Atomizer truth???

[Winace]

Ok, been doing some research tonight. Experimentation really. I used a clear piece of tubing, interior diameter a little smaller than the interior cross-section if a 510 cart. I plugged the tubing on one end, tilted the tubing to fill. When filling the tubing, if the water transects the tube it will no longer fill, air need to displace by the fluid. Ok, so tube is filled. Test 1 was inserting a polyfill plug into the end of the tube (end I filled from). I have a tube filled with water plugged on one end with a rubber stopper, the other end plugged with polyfill. Note, even with no polyfill plug and turning the tube for the water to dump out, it would not (due to the surface bonding characteristics of water (not really air displacement)).

I touch the polyfill which is plugging the tube to more polyfill. There is no flow. I touch the poly to blue foam, no flow. Touched to an atomizer bridge, no flow. I touch the poly to cotton, bubbles run up the tube as it drains to a more absorbant material. Once the cotton is saturated, flow stops. I touch the poly to cloth (rag) and it REALLY flows. Since the rag was too big to saturate it emptied the tube.

I refilled the tube, placed in a cotton plug. Touched to poly, no flow. Touched to blue foam, no flow. Touched to atty bridge, no flow. Touch to cloth, the tube emptied.

I refilled tube, placed in blue foam plug. This flowed to nothing, not even the cloth. The blue foam is not absorbant, it just holds the fluid. The blue foam in actuallity just makes the opening of the tube smaller and the water droplets could not penetrate through. I tried this with compressed foam (rolled up) and non compressed (just a little sliver).

With no plug in the tube, touched to poly, it flowed until poly was saturated. Same to the cotton. The cloth would empty it. The water would NOT flow out of the open tube when pressed to blue foam or the atomizer bridge.

If I pushed the open tube to the atty bridge (bridge actually broke surface of water trapped in tube) it dumped the whole thing.

Conclusions: It is all or nothing to the atty bridge. If a carts liquid surface is broken by the atty bridge it will dump everything. If it does not break the surface of the liquid it will absorb NOTHING.

Absorbtion will flow from a less absorbative material to a more absorbative material. The atomizer bridge is not absorbative whatsoever.

I do not think the coil is directly vaporizing anything, but indirectly only. The metal bridge heating is actually vaporizing these low threshold liquids. (ie, nicotine burns off very quickly). So, coil heats bridge, bridge is actually vaporizing the liquid (or warming the liquid and making it less viscous and the flowing to the bridge). Keep in mind, I used water, which is much less viscous than any fluid we are using.

I have no more working atomizers. If someone has extra, try bending the bridge closer to the coil and use the polyfill plug method (refer to ADM mod). This should really work much better.

This also explains why higher voltage works better. Higher coil temp and more efficient transfer of heat to the bridge...

And yes, I know there is material UNDER the metallic bridge. The metal bridge is attempted to be used as a buffer, and it really sucks at doing so.

Any feedback greatly appreciated!!!!

 

[Scottbee]

I don't necessarily agree with your analysis regarding the atomization or vaporization occurring at the bridge. I can say with some certainty that (under normal operating conditions) the bridge doesn't get anywhere near hot enough to vaporize e-liquid.

And, unless it has been damaged, the metal foam covering the bridge wicks e-liquid quite well. It will wick it all the way down the sides of the ceramic pot and then allow it to be drawn through the side holes to the coil assembly. That's the way the design works. And in the case of the 510, it will also wick the liquid to the supplemental fiberglass wick that transfers additional liquid to the coil.

If you want to ruin the wicking capability of an atty, compress the metal foam on the top of the bridge... making it smooth and shiny. After that the atty will starve for fluid.

 

[Winace]

I don't necessarily agree with your analysis regarding the atomization or vaporization occurring at the bridge. I can say with some certainty that (under normal operating conditions) the bridge doesn't get anywhere near hot enough to vaporize e-liquid.

And, unless it has been damaged, the metal foam covering the bridge wicks e-liquid quite well. It will wick it all the way down the sides of the ceramic pot and then allow it to be drawn through the side holes to the coil assembly. That's the way the design works. And in the case of the 510, it will also wick the liquid to the supplemental fiberglass wick that transfers additional liquid to the coil.

If you want to ruin the wicking capability of an atty, compress the metal foam on the top of the bridge... making it smooth and shiny. After that the atty will starve for fluid.

I'll agree with all those statements. But, flowing fluid from an absorbant material to a non-absorbant material (bridge) is not efficient. This is why the blue foam works so well as a plug. It will hold fluid but not absorb it. It is also more porous than the bridge which allows wicking to the bridge. Either way, poly, cotton, or any absorbant material is not a good filler or transient material.