• Need help from former MFS (MyFreedomSmokes) customers

    Has any found a supplier or company that has tobacco e-juice like or very similar to MFS Turbosmog, Tall Paul, or Red Luck?

    View thread

Rayon wick, better flow, flavor, saturation and Nic Hit!

Status
Not open for further replies.

S2KG

Full Member
Mar 28, 2013
66
27
35
Calgary Alberta Canada
Well earlier in the thread I had explained how I was wicking and not getting any flavour. I was told I was using WAY To much rayon. I would pull it through so it was just on the verge of actually pulling the coil crooked and all out of wack. (How much rayon I was trying to thread through) I stepped back from this and now there is just heavy friction.

I'll take them apart and re-wick today and see what is happening.
 

bsoplinger

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Apr 13, 2010
3,268
3,705
Capitol District New York
I'll just offer this suggestion, more so for tanks than drippers... Since rayon seems to work better with larger diameter coils... And since I've always used 2.4mm or larger screwdriver shafts to build on so have no experience with micro coils...

When you've gotten the right amount of rayon inside the coil, that is a good density, you probably have too much rayon in the tails. The examples showing trimming the tails at an angle are critical to getting a good wicking action. I personally prefer the arrow head style trim but a single angled cut is simpler. I think its because rayon wicks so well that if you leave the full tail with its generous volume of material that the extra untrimmed material ends up retaining juice keeping it from getting to the coil. Then you get that tasteless or even pseudo dry hit type taste. Rayon really does wick so well that a tiny fraction of the volume inside the coil is all that's needed to move all the juice a coil could atomize. I believe that's also why shorter tails seem to work better with drippers, just enough touching the deck to transport juice but no extra to retain it. And this holds more for those drippers designed with a reservoir or well as opposed to just a flat deck with no real juice retention like an Igo-L or W.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Xparent Purple Tapatalk 2
 

atroph

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 23, 2014
830
1,655
Chesapeake, VA
Interesting results from a different build I did the other day. I used some of that twisted 32 ga that I posted earlier in a T3S that needed recoiling. 7 wraps around 1.95mm drill bit yielded 1.4 ohms. Wicked with the usual suspect.

Results. This thing really vaped well! Surprisingly well! I went through the entire 3 mL in no time and the flavor persisted vice falling off a bit once full soak had taken place on the wick. Once I drained the tank I took a few photos.

IMG_9989.JPG


IMG_9992.JPG


IMG_9996.JPG


IMG_9998.JPG


To this date I have never had a coil and/or wick come out this clean. I usually kept the power at 6 to 6.5 watts and my older builds the wick would get "blacker" in the middle and this one seems like it was barely phased. This is after a quick rinse but I don't think it made any difference other than removing the remaining juice.

I am going to try something with chocolate in it (choc chip cookie) and see if it withstands. I believe that my old setup the coil was getting too hot too fast and it was burning the juice on top. This one doesn't seem to have that problem.

Yay! I now have a purpose for the 32 ga that I had set off to the side.
 

atroph

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 23, 2014
830
1,655
Chesapeake, VA
Nice to know I'm not the only one using "old" technology. I usually don't bother going below 2 ohms with them, much easier on the batteries that way.

I try and keep my ohms in the sweet spot of my iTaste v3. Too little and it gets stuck at full power. Too much and it doesn't make full power at its max setting. Simple devices like this are really dependant on your build as to if they will give you the full range of 6-11 watts as advertised.

The steam engine has apv presets to give you an ideal ohmage as to your particular device.

Sent from my One using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

cindycated

ECF Guru
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jul 19, 2011
10,304
30,884
San Francisco, CA
I am going to try something with chocolate in it (choc chip cookie) and see if it withstands. I believe that my old setup the coil was getting too hot too fast and it was burning the juice on top. This one doesn't seem to have that problem.

Yay! I now have a purpose for the 32 ga that I had set off to the side.

That was your problem juice earlier on, right? Yes, please do tell how it goes - I have a few of those myself!
Did you notice it taking longer to heat up?

...OK. Now go try the parallel one! :laugh:
 
Last edited:

atroph

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 23, 2014
830
1,655
Chesapeake, VA
That was your problem juice earlier on, right? Yes, please do tell how it goes - I have a few of those myself!
Did you notice it taking longer to heat up?

...OK. Now go try the parallel one! :laugh:

Yes I had a terrible problem with my juices from a certain vendor that were sweet and chocolate in nature. After an EVOD tank full the second tank would turn to crap really fast. The juice was getting crusted on the top of the coil and burning. One hit almost made me spew as it was so gross. I figured out what it was once I dry burned it as it smelled the same.

Heating up difference. Yes, yes it does heat a little slower, but that is fine with me as I usually do a mouth hit, nose exhale and mouth hit at the same time. Honestly it doesn't bother me if the setup is going to work better. I think that the airflow keeps this coil from getting too hot as a single wire coil could (especially on the top). This one seems like a more even and controlled heat vice an instant blast. I am only using 6.5W and it hits like a champ.

I may try the parallel one in my RDA once I get a better mod. I inadvertently rolled a 0.9 ohm build that I posted a few pages back. It maxed the current limit of my puny iTaste v3 but seemed to do ok for the most part.
 

atroph

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Jun 23, 2014
830
1,655
Chesapeake, VA
I am not trimming my tails at all. They are huge and fluffy and I just stuff them down the chimney. It works fine actually, but at the end of the day I get burnt juice on top of the coil. Could these things be related?


You could have too much heat and not enough airflow causing the juice funking on the top of your coil.

Couple of things you could try.

1. More airflow.
2. Less watts/volts.
3. Try rolling a loose coil to spread out the heat a litte vice having it so concentrated.
4. Try rolling a larger diameter coil to facilitate more juice flow possibly so that your coil temps are kept in check.

Just a few ideas. I am sure some of the more seasoned folks will have something better to add.
 

JeremyR

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Dec 29, 2012
6,611
13,973
45
Oregon, IL
I am not trimming my tails at all. They are huge and fluffy and I just stuff them down the chimney. It works fine actually, but at the end of the day I get burnt juice on top of the coil. Could these things be related?

I find that any wick longer than a kanger bottom coil wick; needs to be thinned for best juice flow. Wet coil no gunk. It it gunks it's getting dry for one reason or another.
 

Tbev

Unregistered Supplier
ECF Veteran
Oct 22, 2013
5,674
12,424
SoCal-Vegas
instagram.com
I am not trimming my tails at all. They are huge and fluffy and I just stuff them down the chimney. It works fine actually, but at the end of the day I get burnt juice on top of the coil. Could these things be related?
Yes. Too much wick...


I type that phrase so often that my keyboard finishes "too" with "much cotton", there did it again.
 

MikeE3

Vaping Master
Supporting Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Aug 23, 2011
8,614
109,184
Skippack, PA
I find that any wick longer than a kanger bottom coil wick; needs to be thinned for best juice flow. Wet coil no gunk. If it gunks it's getting dry for one reason or another.

Huh! I always thought 'rapid' gunk build up was do to over wicking. Too much juice at the coil and what juice isn't vaporized is 'cooked' to the coil.
 

sky4it

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Nov 6, 2013
436
578
Minnesota
OK HERE ARE THE GOODS

(1) here is an article:Decades of Hazardous Fumes from Carbon Disulfide

And here is a quote from the article:"Although levels of intoxication had been lowered, a new wave of epidemiological studies uncovered other, health threats by breathing its hazardous fumes. The association with carbon disulfide and Parkinson was found. And findings that exposure could lead to the hardening of the arteries, cerebral vascular disease, and stroke.

This has to do with viscose rayon and Carbon Disulfide FUMES, EXACTLY THE TYPE OF FUMES THAT WILL GO AIRBORN WHEN RAYON IS BURNED. HARDENING OF THE ARTERIES, CV DISEASE AND STROKE COULD RESULT.

Quote from another study: "Reports from Finland and the United Kingdom have drawn attention to the association between occupational exposure to carbon disulfide and coronary heart disease (CHD), even at lower exposures."

(2) here is that link: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/123058/AQG2ndEd_5_4carbodisulfide.PDF

From that link this: "The excretion of the “free” carbon disulfide through the skin is about three times greater than that via the urine." The study also indicates only 1 percent of carbon disulfide is excreted thru urine. Ie (Carbon disulfide invades the human body molecular system. And that is "free" carbon disulfide, not the stuff that stays in the human body.)

(3)And this compilation: The link: http://oehha.ca.gov/air/chronic_rels/pdf/sum111401.pdf

From that study the following: "Vascular atherosclerotic changes are also considered a major effect of chronic carbon disulfide exposure." Notice the words "major effect" which means chronic or with continuous exposure vascular or arteriosclerosis is POSITIVE. MEANING, ITS GOING TO HAPPEN.

In yet another study, 8 dogs were exposed to carbon disulfide by inhalation. Here is what happened: " Retinal angiopathy, possibly as an early sign of arteriosclerosis, developed from the 5th week on. In the heart, significant deviations from the ECG (T wave inversions and accompanying elevation of the RT segment) of normal dogs indicated myocardial derangement. All animals died between week 10 and 15 of exposure."

Therefore, exposure to carbon disulfide airborne, is A KNOWN VASCULAR HAZARD. There are numerous other links on the web, linking carbon disulfide and vascular disease.
In Viscose Rayon, the molecular structure of cellulose is compressed or re-arranged by carbon disulfide to make Rayon. So there you go, there is the science of it.

AND SINCE LYOCELL HAS SILICONE IN IT THERE ARE NO SAFE RAYON ALTERNATIVES.

It was also reported by the New Hampshire department of environmental services that: " Liver toxicity was seen in animals exposed by inhalation to very high concentrations of carbon disulfide." If the liver cant metabolize it, it will stay in the body.

Emphasis mine on the above. What you are saying actually reinforces the idea that rayon is safe to use. The finished product is pretty much pure cellulose. Probably purer than cotton can ever aspire to be. All production residues are thoroughly cleansed away during the washing process. If there is residues that you deem harmful, I'm all ears for solid proof of their existence.

Coming into a 4,000+ posts thread, concerning a new wicking material, and deluding yourself to bring something new to the table without a single verified source for your claims, well... it speaks for itself.

Cheers.

1)The finished product is NOT pure cellulose.
2)The residue is immaterial as the solution/agent are chemically processed to the finished product, modifying the cellulose molecular chain.
3)The fact that there are 4000 posts here is meaningless. Peoples health is more important than a news thread. There might be 100 people in the world who if you put them together would want to eat cardboard, that doesnt mean people should.

4)Lyocell rayon contains silicone, soaps and unlisted agent. Viscose contains hazardous substances. These substances contribute to the finished product, without which there is no Rayon.

5)A single verified source? There is no cause/effect. It has never been studied, because Rayon was not designed for human ingestion. Polyester has never been ingested either, but that doesnt make it safe for human ingestion. If you want to PRESUME something safe, with no prior arrangements available - which you have done<<< well, this speaks for itself. People can be the first to swallow polyester too, but just because they did and are still walking, this doesnt mean others should need verified sources why others shouldn't.

You people have concluded that because Rayon is declared safe for clothing wear and other uses, its also safe for human ingestion, inhalation. This premise is preposterous ,false and misleading. You can wear poisonous berries on clothing too and it wont harm you, but if you eat them your dead. Be clear to reasonable thinking.

sky4it,

I will say that you most likely put a lot of work into your theses but then maybe not.

For a paper presenting such strong opinions one would certainly expect source information footnotes. Without references to defend your position your hard work is nothing but a subjective opinion.

When you smoked cigarettes did you have the same concerns about the paper the tobacco was rolled in? Keep in mind that the paper and tobacco in a cigarette are predominantly cellulose. Oh - and another term for cellulose is "dietary fiber".

One quick quip - I think you might have a difficult time trying to burn "Silica". If you find a method of burning Silica you will have found the most cost effective nonpolluting fuel source on the planet not to mention one of the most abundant on this planet.

I believe you are thoroughly convinced that your beliefs and concerns are honestly presented but not very scientific albeit you present it as if it is a forgone scientific reality.

1) There is no open source network on human ingestion of Rayon, thus No footnotes. Dont pretend that it SHOULD exist, you know it has not ever been ingested/inhaled until now.
2) Consumption of wood products in paper tobacco ones is irrelevant in discussing Rayon ingestion. It was mentioned because some wood products and particularily tree bark are dangerous. In Rayon we simply dont know WHAT PART of the wood pulp is used.
3) Lets not do Silica either, it is sufficient to know that because it doesnt burn easily, airborn hazards are miniscule.

You are correct I am convinced. I do believe it is a forgone reality but there is little science on it. There is however, evidence of it from the chemicals used to make Rayon. There is no science on it because people have never ingested/inhaled Rayon. To talk about science you have to be fair to the idea. Whats known is relatively simple. That is the following: Rayon has chemicals, some has silicone, others soaps and other agents. Like water in a cup, when Rayon goes airborne it will go, to the lungs to the arteries. Its a recipe for arteriosclerosis of the arteries. <<< THIS IS A PROVEN FACT FROM CONTINUAL EXPOSURE TO CARBON DISULFIDE.

Hey sky4it, thanks for your concern.

It's not just me, I have posted sources for most all saftey research posts I have made in this thread. So the end user can make a decision themselves.


Sorry you wasted your time to do all that. You haven't made a reasonable scientific argument. Even worse no sources of how we are gonna die.


Overall - Give me a break.

1) yeah Hi also Jeremy.
2) With respect to the other parts of your post, THERE IS NO STUDY WHICH CERTIFIES RAYON AS SAFE FOR HUMAN INGESTION, Inhalation, QUIT PRETENDING THAT THERE IS ONE.
3) You are not a scientist either Jeremy, so dont pretend that science exists on Rayon inhalation. There is science however on the chemicals used to make Rayon and enough known about how the chemicals modify cellulose, to call it a day and say Rayon is unsafe for inhalation/ingestion. You want a source on how consuming Rayon will cause people to die? If I had that we wouldnt have be having this discussion. Absurd. I mean, must I find someone who drank a liquid house cleaner who died, to prove people shouldn't?
4) I am giving you a break. I am trying to help insure you dont wreck your cardiovascular system. That is quite a break indeed.
5) In your other posts when you say, "The science behind it is pretty solid." Be clear on the facts, there is No science of any kind available on human ingestion /inhalation of airborn Rayon which proclaims it safe or is solid. To the contrary the evidence indicates artery disease, as a certainty from continuous exposure to carbon disulfide.
 
Last edited:

TheKiwi

Vaping Master
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 2, 2013
7,548
18,571
Durham, North Carolina, United States
^you do realize that every single one of those words pretty much goes to .... IF carbon disulfide is not present in the final product right...?

Eta: no one has ever disputed the ill effects of carbon disulfide.

And oh, just because some chemical is used to make something, doesn't mean it's in the final product.

You silly goose.
 
Last edited:

BigLungs

Super Member
ECF Veteran
Verified Member
Dec 29, 2012
330
497
Champaign, Illinois
OK HERE ARE THE GOODS

(1) here is an article:Decades of Hazardous Fumes from Carbon Disulfide

And here is a quote from the article:"Although levels of intoxication had been lowered, a new wave of epidemiological studies uncovered other, health threats by breathing its hazardous fumes. The association with carbon disulfide and Parkinson was found. And findings that exposure could lead to the hardening of the arteries, cerebral vascular disease, and stroke.

This has to do with viscose rayon and Carbon Disulfide FUMES, EXACTLY THE TYPE OF FUMES THAT WILL GO AIRBORN WHEN RAYON IS BURNED. HARDENING OF THE ARTERIES, CV DISEASE AND STROKE COULD RESULT.

Quote from another study: "Reports from Finland and the United Kingdom have drawn attention to the association between occupational exposure to carbon disulfide and coronary heart disease (CHD), even at lower exposures."

(2) here is that link: http://www.euro.who.int/__data/assets/pdf_file/0019/123058/AQG2ndEd_5_4carbodisulfide.PDF

From that link this: "The excretion of the “free” carbon disulfide through the skin is about three times greater than that via the urine." The study also indicates only 1 percent of carbon disulfide is excreted thru urine. Ie (Carbon disulfide invades the human body molecular system. And that is "free carbon disulfide, not the stuff that stays in the human body.)

(3)And this compilation: The link: http://oehha.ca.gov/air/chronic_rels/pdf/sum111401.pdf

From that study the following: "Vascular atherosclerotic changes are also considered a major effect of chronic carbon disulfide exposure." Notice the words "major effect" which means chronic or with continuous exposure vascular or arteriosclerosis is POSITIVE. MEANING, ITS GOING TO HAPPEN.

In yet another study, 8 dogs were exposed to carbon disulfide by inhalation. Here is what happened: " Retinal angiopathy, possibly as an early sign of arteriosclerosis, developed from the 5th week on. In the heart, significant deviations from the ECG (T wave inversions and accompanying elevation of the RT segment) of normal dogs indicated myocardial derangement. All animals died between week 10 and 15 of exposure."

Therefore, exposure to carbon disulfide airborne, is A KNOWN VASCULAR HAZARD. There are numerous other links on the web, linking carbon disulfide and vascular disease.
In Viscose Rayon, the molecular structure of cellulose is compressed or re-arranged by carbon disulfide to make Rayon. So there you go, there is the science of it.

AND SINCE LYOCELL HAS SILICONE IN IT THERE ARE NO SAFE RAYON ALTERNATIVES.

It was also reported by the New Hampshire department of environmental services that: " Liver toxicity was seen in animals exposed by inhalation to very high concentrations of carbon disulfide." If the liver cant metabolize it, it will stay in the body.



1)The finished product is NOT pure cellulose.
2)The residue is immaterial as the solution/agent are chemically processed to the finished product, modifying the cellulose molecular chain.
3)The fact that there are 4000 posts here is meaningless. Peoples health is more important than a news thread. There might be 100 people in the world who if you put them together would want to eat cardboard, that doesnt mean people should.

4)Lyocell rayon contains silicone, soaps and unlisted agent. Viscose contains hazardous substances. These substances contribute to the finished product, without which there is no Rayon.

5)A single verified source? There is no cause/effect. It has never been studied, because Rayon was not designed for human ingestion. Polyester has never been ingested either, but that doesnt make it safe for human ingestion. If you want to PRESUME something safe, with no prior arrangements available - which you have done<<< well, this speaks for itself. People can be the first to swallow polyester too, but just because they did and are still walking, this doesnt mean others should need verified sources why others shouldn't.

You people have concluded that because Rayon is declared safe for clothing wear and other uses, its also safe for human ingestion, inhalation. This premise is preposterous ,false and misleading. You can wear poisonous berries on clothing too and it wont harm you, but if you eat them your dead. Be clear to reasonable thinking.



1) There is no open source network on human ingestion of Rayon, thus No footnotes. Dont pretend that it SHOULD exist, you know it has not ever been ingested/inhaled until now.
2) Consumption of wood products in paper tobacco ones is irrelevant in discussing Rayon ingestion. It was mentioned because some wood products and particularily tree bark are dangerous. In Rayon we simply dont know WHAT PART of the wood pulp is used.
3) Lets not do Silica either, it is sufficient to know that because it doesnt burn easily, airborn hazards are miniscule.

You are correct I am convinced. I do believe it is a forgone reality but there is little science on it. There is however, evidence of it from the chemicals used to make Rayon. There is no science on it because people have never ingested/inhaled Rayon. To talk about science you have to be fair to the idea. Whats known is relatively simple. That is the following: Rayon has chemicals, some has silicone, others soaps and other agents. Like water in a cup, when Rayon goes airborne it will go, to the lungs to the arteries. Its a recipe for arteriosclerosis of the arteries. <<< THIS IS A PROVEN FACT FROM CONTINUAL EXPOSURE TO CARBON DISULFIDE.



1) yeah Hi also Jeremy.
2) With respect to the other parts of your post, THERE IS NO STUDY WHICH CERTIFIES RAYON AS SAFE FOR HUMAN INGESTION, Inhalation, QUIT PRETENDING THAT THERE IS ONE.
3) You are not a scientist either Jeremy, so dont pretend that science exists on Rayon inhalation. There is science however on the chemicals used to make Rayon and enough known about how the chemicals modify cellulose, to call it a day and say Rayon is unsafe for inhalation/ingestion. You want a source on how consuming Rayon will cause people to die? If I had that we wouldnt have be having this discussion. Absurd. I mean, must I find someone who drank a liquid house cleaner who died, to prove people shouldn't?
4) I am giving you a break. I am trying to help insure you dont wreck your cardiovascular system. That is quite a break indeed.
5) In your other posts when you say, "The science behind it is pretty solid." Be clear on the facts, there is No science of any kind available on human ingestion /inhalation of airborn Rayon which proclaims it safe or is solid. To the contrary the evidence indicates artery disease, as a certainty from continuous exposure to carbon disulfide.

There is no carbon disulfide in the final product, at all, whatsoever. It is 100% celluluse
There is no carbon disulfide produced in the burning of rayon we use. This is different than the rayon used in clothes and such, as the rayon for clothes has been treated after the fact.

Even if there was carbon disulfide in the product, it only has a half life of 12 days so that is not a problem. Then add the fact that rayon is washed after being produced means there is absolutely zero chance it is in the final product.

Your entire rant about carbon disulfide is pointless. It's not present in the products we're using, nor could it be.

Edit: The 1st article you are quoting is referring to the risks posed towards the workers, not the end user. This all goes to say that everything you are quoting is pointless for our applications.

The rest of your references are about carbon disulfide, which again is not in our end product.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread