E-Liquid Delivery system idea...

Status
Not open for further replies.

exogenesis

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 1, 2009
877
16
UK
I'm glad I wasn't the only one to be slightly perturbed by that report's
phraseology, I wasn't going to say anything for fear of seeming
a little paranoid or picky.

The actual GC/MS traces in that publicised report were very poor
print-reproduction quality & it's difficult to make out the chart traces at all.

However, given acrolein's toxicity at very low levels:
1 ppm 'inhalation - lowest published toxic concentration' &
0.2 ppm 'short term exposure limit',
I'm not sure you'd taste even acrolein's strong acrid flavour,
at those concentrations ?, what with all the other flavours
in your e-liquid mist.

I really wish they could state 'its not present',
but that's not easy for such low (potential) concentrations I guess.

Safety (MSDS) data for acrolein
 
Last edited:

Nick O'Teen

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 28, 2009
510
10
59
Swansea, Wales
www.decadentvapours.com
I'm glad I wasn't the only one to be slightly perturbed by that report's
phraseology, I wasn't going to say anything for fear of seeming
a little paranoid or picky.

The actual GC/MS traces in that publicised report were very poor
print-reproduction quality & it's difficult to make out the chart traces at all.

However, given acrolein's toxicity at very low levels:
1 ppm 'inhalation - lowest published toxic concentration' &
0.2 ppm 'short term exposure limit',
I'm not sure you'd taste even acrolein's strong acrid flavour,
at those concentrations ?, what with all the other flavours
in your e-liquid mist.

I really wish they could state 'its not present',
but that's not easy for such low (potential) concentrations I guess.

Safety (MSDS) data for acrolein

Analysis is tricky stuff once you get down to parts per billion in a complex brew of only partly identified ingredients (flavouring sources can throw an awful lot of odd molecules into the crucible,) so I can't blame the analysts - a good job done, and good to see they didn't go out on a limb making claims that weren't supportable (that would be far more worrying.)
But I am pretty sure there is no acrolein in our vape, because there is such a high concentration of VG in VG-based liquids, that I really don't think it's possible that only an indiscernable quantity would be produced if that liquid was being heated to 280deg+ - it surely has to be loads or none.

AFAIK there is zero acrolein produced in glycerine heated up to 279degrees - even sustained at 279 over time; it requires 280 to start the reaction. And then it's a steady reaction that should make no small quantity of the stuff. And our vape ought to taste putrid.

It doesn't - ergo there's no acrolein present.

Mind you, I'm only an amateur chemist, and I could be wrong. It wouldn't be the first time, and I'm sure it won't be the last. Common sense is sometimes fatally mistaken. But I'm happy to inhale it, and everyone else will just have to make up their own minds (that's why we have them.)

Still, room temperature vapour production (to get back to the original subject,) would wipe out these worries in an instant :)
 

first2di3

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Feb 17, 2009
92
0
Oklahoma
Still, room temperature vapour production (to get back to the original subject,) would wipe out these worries in an instant :)


I still think we are on the right track with this...

The best part about it, is that we could have a large reservoir of liquid, and we wouldn't have to worry about atomizers burning out... there would not be one...

Im thinking we could take something like a section of small brass tubing, connect the battery to it via the same switch as the pump (or even a different one) and we could heat the tubing to heat the liquid before it goes through the fogging nozzle...

We don't even have to heat it if the amount of vapor produced causes a big enough throat hit to satisfy...
 

Nick O'Teen

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Mar 28, 2009
510
10
59
Swansea, Wales
www.decadentvapours.com
I still think we are on the right track with this...

The best part about it, is that we could have a large reservoir of liquid, and we wouldn't have to worry about atomizers burning out... there would not be one...

Im thinking we could take something like a section of small brass tubing, connect the battery to it via the same switch as the pump (or even a different one) and we could heat the tubing to heat the liquid before it goes through the fogging nozzle...

We don't even have to heat it if the amount of vapor produced causes a big enough throat hit to satisfy...

You could always adopt Walrus's cayenne trick - that'd warm your chest! Mind you, leaking juice in the mouth would be even more unpleasant than it already is :)

Yeah, a large reservoir is what the world is waiting for - ideally a whole 30ml bottle screwed into the dispenser. No messing about with droppers or squeezy bottles - basically an airbrush with a superfine misting nozzle, and an expansion chamber to form an inhalable cloud (rather than blasting the back of your throat - that probably wouldn't be very nice.)
With the right decompression, it would probably condense to a nice, thick vape like a CO2 fire extinguisher (not that you'd want to inhale one of them!)
 

Quit4myKids

Senior Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 18, 2009
95
22
59
San Jose, CA
I've been following this thread for a while now with extreme interest. I think you guys are on to something, but I believe there is a technical problem that must be overcome in order to use a misting nozzle. Most of these nozzles (perfume bottles, etc...) are designed to work with very thin liquids (i.e. alcohol-based perfumes). The glycerine-based solutions that our beloved e-juice is based on is much thicker than that. As an experiment, I diluted some VG from the baking supply store with distilled water, just like I do when I'm mixing my own juice. Didn't bother with flavoring or nic content, as I know I wasn't going to inhale the result of what went through the nozzle anyway. When I tried to pump the e-juice through the nozzle, I just got a drop that formed at the nozzle tip. I assume this is because the nozzle simply couldn't mist the thicker liquid, or there wasn't enough pressure, but still because the liquid was thicker than what the nozzle was designed to work with. If we pursue this line of thinking (creating a mist from the e-liquid), then we must find a nozzle that is capable of creating a mist with e-liquid specifically. Moonman's fantastic UPAC mod (search in the modder's forum for "UPAC") employs a pump nozzle similar to what many folks here have discussed, but he drills straight through the nozzle to simply use the pump to dispense the fluid.

Personally, I don't care about throat hit, or whether the cloud is hot or cold. I frequently smoke a hookah with ice in the lower chamber, and enjoy the cool burst of vapor. What does concern me is that the mist from a nozzle seems to contain much larger drops than vapor from an e-cig, which is much more like the vapor from a hookah. Think about it this way. When one drives a car through a thick fog (an inland fog, not coastal fog), the windshield doesn't get as wet as when there is a heavy mist (such as one might find driving a coastal route. This is because the droplets are larger. Since I'm wary about e-liquid on my hands, I'm not sure I want to spray it directly into my upper respiratory system to condense into liquid.

I believe the best solution is a direct feed to a heating element, but I think we need something more reliable than the current nichrome coil currently employed in our atomizers.

For the liquid feed, perhaps a miniaturized peristaltic dosing pump (wwwDOTwilliamson-shopDOTcoDOTuk/100-series---6v-dc-145-cDOTasp) would do the trick. It wouldn't fit into a penstyle form-factor, but neither would a reasonably sized juice container. It could easily designed into a juicebox or magnum mod.

Bear with me going off-topic for a moment, but this ties into another idea I've been researching for some time.

If this fed the e-liquid directly to a stainless steel wick (wwwDOTsouthernsteamtrainsDOTcom/misc/stainlesswirewicksDOThtm), which encased or was in close proximity to a heating rod (sunelectricheaterDOTcom) or plate (wwwDOThotwattDOTcom/miscellaDOThtm) (see bottom of page for the device), I think we might have a solid substitute for the "designed to fail" solution on the market today. All the parts I have referenced are miniaturized and cost-effective components that I believe could be assembled to create the perfect (imho) PV.

Unfortunately, my skills end at the design end of things. I'm capable of paper napkin-type designs, and can research data with the best of them (required voltages and temperatures, etc...), but I have no electronics or fabrication skills, and two left thumbs. I was trying to follow some threads about USB ports in a juice box to charge the batteries and/or work as a passthrough (ala JantyStick), and it made my head hurt. I would be happy to work as part of a team to build such a device, but cannot do it on my own.

I don't think there is more than $85 dollars in parts costs (my wild guess includes the parts I spec'd, plus a wild guess for fabricating a box, basic electronics, etc...), and I'm certain that many would pay as much as $250-$300 for such a handheld device. Consider the feature set: dual 3.7V batteries (wired in parallel to vape for several days), a simple liquid delivery system storing 3-5ml of juice, and a maintenance-free heating/atomizing element that didn't burn out once a month (if you're lucky).

Sorry for the munged URLs, but I don't have enough posts to include real URLs yet. Moderators, please forgive my transgression, I simply couldn't get my point across without these references. I'm not a newbie to forums (in general or this forum specifically) or e-cigs, just to this site as a poster. Please don't punish me for my enthusiasm and desire to participate?

Anyone want to jump on board with this?

Q4mK
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread