Adhesives, Insulation and Vape Safety
- Thread starter momofthegoons
- Start date
BigDaddyVapor
@BigDogJunction
Yes. That was my point. External heating of glass tubes creates tasty vapor. Since the gn0me has a heat exchanger with more surface area than a regular tube, it may be a more efficient way of creating an all-glass path desktop-type unit.
Glass is a very good conductor of heat, though as many have said, it takes a lot more time, to heat it to the same temps. The advantage glass has, is it retains heat better than SS, makes a better heat insulator (depending on usage) and correct me, if I'm wrong guys... I believe glass distributes heat better/evenly, over its entire surface, than SS when using a single heat source that concentrates heat to an area/part of a glass or SS cylinder. Though, with say a wrapped coil heating element around the glass and SS cylinders... I don't know what/if glass would have an advantage at that point.
Then again, I could just totally be full of @#$%. I don't even know if that made sense. I'm going to vape. Then I might understand myself.
darkrom
Great Scott!
So after taking some time to try to stop panicking and understand the design... I want to say that I feel the UD design is actually probably SAFER than the other style designs. This is my take on it anyway. By having that one piece of silicone there you are effectively blocking off everything below it from the air path. On the other log vapes that hot air is hitting the inside of the wood (toxic fumes I'm told) and the solder and power plug area. Unless I am mistaken I think I'd rather hot air hit high temp silicone than charring wood and hitting the power plug area.
I think the fact that wood is natural might be hiding the fact that it is actually NOT something you want to be charring or even heating and inhaling. Lets keep in mind Datura is natural too and a horrible poison.
I am doing my best to fully understand the situation and speak calmly and clearly with other vaporists. I really don't understand why a more open design is preferred when it means exposing the air path to more items. I feel like at this point the glue being in the power plug is about as much concern as the electronics in the cloud....NONE, because you aren't inhaling it at all.
I think the fact that wood is natural might be hiding the fact that it is actually NOT something you want to be charring or even heating and inhaling. Lets keep in mind Datura is natural too and a horrible poison.
I am doing my best to fully understand the situation and speak calmly and clearly with other vaporists. I really don't understand why a more open design is preferred when it means exposing the air path to more items. I feel like at this point the glue being in the power plug is about as much concern as the electronics in the cloud....NONE, because you aren't inhaling it at all.
BigDaddyVapor
@BigDogJunction
I couldn't disagree more.
That's about all I have to say.
That's about all I have to say.
darkrom
Great Scott!
Well that isn't very useful to the conversation. I'm trying NOT to argue, and completely trying to discuss. If something can be done better, that is what I want to be inhaling. What specifically do you disagree about that we can discuss? Dave has already told me he is willing to make me an underdog however I'd like it made, but after discussing it and having the option to do it either way, I'm back to the current design as the safest possible option based on my current understanding.
Hopefully he can come in here and explain why the current design really exposes you to LESS stuff than an open design.
I am NOT trying to be a fanboy. If there is a better design that's the one I'll use. This is more or less a harm reduction thread since you EITHER have to inhale toxic wood fumes or have the air hit silicone. Or I am not understanding and I'd really like to try to learn since it is very important to me.
zymos
Well-Known Member
Just because some woods are toxic when burned or maybe even heated, it doesn't mean ANY vape with exposed wood IS emitting toxic vapors.
My personal opinion is like yours though, that materials outside the vapor path are not that concerning. If they are, then that means the MFLB, VXC, and most other vapes are out of the running....
My personal opinion is like yours though, that materials outside the vapor path are not that concerning. If they are, then that means the MFLB, VXC, and most other vapes are out of the running....
zmurder
Well-Known Member
I disagree darkrom.....maybe take a look back at mom's original pics and tell me again you wanna be breathing through that rig. Not to keep bringing it back to the HI.....but it seems to solve the problems we're talking about here. No silicon, Gorilla Glue, hot wood, solder, or plug exposed to the core. This is made possible b/c the resistor screws up into its isolated chamber.
Dave has convinced you (and others) that it's simply a defensible "design decision" (a tradeoff!) to use silicon and GG around such heat. I disagree since others have found a better way around this tradeoff.
momofthegoons
vapor accessory addict
Which log vapes are you talking about here? As zmurder pointed out, it is not the case in the HI and it is also not the case with the CRZ which has a completely enclosed, surgical SS airpath. So I'm thinking you must be talking about the PD and the WDZ?
In addition, I've linked a woodworking site that has a list of woods that are considered toxic. Please note that the real hazard comes when working with the wood from the dust.
Glass is not a particularly good conductor of heat. Stainless steel conducts heat a bit better. Aluminium conducts heat a lot better. When I designed the pod, I chose to use glass to contain the resistor because I want as little heat as possible seeping away from the hot spot. What I have discovered from the work of others and my own experiments is that the air reaches maximum temperature once it passes over the resistor. This is the hottest part of the whole system. Every other part of the vape is at a lower temperature than this. In fact, every other part of the vaporizer is pulling heat away from the heat source, reducing its efficiency. For this reason I have decided that heatsinks, fins, etc are of no advantage and may instead cause energy to be wasted. There is some preheating of the air as it first passes through these parts but I believe that this offers no advantage to its final temperature. If it were possible I would prefer to contain the resistor with a material that had zero thermal conductivity. That way I could be sure that all of the heat energy from the resistor is being dissipated into the airstream. Glass was the best material I could find for this purpose.
Looking at Dave's design I have no doubt that his intention is to provide the cleanest, safest air path possible. It is obvious that a lot of consideration went into this. While some people may not like the use of silicone, knowing the kinds of applications it is used in such as ovenware, aquariums, and medical implants, I consider it a particularly inert substance under a wide range of environmental conditions. Furthermore, Dave has even taken steps to isolate the silicone from the air path as well.
As far as the "other log vapes that hot air is hitting the inside of the wood", I only know of the PD, and my own vape that allow this. However, in the Hot Pod, air that has been in contact with the hot part of the wood does not make it into the air path because the air intake is at the cooler lower part of the pod. I don't agree with the idea that hot wood creates toxic fumes. Although you used datura as an example, I don't think anyone would design a vape made out of datura, or anything else known to be toxic. Indeed there are many toxic plants but they are also well documented and therefore avoided. My PD is made from cherry wood. If that is toxic then there must be a lot of toxic furniture, toys, etc out there. The PDs are known for internal charring, but how much of a problem is this in reality? Perhaps a tiny amount of wood smoke has entered the air stream at some point. While this is not a desirable feature, it is not toxic and hardly worth considering. Who hasn't sat around a campfire? For thousands of years mankind has lived with smoke and fire. I'm sure that most of us have breathed in a fair amount of smoke over our lifetimes, so it's worth maintaining some perspective and common sense.
The Banksia pods used in the Hot Pod are not toxic. The pods start off as nectar-filled flowers. The nectar of these flowers is a traditional food of the aborigines, as well as for a variety of animals and insects. The pods themselves have been used by woodturners for decades. If there were any toxicity in the pods then those guys would be ingesting it big time and it would have made news long ago. As you can see from the photo in my previous post, the Hot Pod has a large internal space. This was a deliberate design decision to ensure that charring does not occur. The sides of the pod are just too far away from the heat source for this to happen.
EDIT: Forgot to mention solder. I believe that all the vape makers use lead-free solder. This solder is composed of copper and tin. Neither of these elements are toxic. Copper is often used for water pipes. Tin is used extensively as a coating for cans containing food. Again, these uses have long histories.
that would be a vacuum, of course. but at these temperatures and using these kinds of heaters, infrared/heat radiation is also a (big) factor. that's why i use a shiny stainless steel shell around my heater that is physically isolated from the heater with an air gap. And then another 1/16" air gap between the ss shell and the inside surface of the wood. The exterior barely gets warm.
Slightly Medicated
(SliM) Iron Lungs
I really do not like your tone. It comes off very condescending. You talk to darkrom like he never looked at the original post... I am pretty sure we all did. It is not like looking at it again will magically change our mind.
You also say: Dave has convinced you (and other). Dave did no such thing. I did not need to be convinced. You make it sound like he is a used care sales men trying to sell us a lemon. I read though his entire thread and formed my own opinion before I purchased the product. I saw his old core design in his thread and I had no real issues with what I saw. I new about the use of GG before I purchased my units. I did not need to be "convinced".
I have absolutely no issue with the way Dave has built his devices. I also agree with darkrom. I prefer Dave's insulated closed core design to an open core with no insulation between the core and the outside wood walls.
I have shown his design to my electrical engineer friends. They all seemed to feel it was fine. Yet again we go back to the topic of qualifications to asses material safety. They are not even really qualified. I don't think any individual is qualified yet to asses the material safety of inhalation aromatherapy vaporization devices. There is no standardized test, and until there is, I can't hold anything said in this thread with any real weight. It is all just speculation in my book.
Until you prove to me that X Y Z chemicals are being leached in to the air by any particular device though a repeatable laboratory test, I have a really hard time taking some claims seriously.
zymos
Well-Known Member
"Lead-free solders in commercial use may contain tin, copper, silver, bismuth, indium, zinc, antimony, and traces of other metals"
From Wikipedia, FWIW.
Some of those metals are toxic- just because something is lead free doesn't mean it is necessarily safe.
Not posting this to be alarmist, but I think we would all want to avoid breathing heated electronics....
From Wikipedia, FWIW.
Some of those metals are toxic- just because something is lead free doesn't mean it is necessarily safe.
Not posting this to be alarmist, but I think we would all want to avoid breathing heated electronics....
zmurder
Well-Known Member
If you look at the original pics and still want to use such a device to breathe out of every day, that's your call. We all have to make such calls. I just started using a Steinel heat gun for chrissakes!-- not even designed for vaping....but that's another story.
I didn't mean to condescend to darkrom -- was just trying to correct the following misconception: "since you EITHER have to inhale toxic wood fumes or have the air hit silicone" since it's clear now that that isn't true.
This was not addressed to you SM, it was addressed to darkrom.....and what's wrong with needing to be convinced that a vape's materials are safe?!? I'm glad you needed no convincing (how did you know then?) but many others (myself included) DO need to be convinced that these materials are safe.
Slightly Medicated
(SliM) Iron Lungs
I will give you that, and I tend to agree with you there. I hope I did not come off as overly harsh or anything. I read your post right when I rolled out of bed. I did not have the time to turn on all my filters. I can be a little overly sensitive when i first wake up.
Most substances have some amount of moisture/water in them. I wonder if the silicone gets dry and flakes because it is loosing water from heat? It could be getting warm and then evaporating part of the water content inside the silicone. I imagine that water content would easily be absorbed by the leather bottom. Kind of like how my silicone o-rings dry out/crack on certain vaporizers I use if I let them get too hot. Again all of that is speculation.
zmurder
Well-Known Member
I wrote my post first-thing too and was prolly a little, well, grumpy. Sorry for the 'tude darkrom and SM!
Hey guys I think we had made some great progress towards getting this thread on track towards a meaningful discussion about materials and how they are used in the design and manufacture of vaporizers, especially the handmade ones on the market. I'm as guilty as anyone of saying things I probably shouldn't have and of letting my emotions take control, despite that I think this thread would be much more valuable to the community if we can all move on and continue the discussion(s) in a non-emotional, non-attacking way from now on. That's how I feel things should be and that's how I feel we can get the most out of this discussion so that's how I will treat it from this point on. I will be happy to continue discussing things but I won't be making any more inflammatory posts and I won't be responding to any either.
I want to start off by saying that I have a worldview that might not mesh well with some of yours, if that's the case we'll just have to try our best to 'agree to disagree'. I don't often think that there's an absolute right or wrong way to do things, hell I don't think there's usually a 'best' way to do things. I think the words "perfect" and the phrase "the best" are unrealistic and don't believe they often apply to anything in our world. I don't see things in black and white but instead usually as varying shades of grey.
In line with the above thoughts I want to make it clear that I don't have a problem with the design of the HI, Zaps, PDs or my own UDs.
As many of you know I don't make vapes to a standard size, shape or style nor do I make them out of the same materials all the time. The driving philosophy behind UD vapes is to make vaporizers that are different, powerful and safe with the goal of making vape styles that no one else is making, making custom pieces that people can't get anywhere else and helping people get something that suits their individual needs as best as possible.
It was with those goals in mind that I designed the original UD cores, cores that would be well suited to my application. Not all applications and not even for all people but for my intended applications. At the time all that was out there was classic Zaps and PDs and other copies of that technology. While those design were tested and true I thought I could design something that was better suited to my specific needs. I wanted something with higher performance and better airflow and I wanted something that I could use in any size or shape of vaporizer and in any practical material not just one of a half dozen types of wood.
For my application I decided early on that I wanted to close the air path of the core. At the time there were no log vapes on the market that had a closed air path but I felt that designing one would give me the performance and design flexibility I was looking for in addition to giving me peace of mind when using types of wood that otherwise might be questionable because of irritant concerns. I also decided that even though I didn't have any significant concerns regarding the air path being exposed to solder and the plastic or metal power plugs that it could only be an added bonus to exclude them from the air path as well. My decision, and what I felt very well suited my needs and applications was that I would happily trade a tiny bit of exposure to the silicone potting my glass bead/plug if it would eliminate possible other materials. For me it was simple choice choosing one known exposure to several unknowns. I stand by this decision for my designs and my applications but don't expect everyone else to feel the same way and I respect that. They can make decisions on what suites their needs best and I will do the same for mine. It is my understanding that classic PDs (and clones), classic Zaps, the Toasty Top and the HI use a design with an unclosed opening at the bottom of the core. It is also my understanding that the Ceramic Rock Zap (CRZ) uses a closed core. The UD core is a closed design as well and as we've already discussed I use a glass bead which plugs the bottom of the core 99% potting the bead in place with high-temp silicone that closes the crack around that glass/steel joint. By closing the core in that way I get what I feel to be an excellent performing core, an air path that is physically forced to go where I want it and no where else and peace of mind with my design. Other people might have differing opinions on the subject but that one is mine and again I can't and won't say 'mine is best' it is designed to be exactly what I want it to be.
I understand my above addition to the discussion is long but I hope you guys read it and think about it so we can all participate in a further discussion without the finger pointing and emotional hostility.
The situation that brought about this whole thread I think was an unfortunate one and I think was largely a result of poor communications.
I want to end this post with further discussion of materials so lets do that now and answer some materials questions from earlier:
Q) What finishes are used on UD vaporizers?
A) The vapes are oiled with organic walnut oil by default (pharmaceutical grade mineral oil is an option on request) and once dry several top coats of a natural (made in house) finish made from shellac, organic bees wax and carnuba wax is applied and buffed to the desired shine.
Q) What kind of solder is used in the UD and how?
A) RoHS compliant Sn99.3/Cu0.7 (99.3% Tin, .7% Copper) solder is used and while not necessary is kept out of the air path by only being used below the blocking bead and silicone potting.
If there are any other unanswered materials questions please point them out and I will do my best to answer them as well.
@ Slightly Medicated - the silicone doesn't flake, it stays nicely adhered to the steel and in good elastic shape. The flaking comment was made in reference to the ceramic insulation fabric used between the core and the wooden body.
I want to start off by saying that I have a worldview that might not mesh well with some of yours, if that's the case we'll just have to try our best to 'agree to disagree'. I don't often think that there's an absolute right or wrong way to do things, hell I don't think there's usually a 'best' way to do things. I think the words "perfect" and the phrase "the best" are unrealistic and don't believe they often apply to anything in our world. I don't see things in black and white but instead usually as varying shades of grey.
In line with the above thoughts I want to make it clear that I don't have a problem with the design of the HI, Zaps, PDs or my own UDs.
As many of you know I don't make vapes to a standard size, shape or style nor do I make them out of the same materials all the time. The driving philosophy behind UD vapes is to make vaporizers that are different, powerful and safe with the goal of making vape styles that no one else is making, making custom pieces that people can't get anywhere else and helping people get something that suits their individual needs as best as possible.
It was with those goals in mind that I designed the original UD cores, cores that would be well suited to my application. Not all applications and not even for all people but for my intended applications. At the time all that was out there was classic Zaps and PDs and other copies of that technology. While those design were tested and true I thought I could design something that was better suited to my specific needs. I wanted something with higher performance and better airflow and I wanted something that I could use in any size or shape of vaporizer and in any practical material not just one of a half dozen types of wood.
For my application I decided early on that I wanted to close the air path of the core. At the time there were no log vapes on the market that had a closed air path but I felt that designing one would give me the performance and design flexibility I was looking for in addition to giving me peace of mind when using types of wood that otherwise might be questionable because of irritant concerns. I also decided that even though I didn't have any significant concerns regarding the air path being exposed to solder and the plastic or metal power plugs that it could only be an added bonus to exclude them from the air path as well. My decision, and what I felt very well suited my needs and applications was that I would happily trade a tiny bit of exposure to the silicone potting my glass bead/plug if it would eliminate possible other materials. For me it was simple choice choosing one known exposure to several unknowns. I stand by this decision for my designs and my applications but don't expect everyone else to feel the same way and I respect that. They can make decisions on what suites their needs best and I will do the same for mine. It is my understanding that classic PDs (and clones), classic Zaps, the Toasty Top and the HI use a design with an unclosed opening at the bottom of the core. It is also my understanding that the Ceramic Rock Zap (CRZ) uses a closed core. The UD core is a closed design as well and as we've already discussed I use a glass bead which plugs the bottom of the core 99% potting the bead in place with high-temp silicone that closes the crack around that glass/steel joint. By closing the core in that way I get what I feel to be an excellent performing core, an air path that is physically forced to go where I want it and no where else and peace of mind with my design. Other people might have differing opinions on the subject but that one is mine and again I can't and won't say 'mine is best' it is designed to be exactly what I want it to be.
I understand my above addition to the discussion is long but I hope you guys read it and think about it so we can all participate in a further discussion without the finger pointing and emotional hostility.
The situation that brought about this whole thread I think was an unfortunate one and I think was largely a result of poor communications.
I want to end this post with further discussion of materials so lets do that now and answer some materials questions from earlier:
Q) What finishes are used on UD vaporizers?
A) The vapes are oiled with organic walnut oil by default (pharmaceutical grade mineral oil is an option on request) and once dry several top coats of a natural (made in house) finish made from shellac, organic bees wax and carnuba wax is applied and buffed to the desired shine.
Q) What kind of solder is used in the UD and how?
A) RoHS compliant Sn99.3/Cu0.7 (99.3% Tin, .7% Copper) solder is used and while not necessary is kept out of the air path by only being used below the blocking bead and silicone potting.
If there are any other unanswered materials questions please point them out and I will do my best to answer them as well.
@ Slightly Medicated - the silicone doesn't flake, it stays nicely adhered to the steel and in good elastic shape. The flaking comment was made in reference to the ceramic insulation fabric used between the core and the wooden body.
Good information to know on the Banksia pod hazy. A pod that produces edible products should be inherently safe.
The fibers of most wood freely allow water molecules to pass through them. I have witnessed a ring of water vapor under my vaporizer after the vaporizer had been off and cold from being previously plugged in long enough to drive all the water from the fibers. This means the wood pulled water molecules from the air and they traveling into the grain fibers which are like thousands of tiny straws. The heat of an energized unit will drive all the water molecules back out. The heat also travels along these fibers / straws like heat pipes. The mahogany Toasty Tower w/ ebony legs I sent to Dave in trade for the UD demonstrates this phenomenon very well. Gas molecules are also able to travel through the fibers. If the unit is turned with the grain going top to bottom like most are made, then there are thousands of tiny passage ways for gas molecules to pass between the bottom and the top. I decided that sealing the top from the bottom was not really feasible and chose to go with an open design. The surface area of hot metal that is exposed to the ends of the open wood fibers below the core has been minimized to reduce thermal transmission to the wood in the bottom portion of the unit. This will keep the wood below the core from getting too hot.
The user removable heating element also makes it necessary to have the bottom hole in the core open.
Edit - The PD is the only vaporizer Dave listed above with exposed wood at the bottom of the core. All the others have stainless steel at the bottom of the air way.
The fibers of most wood freely allow water molecules to pass through them. I have witnessed a ring of water vapor under my vaporizer after the vaporizer had been off and cold from being previously plugged in long enough to drive all the water from the fibers. This means the wood pulled water molecules from the air and they traveling into the grain fibers which are like thousands of tiny straws. The heat of an energized unit will drive all the water molecules back out. The heat also travels along these fibers / straws like heat pipes. The mahogany Toasty Tower w/ ebony legs I sent to Dave in trade for the UD demonstrates this phenomenon very well. Gas molecules are also able to travel through the fibers. If the unit is turned with the grain going top to bottom like most are made, then there are thousands of tiny passage ways for gas molecules to pass between the bottom and the top. I decided that sealing the top from the bottom was not really feasible and chose to go with an open design. The surface area of hot metal that is exposed to the ends of the open wood fibers below the core has been minimized to reduce thermal transmission to the wood in the bottom portion of the unit. This will keep the wood below the core from getting too hot.
The user removable heating element also makes it necessary to have the bottom hole in the core open.
Edit - The PD is the only vaporizer Dave listed above with exposed wood at the bottom of the core. All the others have stainless steel at the bottom of the air way.
It is a good thing that Banksia is not one of those plants.
Sorry if I didn't make my statement more clear, what I was getting at wasn't that any of those models have wood exposed at the bottom of the air way in a line-of-sight-from-the-resistor fashion though you're right by your definition (as I understand the different vapes) it is correct the PD is the only one with an exposed wood surface at the bottom of the core.
What I was saying is that, as you pointed out, the bottom of the HI and TT have to be open so that the resistor can be inserted and removed, again I'm using 'open' in the sense of how airtight it is not line of sight. The PD and original style Zaps are line-of-sight open to the wood at the bottom (correct me if I'm wrong) not for purposes of resistor insertion or removal but simply as an older style of design.
The same tin material used for soldering the joints is covering all of the copper wire to the resistor. The tinned wiring and enamel coated resistor are all in the air path on all log vaporizer designs.
The resistor for the CRZ is free to be removed and replaced quite easily from what Rick has stated. The CRZ also has an open hole between the lower cavity and the core to allow this. The air will follow the path of least resistance and only air from the intake holes will pass through the core. The bottom cavity is just a dead air space. As long as there is nothing hazardous in the bottom cavity, there are no concerns. I know of no hazardous materials in the bottom cavity of the CRZ. The bottom cavity of the HI is just the space between the thread in heating element and the bottom of the core. A very tiny empty space.
Edit - The hole separating the core from bottom cavity is 5/16" in diameter. Just large enough for the resistor to pass.
generally, not referencing any particular design, the air intake will depend on the volume of outflow (outward pressure). So, a larger toke could pull air from more than the specific intake holes.
There has been some discussion in other threads about lowering the air pressure in the herb chamber to facilitate vapor extraction. Kind of a related concept. Depends on the design.
stickstones
Vapor concierge
I feel like a fly on the wall of a room full of vape engineers...this is great!
I want to thank all you manufacturers for participating in a mellow, respectful way.
I want to thank all you manufacturers for participating in a mellow, respectful way.