The end of microcoils?
- Thread starter cool52
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
I would normally take anything Dr F says seriously. There aren't many people doing research on vaping who don't appear to have an agenda. He gives us the bad news as well as the good news.
So this one is a bit scary. I'm going to try to wind some coils without heating and see how they go. And try cleaning them without dry burning. If it works out OK then why not.
On the other hand I would like to know a bit more about "destroying the molecular structure of the metal". What does that mean? How did he determine that the molecular structure was "completely destroyed"? Breaking the bonds between the metal atoms? Seems logical that the molecular structure would be changed, but changed in a way that allows enhanced release of bad stuff is a very specific statement. Heat this specific metal to "X" degrees, let it cool slowly in air, then soak it in VG, and heat it to "Y" degrees, pass air over it, and "Z" percent more atoms of Zinc are released. I did a short metallurgy class 45 years ago, enough to know there are a lot of variables here.
Did he examine the molecular structure, or access some existing research, to base this assertion on? If his source of information was mentioned I must have missed it. He said something about how it would be good to do some research into whether metals were actually released into vapor. Which sounds like maybe that hasn't been done. Maybe there is more information on his reasons for saying this, like in a research paper or something. Anyone know?
If this had anyone else's name on it I would be very skeptical, I would be thinking "formaldehyde". But this is Dr F.
And as Marc42 said above, getting the coating on the metal surface has always been part of the accepted wisdom. Will that happen during normal vaping?
Do we know if manufacturers heat treat premade coils?
Big can of worms being opened here.
So this one is a bit scary. I'm going to try to wind some coils without heating and see how they go. And try cleaning them without dry burning. If it works out OK then why not.
On the other hand I would like to know a bit more about "destroying the molecular structure of the metal". What does that mean? How did he determine that the molecular structure was "completely destroyed"? Breaking the bonds between the metal atoms? Seems logical that the molecular structure would be changed, but changed in a way that allows enhanced release of bad stuff is a very specific statement. Heat this specific metal to "X" degrees, let it cool slowly in air, then soak it in VG, and heat it to "Y" degrees, pass air over it, and "Z" percent more atoms of Zinc are released. I did a short metallurgy class 45 years ago, enough to know there are a lot of variables here.
Did he examine the molecular structure, or access some existing research, to base this assertion on? If his source of information was mentioned I must have missed it. He said something about how it would be good to do some research into whether metals were actually released into vapor. Which sounds like maybe that hasn't been done. Maybe there is more information on his reasons for saying this, like in a research paper or something. Anyone know?
If this had anyone else's name on it I would be very skeptical, I would be thinking "formaldehyde". But this is Dr F.
And as Marc42 said above, getting the coating on the metal surface has always been part of the accepted wisdom. Will that happen during normal vaping?
Do we know if manufacturers heat treat premade coils?
Big can of worms being opened here.
I'm not a metallurgist and hold no degrees in any, recognized or otherwise, field of study but it does seem to me that it would take some very significant heat to disturb the crystaline structures or the molecular structure they are composed of to produce a significant, potentially, toxic byproduct.
I do respect Dr. F's work and feel he is pretty much an expert in chemistry, but metallurgy is a whole other thing.
I do respect Dr. F's work and feel he is pretty much an expert in chemistry, but metallurgy is a whole other thing.
So basically I spent the last weeks perfecting my titanium coils reaching a point where I learned to torch them enough to work with the coil but not enough to form a titanium dioxide layer and now I'm told I've been 'destroying' bonds and what I've been doing is terrible?
I should go back to steel and blue fish filter foam pads.
Tony
I should go back to steel and blue fish filter foam pads.
Tony
Dr. is a devoted cardio scientist, and I take his work seriously.
HOWEVER; I'm an automotive engineer. PLEASE don't ask me to build you a bridge, because I don't even WANT to know how!
Matching ideal materials for intended use is a science, and I always found it in my best interest to ask the right scientists.
HOWEVER; I'm an automotive engineer. PLEASE don't ask me to build you a bridge, because I don't even WANT to know how!
Matching ideal materials for intended use is a science, and I always found it in my best interest to ask the right scientists.
Last edited:
I'm going to choose to believe Alien Traveller the metallurgist who said it's nonsense (thanks @Alien Traveler !)
Of course I am biased; this is what I want to hear. But equally, the "changing molecules" bit makes little sense to me (as a layman.) These metals are rated for certain temperatures. That's why for example you'll see Ni200 rated for only up to 600°F and discussion on how it changes its structure/nature above that - find any data sheet on Ni200 and it clearly says don't use it above 600°F (or rather, suggests not using it because it changes.)
Kanthal is rated well over 1000°C. To me that means it stays Kanthal, with no changes, all the way up to that maximum temperature. If there was some change to it happening below that this would be noted by the data sheets on it, for the prime users of the metal. Even if those changes were unimportant for the prime purposes, it would be noted. And I simply cannot imagine a scenario where a metal being used in industry for years/decades does not have literature about important structural changes that we in vaping are now discovering for them.
I think Dr F, however good he may be at other things, is not qualified to speak on these matters. Until a metallurgist or similar expert comments on Kanthal - or other metals we use - having problems at the temperatures at which we use them, I am going to consider that nothing has changed from 20 minutes ago before I ever heard of this study.
And most importantly of all, I am sticking to my default position of: even if it is harmful, how likely is it that it's more harmful than smoking? Or even close to as harmful?
Say No to Asbestos; most other things are more likely than not to be OK, I reckon Certainly until proven otherwise.
Of course I am biased; this is what I want to hear. But equally, the "changing molecules" bit makes little sense to me (as a layman.) These metals are rated for certain temperatures. That's why for example you'll see Ni200 rated for only up to 600°F and discussion on how it changes its structure/nature above that - find any data sheet on Ni200 and it clearly says don't use it above 600°F (or rather, suggests not using it because it changes.)
Kanthal is rated well over 1000°C. To me that means it stays Kanthal, with no changes, all the way up to that maximum temperature. If there was some change to it happening below that this would be noted by the data sheets on it, for the prime users of the metal. Even if those changes were unimportant for the prime purposes, it would be noted. And I simply cannot imagine a scenario where a metal being used in industry for years/decades does not have literature about important structural changes that we in vaping are now discovering for them.
I think Dr F, however good he may be at other things, is not qualified to speak on these matters. Until a metallurgist or similar expert comments on Kanthal - or other metals we use - having problems at the temperatures at which we use them, I am going to consider that nothing has changed from 20 minutes ago before I ever heard of this study.
And most importantly of all, I am sticking to my default position of: even if it is harmful, how likely is it that it's more harmful than smoking? Or even close to as harmful?
Say No to Asbestos; most other things are more likely than not to be OK, I reckon
Certainly until proven otherwise.The amount of titanium dioxide release would be trivial if any, and titanium dioxide is not classified as harmful.So basically I spent the last weeks perfecting my titanium coils reaching a point where I learned to torch them enough to work with the coil but not enough to form a titanium dioxide layer and now I'm told I've been 'destroying' bonds and what I've been doing is terrible?
I should go back to steel and blue fish filter foam pads.
Tony
Titanium dioxide is the pigment used in just about everything to colour it white, ie toothpaste.
inhalation of large amounts fine pigment powder would irritate the lungs.
Titanium metal is used for implants in the body.
Are there any bright youngsters in our vaping community who are attending university that might have access to a scanning electron microscope with spectroscopy capabilities? I would really like to discuss the possibility of a simple little study to help us get a little better understanding of the aging of the metal alloys we are using in a very unusual application.
Alternatively, we could crowd fund a study and contract an analysis lab to examine some samples for us. Perhaps we could show some of our skeptics that we really do care about vaping safely and that we could use some help instead of uneducated, draconian regulations.
Alternatively, we could crowd fund a study and contract an analysis lab to examine some samples for us. Perhaps we could show some of our skeptics that we really do care about vaping safely and that we could use some help instead of uneducated, draconian regulations.
I really do respect Dr Farsalinos and appreciate all the unbiased research he's done for the vape community, but suspect there's more to the story. I'd like to see an actual study, not just speculation.
Aluminum starts to form an oxide layer immediately that it is exposed to oxygen, a passivation layer. This can be enhanced by electrical annealing at temp's far lower than melting point. However, this substantially reduces the rigidity of the wire which is helpful to its retaining its geometry in operation. There needs to be a balance. That can be achieved with strain in winding with limited further pulse annealing so as to promote oxidation and retain fundamentally the wind order.
We don't burn the wire for the reasons cited (melting point). Kanthal is highly heat tolerant. It's a "heating element" wire.
Microcoils are the most efficient wire forms that can be created for a vaporizer (in our space limited application). Let's just go ahead and dismiss that math. Millions of would be vapers need us helping them to get asap to a great vape…and getting the reliable truth from us, their fellow vapers.
Good luck all.
Would be nice.
BTW, greetings from a former Yooper. Spent 7 years studying at MTU many years ago.
HMMMMM any more TC haters and naysayers? Its looking more and more attractive every day. This info has been out there awhile now. I try to keep over heating my kanthel coils to a minimum.
Some refreshing and lucid posts from you and a few others, thankfully.
I've been researching vaping technology quasi-formally for two years and studies such as this in particular.
Any metallurgists contact me freely please. Exchange would be appreciated and helpful.
Good luck all.
And from the reserch Ive done the TI has to be heated to above 600 degrees F to form the dioxide. Its like 600 14 or 28 I dont remember the actual temp but at 400 degrees F in my TC mods as long as I keep my coil juiced the TC never kicks in.
So we have known, from day ONE, that vaping was NOT 100% safe. It is SAFER than SMOKING.
Why then do we have issues with vaping research, that we asked for, that explains those unsafe parts of vaping. That we new existed, just not what they were exactly. It's not like any of the "bad" research is saying that you should go back to smoking to reduce risk. It's is just telling us what the hazards of vaping are or could be. This information is why we are seeing the temp control stuff and ceramic heating elements coming into the Vape market.
Why then do we have issues with vaping research, that we asked for, that explains those unsafe parts of vaping. That we new existed, just not what they were exactly. It's not like any of the "bad" research is saying that you should go back to smoking to reduce risk. It's is just telling us what the hazards of vaping are or could be. This information is why we are seeing the temp control stuff and ceramic heating elements coming into the Vape market.
I know that and anyone who has scraped a white wall for painting has probably inhaled more titanium dioxide than a Vaper will see in his life time so not really that concerned HOWEVER it does concern me that somebody as respected as Dr F. Who has always thought on our side, suddently comes up with such a theory without a study backing him up.
Believe me I went through the darkest corners of the Web researching about TiO2 before making my first Ti coil and I even read the infamous study that put titanium dioxide in the potential watch list (I consider it rubbish btw) and I found no concrete evidence of harmful effects especially at the levels we're using it.
Don't know... I think we need real studies about coil material to come out before starting this or that.
Regards
Tony
Sent from my keyboard through my phone or something like that.
- Status
Similar threads
