new vaper, I have read through a chunk of this thread but still, I am lost as to how/if I should adapt my vaping based on this data.
Quick and simple answer: use lowest possible watts to get a satisfying vape. Avoid chain vaping too much as it will heat up e-liquid (I have trouble with that first thing in the morning), when able/interested, invest in a decent temperature controlled device, and use that for vaping, as it will prevent unhealthy temperatures in your vape. Depending on your vape style, that may mean finding a reasonable rebuildable tank atomizer that you can work with easily and build your own coils, the current trend is that stainless steel wire is the safest. You also want a device that can read temperature okay and won't give you weird readings, some seem to be better at that than others. You can also use titanium or nickle wire, but it's going to depend on the accuracy of your mod-- nickle can overheat and release undesirable biproducts when heated past certain temps. Or, it may mean finding a replaceable coil atomizer that offers the option of TC coils, many of the newer atomizers on the market offer that option, some do not.
Finally, don't panic. Even if you occasionally overheat your coils or tank, it's still much safer than smoking cigarettes, is the consensus. Don't stop vaping, don't buy a bunch of things that may or may not work for your style of vaping (I am guilty of buying a RTA or several that weren't really *great* for me to start, either too complicated to build or just crazy clouds, I'm a MTL vaper) and just try to keep in mind those general principles.
Whoah. *Sweat drips from face.* I hope I got all that right. Mike or someone else will surely correct me if I'm wrong.
Anna
Finally, don't panic.
Even if you occasionally overheat your coils or tank, it's still much safer than smoking cigarettes, is the consensus. Don't stop vaping, don't buy a bunch of things that may or may not work for your style of vaping (I am guilty of buying a RTA or several that weren't really *great* for me to start, either too complicated to build or just crazy clouds, I'm a MTL vaper) and just try to keep in mind those general principles.Whoah. *Sweat drips from face.* I hope I got all that right. Mike or someone else will surely correct me if I'm wrong.
Anna
Quick and simple answer: use lowest possible watts to get a satisfying vape. Avoid chain vaping too much as it will heat up e-liquid (I have trouble with that first thing in the morning), when able/interested, invest in a decent temperature controlled device, and use that for vaping, as it will prevent unhealthy temperatures in your vape. Depending on your vape style, that may mean finding a reasonable rebuildable tank atomizer that you can work with easily and build your own coils, the current trend is that stainless steel wire is the safest. You also want a device that can read temperature okay and won't give you weird readings, some seem to be better at that than others. You can also use titanium or nickle wire, but it's going to depend on the accuracy of your mod-- nickle can overheat and release undesirable biproducts when heated past certain temps. Or, it may mean finding a replaceable coil atomizer that offers the option of TC coils, many of the newer atomizers on the market offer that option, some do not.
Finally, don't panic.
Whoah. *Sweat drips from face.* I hope I got all that right. Mike or someone else will surely correct me if I'm wrong.
Anna
Thank you Anna!! I own one box mod, the eleaf ikonn 220, which I believe came out in the spring/early summer and it does have TC. I will experiment with it.
To add: You cannot use Kanthal wire in TC mode. It either fluctuates too wildly, or not enough, (I can't remember) so if you are experimenting with coils and whatnot, you are limited to SS, titanium, or nickle, and in some cases ceramic coils, though not all of them are set up for TC. I think your mod will work fairly well as far as reading TC coils, however.
Anna
Anna
The only thing I will add is that almost any wire can emit substances we don't want to inhale, kanthal, nichrome, titanium, nickel, and some stainless alloys, but ONLY if heated to temperatures far in excess of what you can actually vape at. If you "dry burn" coils to clean them, rather than rebuilding from scratch, the temperature does need to be controlled to prevent over oxidation which will produce those undesirable substances.
If you do use a TC device the hazards of chain vaping and dry hits is, basically, eliminated. It is safer to keep temperatures below 450 to minimize the chances of producing undesirable chemicals, aldehydes, but generally speaking even at higher temperatures vaping does seem far safer than burning tobacco.
The key to good TC is good electrical connections at the coil inside the atomizer, at the 510 connector and internally inside the mod. Given the way most replaceable coil heads are built finding ones that work, reliably and accurately in TC mode, can be a challenge. Rebuildable atomizers are sort of the "go to" for good TC, be they RTA, RDA or whatever.
If you do use a TC device the hazards of chain vaping and dry hits is, basically, eliminated. It is safer to keep temperatures below 450 to minimize the chances of producing undesirable chemicals, aldehydes, but generally speaking even at higher temperatures vaping does seem far safer than burning tobacco.
The key to good TC is good electrical connections at the coil inside the atomizer, at the 510 connector and internally inside the mod. Given the way most replaceable coil heads are built finding ones that work, reliably and accurately in TC mode, can be a challenge. Rebuildable atomizers are sort of the "go to" for good TC, be they RTA, RDA or whatever.
Visual:
What I did:
All three sensors are calculated together through an algorithm to arrive at the reading displayed.
Me being the resourceful #^&E# I am, will figure out how to do it properly this week.
Not going to worry about Tidal Volume etc at first. just going to focus on repeatability, with the ENTIRE probe in a sample chamber. Once I see repeatability I will tweak the setup to match the puff/tidal volumes being used by the science community.
Last edited:
MacGyver would have done it right the first time!
(with a matchstick, a paperclip, and bowel of jello)
Last edited:
Yup Mike, I've examined your methodology in detail, and I definitely don't have a clue what you're talking about. Maybe when you get through with it you can post a dummies version of the results. This is why we need scientists.
Quite simple actually......
And just for the record, I am an Engineer, not a Scientist. I just build the junk those guys think up.
Mike, so far it LOOKS like everything, within the parameters of the equipment, is being accounted for, and I applaud this heroic effort. 
Once you start getting ppm (or ppb) and can calculate back to actual micrograms of formaldehyde per puff and per gram of e-liquid consumed, then we can start comparing results with our study using 5 different tank models and HPLC. For comparisons, I would not use TC initially, rather wattage, since that is what we used (wattages are given in the paper, as well as the "devices"). Yes, you may well find lower emissions for TC, but right now I think focusing on validation of method is more important.
Condensation in the syringe and jar MAY be an issue, since some CH2O may be dissolved in the condensate and not be detected in the gas...but then again it might be very small and within the uncertainty of the measurements, which can only be assessed through statistics. We used standard deviation, N=6 for each device (Set of 3 runs, two examples of each device model, 25 puffs each run...you may not choose to do this, but its what we did).
I honestly do not know how this will compare to our validated method, but it will be interesting and a real learning journey!
Kurt
Once you start getting ppm (or ppb) and can calculate back to actual micrograms of formaldehyde per puff and per gram of e-liquid consumed, then we can start comparing results with our study using 5 different tank models and HPLC. For comparisons, I would not use TC initially, rather wattage, since that is what we used (wattages are given in the paper, as well as the "devices"). Yes, you may well find lower emissions for TC, but right now I think focusing on validation of method is more important. Condensation in the syringe and jar MAY be an issue, since some CH2O may be dissolved in the condensate and not be detected in the gas...but then again it might be very small and within the uncertainty of the measurements, which can only be assessed through statistics. We used standard deviation, N=6 for each device (Set of 3 runs, two examples of each device model, 25 puffs each run...you may not choose to do this, but its what we did).
I honestly do not know how this will compare to our validated method, but it will be interesting and a real learning journey!
Kurt
Mike, so far it LOOKS like everything, within the parameters of the equipment, is being accounted for, and I applaud this heroic effort.
Condensation in the syringe and jar MAY be an issue, since some CH2O may be dissolved in the condensate and not be detected in the gas...but then again it might be very small and within the uncertainty of the measurements, which can only be assessed through statistics. We used standard deviation, N=6 for each device (Set of 3 runs, two examples of each device model, 25 puffs each run...you may not choose to do this, but its what we did).
I honestly do not know how this will compare to our validated method, but it will be interesting and a real learning journey!
Kurt
Point taken on validation of method. And I promise to include reproducing some existing studies.
However, my personal primary goal is to validate the "continuum" suggested by the Wang study. The Wang study was discredited by many due to their method, and even I disagree with their quantitative results as compared to actual vape gear. However, it is my belief that Wang was onto something. I believe that vg does give off nasties at higher temperatures, but temperatures low enough that we actually do vape them. I believe that thermal degradation can and does occur at temperatures that fall within the range of actual vaping. I.e. NOT burnt hits. I know I have vaped at 480f+ many times.
If I can show low formaldehyde at 400f, repeatably, and show high(er) formaldehyde at 480f repeatably, then it validates TC as being a factor contributing to vaping safer. Once I prove/disprove this theory, in principle, then I will attempt to replicate some of your, and other's, tests.
I have done many NIST traceable temperature measurements on VW devices, see my blog VV & VW Mod Temperature Variables | E-Cigarette Forum which shows the many variables beyond wattage alone. Wattage alone does not determine the temperature in a mod.
Quantitatively, I dont trust this instrument more than +/- 25%. But that is enough to prove/disprove that "temperature matters". I believe that temperature is the primary variable leading to nasties caused by thermal degradation, and it occurs at temperatures that many are vaping at.
Mike, that probe is meant to be used in ambient air sampling. The intake and output don't need to be physically separate to work. The humidity thingy on the side appears to be of importance for accuracy. What about this. Take the tin top of that jar and cut out a rectangular shape that will accommodate the entire end of the probe into the jar. Then seal up with a little silicone (or anything that is easily removable so you you're not stuck with a jam jar cover on the probe for posterity) and all three "sensors" are in that environment without going for a larger volume container to hold the entire probe, just the business end.
I am thinking something similar along those lines, only I am going for the larger container. A larger 5000ml square plastic container (like one might put sugar in). Put a grommet in the lid to pass the cord through and put the whole probe in the container.
Since 5000ml is 10x the Tidal volume, if I still use a 55ml puff I would just multiply my meter reading by 10. I suspect the weaker concentration may actual be measured better by this device since it tops out at 5 PPM, effectively increasing my range to 50 PPM.
Going to obtain an appropriate grommet today.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
