The Elephant In The Room ...

[Vicks Vap-oh-Yeah]

The problem we are seeing (the gigantic pink elephant and the horse he rode in on) is heat = carbonized deposits....

Didn't the first prototypes of PV's come up with an ultrasonic atomizer? I understand that the vapor is cold with this type of vaporization, but did this eliminate the heat generated deposits?

Perhaps the manufacturers switched to a heat-based vaporization device to answer to consumer demand for warmed vapor.....now, if we could go back to an ultrasonic devise, and find a way to warm the vapor after its produced???

Thoughts?

 

[Vapinginjapan]

There's already a method for rapid heating of a liquid on the fly, used in espresso machines, called a thermoblock.

It's basically a small metal block with a heating element in it, with channels built into it.

You run the liquid through the channels to heat it.

If you heat it up to say, 100C, before running it to the atomizer, likely there would be no carbonization to speak of.

The problem with a piezo atomizer running after a thermo block that I could see is that the vaporization of the liquid would vastly increase surface area, thus making it more prone to rapid cooling before it reached the vapers mouth. Which is why I say it would be more prudent to have the heating run after the piezo.

Thermo blocks also require some sort of pumping mechanism, adding to complexity.

I really think that a piezo element running before a heater block inside of the vaping device would still provide acceptable heat to the user, especially with high surface area. Air that's passed through an extremely hot heat sink still warms before it hits the air. (Just my general instincts from being a computer user)

 

[kinabaloo]

The problem we are seeing (the gigantic pink elephant and the horse he rode in on) is heat = carbonized deposits....

Didn't the first prototypes of PV's come up with an ultrasonic atomizer? I understand that the vapor is cold with this type of vaporization, but did this eliminate the heat generated deposits?

Perhaps the manufacturers switched to a heat-based vaporization device to answer to consumer demand for warmed vapor.....now, if we could go back to an ultrasonic devise, and find a way to warm the vapor after its produced???

Thoughts?

Not actually tried this yet but next time I see a running 'cold-steam' humidier in a shop I will try inhaling some to get a better idea; I know that it feels col if you put your hand in the mist.

A note on piezo-electric transducer (ultrasonic) atomizer used in place of a heated coil: dry residues might still clog up the atomizer (to a lesser extent) but would be fairly easily rinsed out. There would be no decomposition of VG (or anything else) and no 'burning' (degradation) of the deposit. However, most of the components that will/would become dry-residue would end up in the lungs, not heat-degraded but a far from ideal situation nevertheless.

In short, a piezo-electric transducer (ultrasonic) atomizer would only be a slight improvement (and might actually be worse) in terms of unwanted stuff getting into the lungs. The need for clean juices remains.

However, there is an important potential use for a piezo-electric transducer (ultrasonic) in an atomizer: using one to feed (a jet mist of) juice to the heater coil (from the back). The present common design whereby droplets are pulled from te metal meshing by the inhaled air stream works well; but there is a very significant advantage in using a piezo: the juice could then be held in a sealed (yet still refillable) container. This would avoid the leaking of juce into the mouth, the second most important issue that regulators are likely to sieze on.

 

[kinabaloo]

There's already a method for rapid heating of a liquid on the fly, used in espresso machines, called a thermoblock.

It's basically a small metal block with a heating element in it, with channels built into it.

You run the liquid through the channels to heat it.

If you heat it up to say, 100C, before running it to the atomizer, likely there would be no carbonization to speak of.

The problem with a piezo atomizer running after a thermo block that I could see is that the vaporization of the liquid would vastly increase surface area, thus making it more prone to rapid cooling before it reached the vapers mouth. Which is why I say it would be more prudent to have the heating run after the piezo.

Thermo blocks also require some sort of pumping mechanism, adding to complexity.

I really think that a piezo element running before a heater block inside of the vaping device would still provide acceptable heat to the user, especially with high surface area. Air that's passed through an extremely hot heat sink still warms before it hits the air. (Just my general instincts from being a computer user)

Another idea: the heating of a small (tiny) amount of juice in a confined space could be itself used to create a vapor/mist by allowing exist through a nozzle.

Ultrasonic piezo transducers require relatively little power, I believe. In contrast, any heating that is not of a very tiny amount of juice - as in present designs - is likely to up the power requirements considerably, leading to shortened battery life; this is a major drawback.

If it was really possible to heat a mist, it would be worthwhile to look into it. I think it is practically impossible as the volume is huge and the heating must not impede the droplets of juice in the mist.

Whichever design is employed (piezo, heater coil or combination), for reasons outlined in my post above, there would still be the need for non deposit-forming juices to avoid contaminants in the inhaled vapor; in the case of ultrasonics, the dry deposit materials themselves; in the case of a heating element (coil), decomposition products from heat degradation of the dry deposits.

 

[kinabaloo]

I'd just like to note that many of us know there is an elephant in the room, but we don't comment because we don't understand the elephant or the horse he rode in on.

When you start talking about gas spectrometry and piezo atomizers, my eyes glaze over. I don't have a clue what you're talking about, so I have nothing to add...and very little to gain by even reading the thread at all.

Simply from a common sense point of view, it seems to me pretty evident that e-cigs are PROBABLY less harmful to me than analogs. I don't see how they could be worse. Plus there is the side benefit of not driving all my friends and relatives crazy with the second-hand smoke and the stink. I will have to leave it to those much smarter than me to figure out how to make it risk-free. Until then, I'm content to vape and let the brains figure it out.

But yeah, I still see the elephant.

If this was just a problem to think about we'd be discussing this in the experimenters forum (and do). But as there is an obvious doorway to lead the elephant out of the room, I think it should be discussed more widely.

It is not a matter of 'wouldn't be be bice if we could ...' It is a matter that can be resolved quite easily.

 

[Vapinginjapan]

Kinabloo, all methods you're proposing make this work are mechanical, using a thermoblock to heat the juice would require some sort of pumping mechanism to make it out of the thermoblock and into the atomizer.

This would make it extremely challenging to make a small form factor device with.

What COULD work, is if you made a heated piezo. Direct contact with the heated piezo by the cartridge. The piezo wouldn't have to get as hot as an atomizer to vaporize the juice. Just warm it up so it's not cold. Now that I think about it, this is a splended idea. Why didn't I think of it before?

Kinabloo: Perfume piezo's would be ideally suited to this task. They can run on 1.5V, all you would need is a driver.

To all of those reading the thread

Piezos are bidirectional devices. They produce vibration from electricity and electricity from vibration. If you feed them rapid enough changes in current, then can expand and contract millions of times per second, thus 'kicking up' water from the liquid into the air to form a fine mist.

Additionally, it's possible that any harmful gases not removed by this change could be reformed by a catalytic converter between the vapor stream and the mouth piece.

Gas spectrometry is merely a method to look at the components in the gas and get a computerized readout.

Thermoblocks are a metal block with a heating element, and tiny chanels for the liquid to pass through, thus heating the liquid as it passes through the block, and ONLY the liquid passing through the block.

 

[kinabaloo]

Kinabloo, all methods you're proposing make this work are mechanical, using a thermoblock to heat the juice would require some sort of pumping mechanism to make it out of the thermoblock and into the atomizer.

This would make it extremely challenging to make a small form factor device with.

What COULD work, is if you made a heated piezo. Direct contact with the heated piezo by the cartridge. The piezo wouldn't have to get as hot as an atomizer to vaporize the juice. Just warm it up so it's not cold. Now that I think about it, this is a splended idea. Why didn't I think of it before?

Kinabloo: Perfume piezo's would be ideally suited to this task. They can run on 1.5V, all you would need is a driver.

To all of those reading the thread

Piezos are bidirectional devices. They produce vibration from electricity and electricity from vibration. If you feed them rapid enough changes in current, then can expand and contract millions of times per second, thus 'kicking up' water from the liquid into the air to form a fine mist.

Additionally, it's possible that any harmful gases not removed by this change could be reformed by a catalytic converter between the vapor stream and the mouth piece.

Gas spectrometry is merely a method to look at the components in the gas and get a computerized readout.

Thermoblocks are a metal block with a heating element, and tiny chanels for the liquid to pass through, thus heating the liquid as it passes through the block, and ONLY the liquid passing through the block.

I can't see the point in using a thermoblock. It would be an energy intensive method and doesn't provide anything special.

Re cataytc converters: a complex way to try to clean up after - when we should clean up before; and it would do nothing about deposit buildup.

However, though this does not address the deposit issue, the piezo-based perfume mister is well worth looking into.

These sorts of ideas would be best discussed in the Modders Forum.

 

[Vapinginjapan]

I think, once dry deposits were eliminated, piezo's DO solve the deposit issue, because a piezo would enable an e-cig to vaporize the fluid without heating it. (much)

At this point, all that would be needed was a little heating to keep the vapor from being cold. Far less heating than required for vaporization, and far less danger of decomposition products.

A heated piezo may indeed be the way to go, but engineering a piezo with a heating element inside of it might be a complex engineering endeavor on it's own.

My comment towards the catalytic was merely aimed at cleaning up any decomposition gases that might occur, which would, while be completely unrelated to dry deposits, further enhance the safety of an e-cig, and would be entirely reusable.

 

[kinabaloo]

I think, once dry deposits were eliminated, piezo's DO solve the deposit issue, because a piezo would enable an e-cig to vaporize the fluid without heating it. (much)

At this point, all that would be needed was a little heating to keep the vapor from being cold. Far less heating than required for vaporization, and far less danger of decomposition products.

A heated piezo may indeed be the way to go, but engineering a piezo with a heating element inside of it might be a complex engineering endeavor on it's own.

My comment towards the catalytic was merely aimed at cleaning up any decomposition gases that might occur, which would, while be completely unrelated to dry deposits, further enhance the safety of an e-cig, and would be entirely reusable.

A pure piezo device (no heater) would be VG safe, that is true.

I appreciate your thinking on this.

Now to design that thing !

Will not easy but will not be too difficult either. But I suspect it is going to need considerably more power; not necessarily too bad a drawback as battery technology is certain to improve.

 

[Vapinginjapan]

One quick note, Kinabaloo

This would be of large benefit, or large hinderance to the community.

however, an ultrasonic atomizer would probably have quite an unintended sideeffect.

Nicotine vapors combust at about 25c.

In the typical combusting cigarette, about 10% of the original nicotine actually makes it into your blood.

I don't know if PG has a higher, or lower delivery ratio, as it might 'preserve' the nicotine and keep it from combusting. however, it's something to think about. However..


An ultrasonic atomizer would keep the temperature low enough to probably preserve alot more of the nicotine in our juices, totally re-grading our juice scale. Just a thought.

 

[kinabaloo]

Nicotine vapors combust at about 25c.

The flashpoint is 95C but this will not occur in vaping (far too dilute). No combustion takes place when vaping. Slightly soluble in water; much more soluble in (miscible with) alcohol. A high boiling point of 247C. It is that high boiling point that makes me wonder if all of the nicotine gets into the vapor; some may be simply degraded on the heater coil (this needs investigating).

Some notes on Nicotine:

Chemical Formula C10H14N2
Aqueous solubility Slightly soluble
Boiling Point477°F (247°C)
Density Liquid: 1.01 g/cm3 at (68°F/39°F) (20°C/4°C)
Gas: 5.6 (air = 1)
Flammability Combustible liquid
Flashpoint203°F (95°C)
Molecular Mass162.23
Soluble In Alcohol, chloroform, ether, petroleum ether, kerosene, and oils.
Specific Gravity1.01
Vapor Pressure0.08 mm Hg at 68°F (20°C) 0.038 mm Hg at 77°F (25°C)
Volatility Not established/determined
Auto-Ignition Temperature: 240 degrees Celsius
Explosive Limits: 0.7 - 4 percent, by volume, in air

Further discussion on nicotine here: http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/fo...ment/17689-chemistry-nicotine.html#post286394

 

[Vapinginjapan]

They should really edit that wikipedia article that says that it can combust at like, 35c, or provide a source.

Anyways, thank you for enlightening me on this. It would appear that it has an autoignition point of about 240c. Given that VG starts to break down into acreolin at around there, and the new 6v PV's seem to be harsh with VG, I wonder if they'll also cut nicotine levels in the fluid.

I really wonder what 6v will do for atomizer lifespan..

It would seem to me that another possible road is a teflon coated wicking material, as long as the teflon properties don't interfere with the actual wicking action, with a filter in the mouth piece. Hard deposits would just be whisked into the airstream to be deposited in the filter.

As long as we haven't got any out gasing, we're good.

Sadly, we'd have to strictly control the heat of anything teflon coated, because it starts to pyrolyse at 200c. Luckily, we should have a 'toxicity saftey margin' of about 260c.

(Wouldn't want to kill Mike with Teflon poisoning. )

 

[tescela]

We have an alternative to one of the world's biggest killers and we face potential legislation that could bump it off. That it's safer is not going to cut the ice. Everyone knows that tobacco smoking is a kind of exception, for historical reasons; just being safer than that, no matter how much more safe just isn't likely to win the day.

There is an obvious flaw and we can fix it. We haven't got much time but we have a chance to get this fixed before the real testing begins. It feels like so many are just hoping the potential ban will go away. I can understand newbies concern with this and that model etc., but there's a lot of veterans here, with many skills. Science, petitioning, legal, etc. People who can influence things and get things moving. All the models, and connectors and gripes etc won't mean a thing if the whole thing is cancelled. We see the fire approaching and we play mahjong waiting for the city to burn down while hoping a storm extinguishes the flames. Lets do what we can so when the time comes there's no case to answer. Don't regret later, let's do what we can right now. I know so many are already doing a lot, but try to understand that there's an issue here we should deal with, a vital, urgent one.

We'd love to say, hey it's just PG and water and flavorings (and perhaps nicotine). Let's make sure it is.

This is an EXCELLENT post!!! Please share more of your thoughts!

 

[wegster]

There's already a method for rapid heating of a liquid on the fly, used in espresso machines, called a thermoblock.

It's basically a small metal block with a heating element in it, with channels built into it.

You run the liquid through the channels to heat it.

If you heat it up to say, 100C, before running it to the atomizer, likely there would be no carbonization to speak of.
...
Thermo blocks also require some sort of pumping mechanism, adding to complexity.

I really think that a piezo element running before a heater block inside of the vaping device would still provide acceptable heat to the user, especially with high surface area. Air that's passed through an extremely hot heat sink still warms before it hits the air. (Just my general instincts from being a computer user)

Which can also take an hour or longer to come up to temperature on espresso machines). Granted, it's not like you'd be heating a multiple E61 group head sized system, but compare battery life on today's e-cigs, versus what size block you'd need that's going to be efficient without being plugged in, and of larger size. The thermo block AFAIK sits inside the boiler, or replaces it, but isn't an 'instant heat' sort of option, not when trying to raise temperatures significantly, no?

 

[kinabaloo]

They should really edit that wikipedia article that says that it can combust at like, 35c, or provide a source.

Anyways, thank you for enlightening me on this. It would appear that it has an autoignition point of about 240c. Given that VG starts to break down into acreolin at around there, and the new 6v PV's seem to be harsh with VG, I wonder if they'll also cut nicotine levels in the fluid.

I really wonder what 6v will do for atomizer lifespan..

It would seem to me that another possible road is a teflon coated wicking material, as long as the teflon properties don't interfere with the actual wicking action, with a filter in the mouth piece. Hard deposits would just be whisked into the airstream to be deposited in the filter.

As long as we haven't got any out gasing, we're good.

Sadly, we'd have to strictly control the heat of anything teflon coated, because it starts to pyrolyse at 200c. Luckily, we should have a 'toxicity saftey margin' of about 260c.

(Wouldn't want to kill Mike with Teflon poisoning. )

Although the flashpoint is 95C, it's not going to happen because the nicotine is just a tiny part of the vapor. It is possible that the increased voltage releases more free-base nicotine and ths is (at least part of) the reason for the more sharp taste. The non-freebase nicotine might be left to burn on the heater coil; I'm really not sure. If the amount of nicotine in the vapor, as opposed to the juice, is low, the high boiling point of the (free-base) nicotine could well be the reason. I don't recommend running at 6v because that is off-spec., but what might happen in terms of atty life is: some attys will fail unable to cope with the extra power; others may do well as the 6v might well burn off ('ash') the deposit (as the 'cleaning cycle' aims to do), but - and it's a big but - while being used, so the burn off products will be inhaled (adding to the sharp/burnt taste (that some might even prefer as it could be felt to resemble tobacco smoke).

Re Teflon: this thread aims to remove the deposits by the creation of a cleaner juice, so we're off topic here; we should aim to make this sort of consideration unnecessary. I would choose ceramic, which is far more heat stable, over the fluoride-containing teflon!

 

[kinabaloo]

This is an EXCELLENT post!!! Please share more of your thoughts!

Thank you Tescala.

 

[Vapinginjapan]

Honestly, I think all of the discussion here of theory of eliminating dry depoits is more than sufficent.

What I think needs to be done, is somebody needs to take some juice, run it through a still, then evaporate it with a hot plate about the temp of our atty's and see if it leaves any dry deposit.

Then follow up with a test where they take the same fluid that's been run through a still, and vape it, and see if the nicotine/flavor has been severley diminished.

THEN we will have our answer.

Any chemist volunteers?

 

[kinabaloo]

Honestly, I think all of the discussion here of theory of eliminating dry depoits is more than sufficent.

What I think needs to be done, is somebody needs to take some juice, run it through a still, then evaporate it with a hot plate about the temp of our atty's and see if it leaves any dry deposit.

Then follow up with a test where they take the same fluid that's been run through a still, and vape it, and see if the nicotine/flavor has been severley diminished.

THEN we will have our answer.

Any chemist volunteers?

Yes, these are important steps to confirm the theory. Although there are no good reasons to think it will change the juice in either flavor or nicotine content - as only vaporisable content will be the atomizer's emitted vapor - it would certainly help with convincing people of the merits to deposit-free juices. We would also aim to show that the clean juice does indeed leave no deposit in a new atomizer.

The next step would be to look at how a juce can be prepared with only vaprisable ingredients so that running through a still would not be necessary.

 

[kinabaloo]

There is a poll running that will help with our research.

Everyone who has had an atomizer fail in under 2 weeks, please take part in this important research poll:

(If you cut your juice with VG, count it as 'VG base')

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/forum/e-cig-technical-issues/17905-premature-atomizer-failure.html

 

[Nick O'Teen]

Many excellent points in this thread, but the real elephant is the attitude of the health fascists who drive the anti-smoking agenda. It doesn't matter how safe you make it, it doesn't matter how clean the juice is, it doesn't matter if the vapour is demonstrably harmless. The anti-smoking killjoys (with the self-interested collusion of Big Tobacco and Big Pharma,) will continue to froth at the mouth demanding a ban, and assuming that they have the God-given right to persecute smokers. Because that's what we are in their eyes, smokers - and as such, a legitimate target for any amount of abuse and discrimination. And a good deal easier to crush than the more deeply-rooted analog smoking culture. They will lie, distort statistics, misprepresent the evidence, resort to any means to demonize us "for the greater good".

I sometimes think it's only a matter of time before we are placed on a social par with paedophiles and serial killers - I'm just waiting for the hysterical announcement that "new evidence shows the lethal dangers of fourth-hand smoking!" That should do it.