Stainless Steel mesh, Oxide discussion.

[Porksmuggler]

Any chance that you requested redundant testing using method 7196A or 6800?

Here's some documentation of the variance of CrVI detection.

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dsr/chromium/chrom-soils-waste.pdf
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dsr/chromium/chapter 4.pdf

 

[gomjabbar]

Any chance you could post the ppm of the CrVI in the distilled water?

 

[DrMA]

Very nice, Boden. Thanks for sharing.

I found it a bit odd that the lab reported the results in mass units (mg/kg) rather than volume units (µg/L), since you submitted liquid samples. Moreover, EPA method 7199 is designed for water testing and the method detection limit is 0.4 µg/L (~1000 times lower than what your lab report seems to indicate i.e. 0.4 mg/kg). I think it's worth contacting the lab to clarify these discrepancies.

Other than that, I agree with your suggestion that the eliquid components are reducing agents: PG, VG, nicotine, and ethanol. I'm pretty sure all of these components will spontaneously react with Cr(VI), no acid needed. In fact, dropping solid CrO3 into ethanol will immediately cause it to catch fire.

 

[junkman]

Boden -

Just to make it clear to my non science mind:

What we know at this point is -

1) Based on professional lab results there was no CR(VI) detected an any of the samples?

2) The only evidence we have of CR(VI) forming on stainless steel mesh was a home test using a much less stringent testing method?

If I am reading this correctly, this must be good news?

 

[Bmays]

Boden -

Just to make it clear to my non science mind:

What we know at this point is -

1) Based on professional lab results there was no CR(VI) detected an any of the samples?

2) The only evidence we have of CR(VI) forming on stainless steel mesh was a home test using a much less stringent testing method?

If I am reading this correctly, this must be good news?

What he said....

For what its worth I may be the only one that had been reading this thread from the start that is still using my oxidized wick daily. It was just too good to toss.

 

[Cool_Breeze]

One item that seems to have come to light via this thread, if I recall correctly, is that the particles of decomposed silica are too large to be of consequence in regards to matters of the lungs.

 

[dnakr]

What he said....

For what its worth I may be the only one that had been reading this thread from the start that is still using my oxidized wick daily. It was just too good to toss.

Nope not the only one.

 

[jamesd1628]

What he said....

For what its worth I may be the only one that had been reading this thread from the start that is still using my oxidized wick daily. It was just too good to toss.

Not the only one, I still use mine. However, I have recently started experimenting with other options, such as cotton, bamboo, etc. They work quite well and are much easier to work with than SS. But I do still love me some SS wicks.

 

[Jimi D.]

Thanks Boden. Time to rebuild again. As for me, I will be sticking to SS and silica. I like wicks that will not burn away. Has anyone tested the cotton and hemp for carbon monoxide?

 

[Uma]

What he said....

For what its worth I may be the only one that had been reading this thread from the start that is still using my oxidized wick daily. It was just too good to toss.

Same here! It's a righteous wick, one worth dying for lol.

 

[DrMA]

Boden -

Just to make it clear to my non science mind:

What we know at this point is -

1) Based on professional lab results there was no CR(VI) detected an any of the samples?

2) The only evidence we have of CR(VI) forming on stainless steel mesh was a home test using a much less stringent testing method?

If I am reading this correctly, this must be good news?

There's always the chance that other metals interfere with the diphenylcarbazide method used by the OP in the home test. For example, the method is very sensitive to Vanadium (an oxine cleanup step is required for accurate results). The detection error (false positives) increases with very low concentrations close to the detection limit.

Chromium - National Research Council (U.S.). Committee on Biologic Effects of Atmospheric Pollutants - Google Books

 

[Jimi D.]

Unsubscribed...

 

[B2L]

As a result of this thread I have experimented with unoxidized SS wicks and am loving the seemingly "cleaner" flavor, thanks Boden for actually scientifically testing this theory and posting the results.

 

[Boden]

Any chance that you requested redundant testing using method 7196A or 6800?

Here's some documentation of the variance of CrVI detection.

http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dsr/chromium/chrom-soils-waste.pdf
http://www.state.nj.us/dep/dsr/chromium/chapter 4.pdf

The lab did do redundant testing using both 7199 and 7196A.

 

[asdaq]

Thanks for seeing this through Boden.

For curiosities sake, how hot does a standard butane lighter flame get? Logically less than a torch, but it is able to get mesh glowing orange-- surprisingly this simple question gets a range of answers spanning about 2000 degrees F.

 

[Boden]

Boden -

Just to make it clear to my non science mind:

What we know at this point is -

1) Based on professional lab results there was no CR(VI) detected an any of the samples?

2) The only evidence we have of CR(VI) forming on stainless steel mesh was a home test using a much less stringent testing method?

If I am reading this correctly, this must be good news?

1. Yes, but this is only one test, it needs to be repeated.
2. The test I did myself is a standard so I wouldn't call it less stringent. There was someone earlier who said they were buying a test kit similar to the one I used. I hope they got it and will repeat my initial test. I plan on doing the same with a new test kit to reconfirm. (The lab I used above confirmed I did it right but I'm kinda .... about this stuff )

I wouldn't call it good news...it's just news. But then again, I'm pretty unemotional about this kind of thing.

 

[Boden]

Thanks for seeing this through Boden.

For curiosities sake, how hot does a standard butane lighter flame get? Logically less than a torch, but it is able to get mesh glowing orange-- surprisingly this simple question gets a range of answers spanning about 2000 degrees F.

That would depend on the lighter, the pressure at the nozzle, how and were the oxygen mixes with the gas, the size of the nozzle, etc. etc.

 

[asdaq]

Hmmm, sure I guess, but let's just say a standard Bic with a 1" flame or a cheap clear acrylic boxy thing with a similar conservative flame setting. I'm guessing 700-900F seems reasonable as a jet lighter gets an advertised 1300F and a small butane torch gets an advertised 2000F.

Emphasis on advertised.

 

[junkman]

1. Yes, but this is only one test, it needs to be repeated.
2. The test I did myself is a standard so I wouldn't call it less stringent. There was someone earlier who said they were buying a test kit similar to the one I used. I hope they got it and will repeat my initial test. I plan on doing the same with a new test kit to reconfirm. (The lab I used above confirmed I did it right but I'm kinda .... about this stuff )

I wouldn't call it good news...it's just news. But then again, I'm pretty unemotional about this kind of thing.

I don't know if I follow you -

The lab did some kind of high tech detailed testing whereas I thought your earlier test was an "at home" kind of test - add this chemical/compare colors to chart type of thing. I believe those test are only preliminary and a positive test would entail only doing as you did - getting a professional test?

I would have to call it good news that a professional lab, doing what both the lab and you agreed was the appropriate test foud no trace of CR(VI).

 

[Bmays]

I would have to call it good news that a professional lab, doing what both the lab and you agreed was the appropriate test foud no trace of CR(VI).

Me Too, I hope the word spreads as fast that SS wicks are fine as it did that they may not be.