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
Multiply the resistance measured at 68 degrees (baseline of 1.0000) by whatever resistance factor to obtain the resistance measured at that temp. As temp rise, resistance rises, as temps lower, so does resistance. These are the data that make up a TFR curve. So a coil at 0.68 ohm at room temp (0.68*1.0000) would have a resistance of 0.76 ohm at 392F/200C (0.68*1.16800).
Here's another way to look at it with "live" data. This is from my Therion with a ~0.5 ohm coil (the purple) power in green and temp in red.
As the temp rose to the set temperature (470F in this example) the resistance went from 0.53 to 0.64 ohm. All the board does is calculate what the resistance should be at the selected temperature, in this case 470F. It "knows" the target resistance based on the metal selected and the TFR curve loaded for that metal. One that resistance is reached, power (green) is continually throttled back to keep the resistance/temp the same (that first jump in power was my preheat, the power setting was 30W, and you can see how it continued to be reduced to about only 20W to maintain the temperature reached. That's all temp control is, maintaining a resistance reading that matches the temperature you entered.
Many are very off. That is a true fact. The reviewer Daniel from DJLSB VAPES, tests all the mods he reviews, very informative if you are looking for a TC device.. check out his site or on YouTube.
Dr F says so - the dry puff phenomenon' - but you need to accept his research/ findings to agree this is the case. Clive Bates' post here relating to bad science (in the pdf) probably explains better:
'Some measurements have been made from vaping equipment used at temperatures that are never experienced by humans, yet these were used to project risks to human health. Many published findings have been based on overheating liquids and then measuring thermal degradation products like formaldehyde - but real vapers never experience these conditions because the taste is so awful. Overheating e-liquid, like burning toast, changes the chemistry. But just as people don’t exist on a diet of blackened toast, vapers will almost never be exposed to overheated liquid'.
If you don't accept his findings then obviously it won't be of consideration (and I accept it doesn't help with higher wattage/ tc as there hasn't been any specific testing at these levels with tanks etc. as far as I can see)
Not to be a smartass here, but. I say we ban everything with carcinogens in them or can possibly create them. The only problem with that is, probably a good 80% of us will be dead in a year. The rest who survive will find themselves living outdoors, wearing nothing but animal skins for clothing and always freezing because there would be no way to stay warm without creating carcinogens.
Woo hoo, I'm down with that. Who else wants to give it a go?
Woo hoo, I'm down with that. Who else wants to give it a go?
Yup, science is good, just have to make sure that we're not reading more into it than is actually there.Thank you for bringing clarity to the facts regarding the studies. I am just now getting a chance to read and watch the videos, meanwhile it seems a lot of folks are running around hysterically shouting "temperature control!" While their TC devices might be off 50 to a 100 degrees F and their juice may well not be reaching the high temperatures as it vaprorizes away from the wick and coil. Still reading my hysteria is on hold lol
Eh, I'm less concerned with the accuracy of the temp control as I am with consistency of results, and understanding the mechanism of what is actually happening. If there is a point, in an/any atomizer where the compounds are being formed, what is that point and what is the cause of reaching that point.
One more thing then I'm done - Kurt didn't say -' vapers should stop using CE4's' (although he did say very few vapers still use them due to the problems many had with them which we can probably all agree with) - he said 'stop using CE4's for aerosol emission studies'. I think he was making a point about using the wrong parameters when undertaking research and giving misleading results. In the study he referred to - there were 5 atties all tested using an identical puff duration etc. - CE4's required (a lot!) of 'tipping', short puffs, high pg and that wasn't part of the testing. If an experiment was devised using 5 atties today - intending to test those in common usage e.g. maybe sub ohm coils, wattage of 50 -100 and the puff protocol/ methodology was devised using an average vaping style for those. My KFL with its 1.6 - 1.8 ohm coil that I vape at 8.5w was included in the line up - do you think the results from my KFL would be very meaningful?
I got called out for making an error in my 11 watt test of peak temp, see earlier video. I failed to account for heat flux difference between a 1.8 ohm kanthal coil and my 1.38 stainless coil. So, rightfully chastened, I went to steam engine and set up both coils. Steam engine informed me that to get 200 heat flux on the 1.8 ohm nautilus coil I would need 10 watts but to get the same heat flux on the stainless coil I would need 30 watts. So I ran the test again at tripple the watts and peak temp remaiined comfortably below 470F. Would it mean then that testing a temp control build with the same heat flux as a kanthal build should indicate what has to happen for the kanthal build to exceed 470 F? Is this a way to safety check kanthal builds?
Its not that I dont accept Dr F's tests, because I do. The thing is that all of his tests were based on wattage, and wattage alone does not answer the temperature questions. I think it is well within the realm of possibility, given all the combinations of mods and attys, that someone could vape at wattages that generate temperatures that Wang is saying could generate nasties, without tasting like devil's .....
Yes, some charts I looked at for a couple of mods indicated good TC setting accuracy for nickel and titanium coils. SS is a bit tougher to TC, and if you don't have the TCR right for the wire (wire quality is a factor, whats the actual TCR? And that's not just SS I'm talking about) it's not going to be accurate.
First a disclaimer, I don't use TC, and my only knowledge is a little research as a curious engineer which naturally questioned the accuracy of these devices, since at some point I would like to try SS in power mode and TC mode. I saw charts from DJLsb Vapes on youtube for various TC mods.
Sigelei 213, off by 100 deg F or more with Nickel, titanium and SS (actual coil temp lower than indicated), TC charts start at around 35:10 into the video:
Eleaf Pico, SS 316L coil, Device setting 400F, actual =451F, setting 450F, actual- 485F, setting at 500F, actual =611F. TC charts start at around 27:00 in the video:
The cuboid seemed to have pretty good TC results, but somewhat lower actual temperature than the settings on SS. TC charts start around 26:00 into the video:
As the reviewer said in one of the videos, firmware upgrades could have already fixed some of these errors in measurement, and the quality of the wire with an established TCR are important factors. Also, I don' t know what the reviewer used as his standard to verify actual coil temperature, so there's that caveat.
I should add that while I find TC technology interesting, I don't feel the urge to run off and do it because of a study that shows VG and PG heated in a TUBE to those temperatures releases that high a level of aldehydes, since no way you can extrapolate that to coils and wicks without considering the differences in a small diameter coil against a wick and the cooling effect of the vaporization, effects of gunk build p on the coil, etc. I trust studies that use real devices PROPERLY far more, and those studies I have seen show lower levels of aldehydes with most modern devices than the tube study shows for high temperatures. I do think the study provides a value in that VG and to a lesser degree PG alone, without flavorings, can produce aldehydes at high temperatures.
Last edited:
Just for sheets and giggles while I had the coils exposed on my Griffin 25 Plus which are 2 SS316L coils at 1.3Ω. I fired them at 85W and 500°F in TC Mode with an Infrared Temperature sensor pointed directly at the coils. Barely gets over 100°F while vaporizing e-Liquid. So this study now seems even more questionable to me in my opinion.
"IF" nasties are generated at certain temperatures, as Wang claims, then tests based on "wattage" are not relevant as those tests did not include temperature as a measured value.
To my knowledge no testing on actual mods has been done to determine nasties at certain coil temperature levels. To extrapolate wattage testing doesnt prove anything with regard to temperature.
Dry hit conditions go off the charts on temp, well past 1000F or more at the coil. That is a totally different phenomena than the 400-600F range being discussed by Wang as the starting point of nasties.
To my knowledge no testing on actual mods has been done to determine nasties at certain coil temperature levels. To extrapolate wattage testing doesnt prove anything with regard to temperature.
Dry hit conditions go off the charts on temp, well past 1000F or more at the coil. That is a totally different phenomena than the 400-600F range being discussed by Wang as the starting point of nasties.
I wish I had an optical pyrometer at home, I only have access to them at work and it would be hard to do experiments there haha. What with the beam spread limits I wouldn't think they it wouldn't work well with a spaced coil, but maybe a good test would be a tight coil, no wick, firing in TC, then shoot the coil up close and see what you get compared to the mod TC temperature setting. Not sure what the emissivity setting should be for a coil, if its shiny its probably not gonna be a good measurement with an OP, so maybe dry burn it before shooting it and set emissivity to 0.95?
I find that difficult to reconcile with my testing using a infrared camera. The camera told me that the coil was pretty darn close to the displayed by multiple different DNA boards.
These were all with saturated coils and generating vapor.
I have a couple dozen of these photos. I was doing the tests at the time to see how close the DNA was to what I measured.
Last edited:
K.... So double Check my Math.
I'll assume that the Room Temp was 68F. And that since the Temp/Resistance Curve you posted is Nearly Flat, I'll consider it to be Linear. And use it's End Points to do some Scalar Averaging.
If my Coil starts at 68F/.68 Ohms and goes to 392F/.76 Ohms, the "Delta's" are 324F/.08 Ohms respectively.
So... the Rate of Change of the Ohms is .000247 Ohms / 1 Degree F
So... For a 30F Degree Differential (inside the 68F ~ 392F range), there would be a Corresponding of Ohms Change of .0074 Ohms
Now, Here's the Big Question. Can a TC Mod Resolve Ohms down on the .00X level?
Because if it Can't, would an actual 30F Degree starting point difference from a 68F Pre-Programed Room Temp make a Significant Difference in the Actual Temperature Calculations?
Or would it get kinda Rinsed out in the Round Off Wash?
With the laser pointer in the center of the coil and run across the entire length it was not even getting hot.
With the picture you display there it is impossible to see what that could be dry burning coils with no saturated cotton? I am confused with the reason you are defending this study or propaganda.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
