Tank 2 ml limit regulation and possible fix

[ariel1983]

Am I correct in thinking that the rational behind the limit is the possibility of a spill and subsequent posioning? If so then I am thinking that perhaps it is possible to make a tank that has 3 seperately fillable compartments which all wick to the atomizer, where no 2 compartments could be open simultaneously.

In the event that you like this idea would be grateful if you could put me in touch with people who could influence getting this kind of idea approved.

 

[Beamslider]

Some tanks available in 2ml have chimney extensions and glass available to convert them....Can those be ordered and comply? Ordered separately might at least slip thru

 

[stols001]

Honestly, I'm doubtful that's the rationale. Because you can buy e-liquid in 10 ml containers, that could equally be spilled as well. I believe it's more a general regulation across the board to try and limit the amount of e-juice and nicotine a vaper can use at any given time.

I think some of it makes no sense, though I guess there was some concerns raised over spillage, but really that's more likely to happen when refilling more often, and there's also the 20 mg/ml limit on e-liquid. I am of the belief that TPD was more worried about general CONSUMPTION of e-liquid/nicotine though I'm not sure the regulations actually reflect that-- as one is able to purchase more liquid and refill more frequently, but my GUESS is that TPD was trying to set some (rather unenforceable, though a pain in the neck) guidelines concerning how/how much e-liquid should be used.

I'm far from an expert on this, but I'd be highly doubtful that having 3 separate chambers that "link" to the atomizer would be able to gain approval in any case, and it seems (to me) even more complicated than just refilling one's tank in the first place?

Just my opinion of course.... I have no way of "linking" this idea to anyone relevant in England, though you might want to run this idea by the UK forum to be found here: UK Forum

Best of luck,

Anna

 

[Oliver]

Am I correct in thinking that the rational behind the limit is the possibility of a spill and subsequent posioning? If so then I am thinking that perhaps it is possible to make a tank that has 3 seperately fillable compartments which all wick to the atomizer, where no 2 compartments could be open simultaneously.

In the event that you like this idea would be grateful if you could put me in touch with people who could influence getting this kind of idea approved.

There's no real rationale, unfortunately. This limit was cobbled together during 11th hour horse-trading in the EU commission and is totally arbitrary.

If you have a tank with three chambers each totaling 2ml, you have a 6ml tank. That's how it will be evaluated, unfortunately. In terms of getting these ideas approved, you need to speak to the TPD lead at MHRA.

 

[Beamslider]

I suspect that they are more worried about taxing the heck out of it than anything else. Easier to tax it if it is strictly controlled

 

[jfcooley]

Just an interesting thing. Wismecs gnome tank comes as a 2ml, however you can use a pair of tweezers to remove a slicone piece from inside the top and it becomes a 4ml.

Thought it was an interesting way to get around the 2ml regulation.

 

[Eskie]

Just an interesting thing. Wismecs gnome tank comes as a 2ml, however you can use a pair of tweezers to remove a slicone piece from inside the top and it becomes a 4ml.

Thought it was an interesting way to get around the 2ml regulation.

There have been several designs with easy to remove plugs and whatnot to adapt to the 2 ml TPD rule, but it is my understanding the TPD people/board/whoever makes the decisions is reevaluating how to classify that type of workaround and close that loophole.

 

[tj99959]

There is no law that says you can only have one 2ml tank with you, so what's the problem??

I frequently leave the house with a topper that only holds 7 drops. A small bottle of e-liquid with me and the problem is solved. (it's called an RDA)

 

[Richard-D]

There is no rationale; it is probably just an example of European Commission corruption.

My 5 ml tank and I are looking forward to being rid of them.

 

[OldBatty]

There have been several designs with easy to remove plugs and whatnot to adapt to the 2 ml TPD rule, but it is my understanding the TPD people/board/whoever makes the decisions is reevaluating how to classify that type of workaround and close that loophole.

Perhaps a very thick walled plastic tank, do not sell any glass that size but by 'coincidence' a replacement glass for a rivals older product is a perfect fit. Then wait for some one on the forum(s) to discover this happy accident

 

[Eskie]

Perhaps a very thick walled plastic tank, do not sell any glass that size but by 'coincidence' a replacement glass for a rivals older product is a perfect fit. Then wait for some one on the forum(s) to discover this happy accident

Possible, but that's gonna be one thick wall of plastic.

 

[DaveP]

Laws can be puzzling. If auto gas tanks were limited to 5 gallons to reduce fire hazard, everyone would carry a 10 gallon can in their trunk. Go figure.