Houston, we have a problem...BE nic titration results

[markfm]

Rolygate, pretty sure the offshore nic source is blameless. It looks like BE starts by buying pure 997 nic, is supposed to do a first cut to around 120, then the 120 is moved to a second location for final cutting, to the 100, 48, & 36 that BE sells to the market.

Offshore is only responsible for supplying the original pure nic, all dilution from that point is done by BE, in the US.

Discussion of this is way back, around pages 26-32 of this thread.

 

[Kurt]

@Tib
I did say that I found it hard to believe that only the US wholesaler was to blame. It's just that I find it hard to understand how they could get it so wrong, so often. The guy would have to come in blind drunk everyday and leave half-filled bottles lying around, then get back to them the next day, again when drunk, in order to screw up so badly so many times. But I do accept that it is possible, somehow. Just that it's hard to see how.

The thought has crossed my mind. But as a chemist who teaches young minds every day, while the possibility of drinking or substance abuse is there, one only has to have an undisciplined mind, as Coz pointed out in his show. Not everyone would have what it takes to constantly be in a sea of bottles, liquids and labels at various stages of retail, and not make bad mistakes. I don't know about this industry's inner details, never been to a production facility as yet, but I would think you pretty much have to have robot-mind. When I'm doing lab work, I know I have to. Not everyone does, and the lure of mad money attracts all types, both capable and not.

 

[kinabaloo]

A large-scale vendor recently mentioned they were probably going to have to spend $10,000 a month on testing now. For them, this would not be a crippling expense, just painful. Actually I don't see why they would need to spend that much. Just something, somewhere, with the proof available to somebody, would be be a step forward.

The need will depend on the situation and scale. $10,000 / month seems over the top. Better to improve the processes to avoid the potential for errors (QA) and test to verify.

The BE is surely a case of carelessness than error. That label with two different strengths printed on it is a prime example.

 

[kinabaloo]

The thought has crossed my mind. But as a chemist who teaches young minds every day, while the possibility of drinking or substance abuse is there, one only has to have an undisciplined mind, as Coz pointed out in his show. Not everyone would have what it takes to constantly be in a sea of bottles, liquids and labels at various stages of retail, and not make bad mistakes. I don't know about this industry's inner details, never been to a production facility as yet, but I would think you pretty much have to have robot-mind. When I'm doing lab work, I know I have to. Not everyone does, and the lure of mad money attracts all types, both capable and not.

The thing is to avoid the 'sea of bottles'

The QA thing is about a methodical approach that moves units in a defined way, from place to place. One wouldn't have one shelf with all different strengths on it labeled with stickie-notes that would often come off (or something like that).

 

[cozzicon]

Rolygate, pretty sure the offshore nic source is blameless. It looks like BE starts by buying pure 997 nic, is supposed to do a first cut to around 120, then the 120 is moved to a second location for final cutting, to the 100, 48, & 36 that BE sells to the market.

Offshore is only responsible for supplying the original pure nic, all dilution from that point is done by BE, in the US.

Discussion of this is way back, around pages 26-32 of this thread.

This is accurate based on my preparation notes, show notes, and the recorded interview.

 

[Iffy]

VSA #7

To those that have offered to contribute to defray Kurt's expenses:

Please PM me for his PayPal addy.

I contacted Kurt to obtain his permission to post this and he reluctantly agreed.

Kudos to Kurt!

 

[rolygate]

I'm wondering if that whole set-up isn't a one-man-band anyway. It wouldn't surprise me at all.

 

[rolygate]

Here's a thought (absolutely unrelated to any previous subject): an internet marketer is looking for a new income stream. Those people have their finger on the pulse and they will certainly find e-cigs. It's a rocket-powered bull market that up until last year was growing at 500% per year, and probably still is. Anyone who is a marketer can't go wrong in that situation.

So our internet marketer (who has 50 or 100 other websites in other markets) researches the market, and opens a web site. Pretty soon he finds that half the retailers are looking for product as well. Since he is an expert in sourcing product globally and selling it better than others - this is how he earns his crust - he starts buying in bulk. He realises there are legal issues so he makes sure his high-strength bulk materials website actually has no mention on it at all of any potentially toxic materials. Anyone who needs the product finds their way there, anyway.

There is only one problem: he has no in-depth knowledge of ecigarette-related products or knowledge of chemistry, he is dyslexic, has an eyesight issue, a substance abuse problem, and a dozen other sites that need orders filling. The end result is that the product going out the door is a total lottery.

It's an interesting tale, and completely unrelated to anything under discussion. It could happen in the future. What exactly is there in place to stop it?

 

[Kevin littell]

Nothing.....


Nothing at all.



Hummmmmmmmmm (typed hearing Arseneo Hall in my head)

 

[juicejunky]

Someone in this thread asked, "What is a lot number?"

First let's define an "end item", which is what a manufacturer delivers to its customer. Not all end items require a lot number, batch number, heat number or whatever they choose to call it, but those end items that have potential to cause injury or loss of life have a unique number that traces all components, elements, ingredients, physical and chemical properties (which include test reports), characteristics and processes of the end item back to it's source (original manufacturer). It's a lot of paperwork or data entry, but the end result is traceability to the source if a discrepancy or defect occurs. There are many companies that require full traceability in order to do business with them.

An item can be bought and sold many times before it's finally sold to the end user. If an item is changed or altered in any way, shape or form, then the item should be issued another unique lot number by the manufacturer that changed or altered it and records of the change or alteration must be traceable to that lot number.

This is what every vendor needs to implement, so when mistakes happen they can recall or warn customers. They should at least have it in their records with every order they ship out.

 

[juicejunky]

Here's a thought (absolutely unrelated to any previous subject): an internet marketer is looking for a new income stream. Those people have their finger on the pulse and they will certainly find e-cigs. It's a rocket-powered bull market that up until last year was growing at 500% per year, and probably still is. Anyone who is a marketer can't go wrong in that situation.

So our internet marketer (who has 50 or 100 other websites in other markets) researches the market, and opens a web site. Pretty soon he finds that half the retailers are looking for product as well. Since he is an expert in sourcing product globally and selling it better than others - this is how he earns his crust - he starts buying in bulk. He realises there are legal issues so he makes sure his high-strength bulk materials website actually has no mention on it at all of any potentially toxic materials. Anyone who needs the product finds their way there, anyway.

There is only one problem: he has no in-depth knowledge of ecigarette-related products or knowledge of chemistry, he is dyslexic, has an eyesight issue, a substance abuse problem, and a dozen other sites that need orders filling. The end result is that the product going out the door is a total lottery.

It's an interesting tale, and completely unrelated to anything under discussion. It could happen in the future. What exactly is there in place to stop it?

Read up on Jason Healy, CEO of Blu sometime. Website has only an 800 customer service number, no direct address. Guy is Australian, moved to the states and started marketing adult films. Moved from that to e-cigs.

 

[markfm]

Moved to: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/diy-e-liquid/241231-home-testing-e-liquid-strength-diy.html
(discussion of home testing results, not directly BE related)

 

[kinabaloo]

I did my tryout with the home test kit. Non-BE nic base, bottles of nominal 60mg PG and 60mg VG, plus 5 eliquid tests, my own diy, all fully steeped.

PG60 tested about 56mg. This was my first try, within 10% of nominal, what I would positive.

I tested 4 eliquids that had been made with this, using combinations of natures flavors caramel/cappuccino/vanilla/black cherry/hazelnut, seedman commercial concentrate, and tpa tobacco blend alc. I blend high flavor, 18 - 20%. The eliquids ranged from 16 - 24 mg/ml nominal. All 4 liquids tested to within about 1mg/ml of nominal, the particular flavorings I use didn't seen to skew results, and the results were consistent with my nic base being about 60 mg/ml.

The vg60 tested at about 48mg/ml, 20% below nominal. Instead of retesting the base, I checked some nominal 15mg/ml car capp, made with the same nf flavors mentioned earlier. The test indicated about 12mg/ml, 20% below target, consistent with the vg nic base being 20% below nominal.

I'll retest when my scale comes in, to see if the results change when I use density to get more accurate volumes.

Overall, the test kit appears user friendly for anyone who does much diy, a simple procedure. I have two bright fluorescent lights where I mix, color change seemed pretty straight forward to gauge. The only change I made was to use my own 1ml pipettes rather than the 3ml supplied with the kit.

This kit is, as others noted, just going to get within a roughly +/- 10% range.

Great news !

Seems this little kit is well worth the money, especially if is accurate on many flavored liquids.

No problem to see the color change despite the liquid color?

I'm not sure I follow the part in bold. Car capp i guess is caramel-cappucino flavoring, and that did lower the nic result by 20% (obviously depending on strength) but otherwise the flavorings had almost no effect; correct?

 

[markfm]

No, my car capp is really dark after steeping, but the bb provides a strong blue cast. I just dropped the acid in, stirred, until the blue cast went away, the mix stopped changing color. I added one drop at a time at the end, looking for the stop of change.
Only takes a couple minutes total, painless, I spent more time rinsng things out than performing the tests.

 

[Kurt]

I did my tryout with the home test kit. Non-BE nic base, bottles of nominal 60mg PG and 60mg VG, plus 5 eliquid tests, my own diy, all fully steeped.

PG60 tested about 56mg. This was my first try, within 10% of nominal, what I would positive.

I tested 4 eliquids that had been made with this, using combinations of natures flavors caramel/cappuccino/vanilla/black cherry/hazelnut, seedman commercial concentrate, and tpa tobacco blend alc. I blend high flavor, 18 - 20%. The eliquids ranged from 16 - 24 mg/ml nominal. All 4 liquids tested to within about 1mg/ml of nominal, the particular flavorings I use didn't seen to skew results, and the results were consistent with my nic base being about 60 mg/ml.

The vg60 tested at about 48mg/ml, 20% below nominal. Instead of retesting the base, I checked some nominal 15mg/ml car capp, made with the same nf flavors mentioned earlier. The test indicated about 12mg/ml, 20% below target, consistent with the vg nic base being 20% below nominal.

I'll retest when my scale comes in, to see if the results change when I use density to get more accurate volumes.

Overall, the test kit appears user friendly for anyone who does much diy, a simple procedure. I have two bright fluorescent lights where I mix, color change seemed pretty straight forward to gauge. The only change I made was to use my own 1ml pipettes rather than the 3ml supplied with the kit.

Nice work! PM me, of course, if you want the 60mg further tested. It sounds off enough that the kit could pick that up.

One thing about this kit that I would like people to try, just to be more rigorous in these titrations, is to dissolve the nic liquid in a little water before titrating. I was imagining people using a tall drinking glass that you could swirl without the liquid splashing out. Add about 10 mL water to the 1 mL measured for the nic, and then use a syringe to add the acid and get the overall total volume as 1 mL nic plus the volume of acid added, reading the syringe. The bit of water added should not be included in the total volume...its presence doesn't change the amount of nic present. I don't know how much it will affect the results, but VG is a bit more acidic than water. In numbers, pKa for VG is about 14.1, and water is 15.75. That is maybe enough to affect the results if it is JUST vg and nic having acid added to it. The VG is starting out already more acidic than water. It might not make much difference, but it is something I would simply do to remove uncertainty, given the gravity of this situation. This will also help when a juice is very dark in the first place, and the color change is hard to see.

 

[markfm]

The kit comes with a 10ml glass graduated cylinder, decent quality, and the instructions are to put in 1ml of the test liquid, 2 or 4 drops of bb, add distilled water to 3 ml, then stir prior to starting to add the acid.

I'll try adding, say, 6 or 7 ml water, depending on if I am testing nic base or a final eliquid, to see if that gives a better result on the vg. Thanks for the hint - the particular nic base is not thinned, is likely really just vg and nic.

Pretty well thought out, clear, instructions. Anyone who does diy should be able to follow the procedure.

I'll be checking out some of my other diy, including a vanilla/banana/strawberry mix, versions using both nf and tpa flavorings.

 

[kinabaloo]

One thing about this kit that I would like people to try, just to be more rigorous in these titrations, is to dissolve the nic liquid in a little water before titrating. .. This will also help when a juice is very dark in the first place, and the color change is hard to see. ... The bit of water added should not be included in the total volume

Sounds like a good idea.

ps: might be worth mentioning: saw on another forum when i was rumaging around: that nicotine might rise out of a mix in VG when the VG is non-hydrated. What we get at the grocery store actually contains a fair bit of water but pharma-grade might be sold unhyrated (water-free). Whether this really makes a difference I'm not sure.

 

[tmcase]

I did my tryout with the home test kit. Non-BE nic base, bottles of nominal 60mg PG and 60mg VG, plus 5 eliquid tests, my own diy, all fully steeped.

PG60 tested about 56mg. This was my first try, within 10% of nominal, what I would call positive, plenty close enough given the test limits.

I tested 4 eliquids that had been made with this, using combinations of natures flavors caramel/cappuccino/vanilla/black cherry/hazelnut, seedman commercial concentrate, and tpa tobacco blend alc. I blend high flavor, 18 - 20%. The eliquids ranged from 16 - 24 mg/ml nominal. All 4 liquids tested to within about 1mg/ml of nominal, the particular flavorings I use didn't seen to skew results, and the results were consistent with my nic base being about 60 mg/ml.

The vg60 tested at about 48mg/ml, 20% below nominal. Instead of retesting the base, I checked some nominal 15mg/ml car capp, made with the same nf flavors mentioned earlier. The test indicated about 12mg/ml, 20% below target, consistent with the vg nic base being 20% below nominal.

I'll retest when my scale comes in, to see if the results change when I use density to get more accurate volumes.

Overall, the test kit appears user friendly for anyone who does much diy, a simple procedure. I have two bright fluorescent lights where I mix, color change seemed pretty straight forward to gauge. The only change I made was to use my own 1ml pipettes rather than the 3ml supplied with the kit.

This kit is, as others noted, just going to get within a roughly +/- 10% range.

I did a test of my 100mg VG BE nic juice with the ebay kit but used a syringe rather than the pipette and got 89 which is within the 10% +/- range. Kurt is testing the same nic juice and should have the results soon. If his results are near what mine are then the ebay kit is good enough for me.

Edit: I didn't see Kurts instructions about adding water to dilute the nic juice until after I had already done my test, so my test was without the nic dilution.

 

[kinabaloo]

I did a test of my 100mg VG BE nic juice with the ebay kit but used a syringe rather than the pipette and got 89 which is within the 10% +/- range. Kurt is testing the same nic juice and should have the results soon. If his results are near what mine are then the ebay kit is good enough for me.

I guess you did continue until all the green tinge vanished and it was pure yellow ? I know some people don't alwats read the instructions too carefully This is where Kurt's tip could help.

+++

Kurt might know this, but one would imagine that some of the oxidation products of nicotine, such as nicotine oxide but there are other more complex compounds, at least, might not be detected such that old liquid might give a lower reading (reasonably enough).

 

[tmcase]

I guess you did continue until all the green tinge vanished and it was pure yellow ? I know some people don't alwats read the instructions too carefully This is where Kurt's tip could help.

+++

Kurt might know this, but one would imagine that some of the oxidation products, at least, might not be detected such that old liquid might give a lower reading (reasonably enough).

I kept adding acid until the blue turn pale yellow and there was no sign of blue or green yes.

Edit: I had the instructions right in front of me as I did the test so I wouldn't screw up.