Taste and heat are subjective matters.
The question of taste and heat is a subjective matter.
Discontinued The Grasshopper
- Thread starter midgetsanchez
- Start date
The question of taste and heat is a subjective matter.
peaceonearth
high since 1968
As a famous non-inhaler once said, it depends on the meaning of the word "is".
lwien
Well-Known Member
My bad. You are absolutely correct. Fucking memory.......
!! I remembered the wires and the heat so I put 'em together. Totally forgot about the silicone.Thanks for the correction, Ratchett.........seriously.
Here's from Grasshopper's product description,
"The case snugly suspends your Grasshopper within a tube to prevent any rattling or scratching."
Edwardo
Active Member
I'm 99% sure that any off gassing will be residue left over IN the actual heating core - the sintering process is a messy one, and needs washed through thoroughly. here is a link describing a similar process
http://www.rha-audio.com/uk/articles/an-introduction-to-metal-injection-moulding/
(injection moulding in this case, rather than additive 'printing', but its similar in terms of having to remove polymers from the compound after moulding/printing).
So the SS outer casing provides the connection for transmitting data between microprocessors, but does it also power the heater? Im not sure it will as powering anything requires a +ve and a -ve, so there may well still be wires.
It would seem that the clicker has two physical states, 'on' and 'off', hence why it takes two clicks to turn it back on once its timed out and gone to sleep. This is good surely? It means the ONLY way to accidentally turn the HEATER on is by clicking it on, which would be quite difficult. Accidentally bridging a connection with a metal object sounds like it is just 'tricking' the unit into thinking its being charged, which it soon realises isn't the case and lights go back off. The drain on the battery will be negligible when this happens. I had read that it doesn't matter a jott whether my crafty's vibrator was on or off, or how bright the LEDs were, or how often the bluetooth chip was used - it is negligible compared to power consumed by the heater (it maybe equates to a few seconds of heat). I recon it would take days to run the battery down with the LED lights alone (assuming some sort of metal object was bridging the connection for the whole time). I would bet money on the heater NOT coming on in this senario (based on the fact that it takes 2 clicks to turn the heater back on after it has gone to sleep - one to get back to the 'off' position, a second click to turn the unit back on). A more interesting experiment would be to turn the unit ON, let it go to 'sleep', and whilst the clicker is still in the 'on' position (but the heater is cool) bridge the connection at the bottom with something metal and see if it triggers the heater to go back on.
I would agree with Ratchet that the clicking noise is probably the heater turning on/off maintaining temp, or perhaps expansion and contraction noises? (Another thing to note about the sintering process is that its moulded/printed X% larger than required as its shrinks down significantly once the polymers are removed).
Lastly, I wouldn't blow through the inlet holes and assume exactly the same thing is happening as when you suck through the mouth piece - fluid mechanics is a funny old black art as much as it is a science, sort of. Turbulence is unpredictable. Fashion a suction devise out of something - an old bicycle pump, balloon pump, or that ominous looking pump devise you keep hidden under your bed
![:\](/i/s/hmm.gif "Hmm :\")
sorry, long ramble, just my
Yes, I had questions about this myself. I actually emailed Trevor to discuss how they were 3D printing, but he wouldn't divulge his secrets for obvious reasons
There are several different ways to 3D print metal, it's tough to know what method they're using and what polymers would be involved in the manufacturing process. However here was Trevor's response to my email regarding the heater's vapor path:
Uzer
Well-Known Member
What does that even mean?
Edwardo
Active Member
I don't think we need to know the specifics, all these processes largely involve the same stages: moulding or printing as a steel/plastic compound; melt/burn/chemically dissolve the plastic percentage of the compound; bake the resulting part in an oven at about 2000C to shrink it down; wash it, wash it again, and a few more times after that. The heating element has been 'cooked' at 10x the temperature we will ever run it at, so its safe to say that there will be no plastic content left in the heater, but there is likely to be residue from whatever they wash the parts with (probably ISO at the end). As this part has been printed (not moulded) it is likely to have complicated inner shapes going on that might be prone to trapping residue (my guess is several helix shapes, maybe 6, that wind around each other and taper to narrower apertures at the mouthpiece end - but just a hypothesis). Or the printed part may be like an 'aero foam' type structure, which would be prone to trapping residue. I believe Trevor when he wrote "Rest assured this is a non issue". Its likely that this 'issue' will vary a LOT from unit to unit, but will ultimately be fine. Worry ye not!
Uzer
Well-Known Member
It was a response about the off-gassing not the design of the heater. Concerns about that initial off-gassing are legit questions and I would imagine (hope) they would want to be doing everything they could to explain what is likely happening and why it isn't an issue. Unless there was more to Trevor's response than what Ratchet posted, he didn't actually answer the question.
I don't know which metal 3D printing technology you've seen, but every metal 3D printer I've worked with uses an injet style printer head to spray droplets of organic binding agents over a bed of powdered metal. The part is then fired in a kiln and post processed.
Here's a video for anyone curious of the method I assumed they may be using:
When Trevor said "Rest assured this is a non issue", he was actually referring to my main question about remaining debris in the vapor path caused by the powder based printing method shown in the video clip above.
There are other ways of 3D printing Aluminum which involve lasers to directly sinter the powdered metal (Shapeways is working on a beta program for that material currently). This printing process would require no post-process firing in a kiln if I'm not mistaken.
i find it interesting that people are doing something to the device that the manufacture specifically stated not to do, they get an abnormal response ("offgassing", if thats what it really is), and then complain about it.
until someone does an actual suction test, using the device as its designed, and then gets legitimate "offgassing", we should leave this "issue" be.
all in my humble opinion of course. which is worth nothing.
until someone does an actual suction test, using the device as its designed, and then gets legitimate "offgassing", we should leave this "issue" be.
all in my humble opinion of course. which is worth nothing.
421
Well-Known Member
doing a burn-in with no bud on a new vape is very frequently recommended here
also the test you are suggesting is highly dangerous
RUDE BOY
Space is the Place
But You would have to take hits off of the GH to do Burn-ins and inhale any "off gassing" vapors, since it only heats as you hit it you can't just turn it on and let it "burn off" like you would a session style vape that's always heating up. that doesn't sound healthy or fun if it were to "off gas" at all.
Hits don't necessarily require inhalation - fast repetitious deep puffs, like with a cigar or tobacco pipe, should be plenty sufficient to activate a hardy convection process and burn-off.
lwien
Well-Known Member
I wouldn't want ANY off gassing in my lungs............or my mouth.
natural farmer
Well-Known Member
Actually you wouldn't have to draw since the residue is probably not in the chamber (it is easy to get rid of it in there with some ISO and q-tips), but on the heater itself. So even if you don't draw the burn-in will happen…
how is the test im suggesting dangerous? all i recommended was using the device in a way that its designed, to test for offgassing.
also, i see no problem testing a new device for offgassing, or doing a burn in. though i do see a problem doing something to the device that they specifically state NOT to do.
sorry for stirring the pot. its just my opinion, i'll leave it alone at this point.
421
Well-Known Member
because you're recommending to inhale the offgas
nowhere did i state to inhale anything. all i was saying is we need some kind of suction test to SIMULATE using the device in a real life scenario, as intended. kind of like one of the first grasshopper test videos we saw, with the vacuum pump and the large glass container.
for real though, im leaving it alone at this point. just my opinion. i will continue to observe from the sidelines from now on...
Fenton Mewley
A man in search of cloudier pastures
AKA a third lung.
421
Well-Known Member
u never said simulate or kind of suction test. most ppl would read what you said and try testing via inhalation.
apologies if i misunderstood u but pls try to be more clear.
Severmore
Well-Known Member
Exhaling directly into the mouthpiece and blowing in the fresh air intake are two very different things IMO
