Adhesives, Insulation and Vape Safety

[hazy]

No worries zymos, the point I was trying to make is that it doesn't make sense that the edible part would be toxic also.

Stickstones, unless you're actually combusting it, I can't think of any reason why hot air would suddenly make it poisonous. If anyone can find some examples of wood that does this I would certainly be interested to know.

 

[underdog]

Very true stickstones and I agree with your logic as well. I was just making a general statement of support and agreement with Hazy not one of specific application.

The irritant risks of wood (and similar natural materials) tends to be the inhalation of dust and/or a skin reaction from touching it. Is this a concern for most people? Probably not. Is it something that's good to talk about and discuss the possibilities?

I think we're far off from any kind of testing in this industry as well. As long as we have the prohibition in place and with so many rules from state to state and country to country I doubt any lab or qualified person to do such tests would stick their neck out and touch this subject with a ten foot pole. With the political environment and uncertainty of the subject I can't say I blame them honestly. Until that day comes (if it ever does) I think we're going to have to rely on self-regulation, the consumer steering the product manufacture and development and community discussion like this to keep us on what we all hope and try to ensure is a safe and good path.

One great thing about the Log specific industry is that it's pretty much all craftsman really and as such a lot of times are more willing to discuss things and have a level of transparency that isn't there in more developed industry. It's great that we can all talk (both as manufacturers and as consumers) as openly as we do instead of releasing a public relations statement and after that going the 'no comment' route.

If i had a serious health problem that warranted care in the materials, i would stick only to glass.

Next would be wood, then ceramic and only then metal.

Plastics, soldering, electric circuits and other compounds.. only if there is nothing wrong with you.

For everytime science discovers something new, there is a potential threat to be uncovered or dismissed. So, there is really no way of knowing anything for sure.

It is up to each one, individually, to assess how far down the line you are willing to go.



I agree there should be a pre-defined test but how would you go about it? And wouldn't that be similar or less efective than consulting the bill of material of the vape in question and search for the data sheets with all information about that material?

I think that our improvised way has worked well so far and we have curbed most threats when they happened.

Well said vorrange.

 

[underdog]

::edited: sorry for the back to back post. Thought there was a comment in between.::

 

[darkrom]

I agree there should be a pre-defined test but how would you go about it? And wouldn't that be similar or less efective than consulting the bill of material of the vape in question and search for the data sheets with all information about that material?

I think that our improvised way has worked well so far and we have curbed most threats when they happened.

I agree that we are doing a great job. I just think that with a device to measure any gas output of ALL vapes while heated without any herb loaded, that would be about as good as anyone could ever want. Does the vape allow you to inhale anything besides pure vapor...if so what. I know this isn't exactly an easy task, but it is IMO the ideal situation to see what these vapes put out. You can engineer and think all day, but in the end isn't a simple accurate test the most comforting? First figure out what (if anything AT ALL) is being released besides vapor. Then you geniuses can fix it while us commoners just wait

 

[vorrange]

I agree that we are doing a great job. I just think that with a device to measure any gas output of ALL vapes while heated without any herb loaded, that would be about as good as anyone could ever want. Does the vape allow you to inhale anything besides pure vapor...if so what. I know this isn't exactly an easy task, but it is IMO the ideal situation to see what these vapes put out. You can engineer and think all day, but in the end isn't a simple accurate test the most comforting? First figure out what (if anything AT ALL) is being released besides vapor. Then you geniuses can fix it while us commoners just wait

I am not a lab guy and i don't know much about mass spectrometers and the other devices that Zymos suggested but i believe that they are rather expensive.

Maybe an FC member to access to this kind of equipment, could do a quick test. I wonder if it could be quick though.. no point in losing jobs over this.

 

[hazy]

I agree that we are doing a great job. I just think that with a device to measure any gas output of ALL vapes while heated without any herb loaded, that would be about as good as anyone could ever want. Does the vape allow you to inhale anything besides pure vapor...if so what. I know this isn't exactly an easy task, but it is IMO the ideal situation to see what these vapes put out. You can engineer and think all day, but in the end isn't a simple accurate test the most comforting? First figure out what (if anything AT ALL) is being released besides vapor. Then you geniuses can fix it while us commoners just wait

I think it's one of those things that seems good in theory but would end up just being a pain in the arse and/or abused. I only think it would be of value where the manufacturer was trying to protect trade secrets and was therefore unable to fully disclose the workings and materials of the product like we do here in this forum. Understanding the vaporizer is far more beneficial to the buyer than just blindly believing a test result. Such testing would probably be expensive, adding yet another hurdle to innovation and increasing costs for vaporists. I think it's better if the "commoners" make an informed decision based on common sense. There are plenty of choices out there.

 

[stickstones]

Dave,

I was looking through the thread, and maybe i missed it, but i didn't see a msds sheet on the insulation...only the silicone and glue. Do you have a link?

Also, I would like to revisit design. It appears that the HI, TT and now the Pod all have enclosed airpaths without the use of silicones or adhesives...would you agree? My inital concerns regarding the resistor in the path seem to be unnecessary, as well as present in all log vapes it turns out.

 

[darkrom]

Would a water pipe make any difference when it comes to questionable vapors? Or would we inhale the toxins just as fast as we would the plain old vapor?

 

[Alan]

A water filtration device is also known as a scrubber in the engineering world. I was a maintenance superintendent at a ammonium nitrate production facility (I have worked at some potentially dangerous places) and we used scrubbers to remove the ammonium nitrate dust from the air leaving the production area. Anything that is water soluble in the air will get trapped in the solution. The more concentrated the water became, the less it would dissolve. The surface area of the exposed water will also increase the efficiency of the capture. The smaller in size and larger number of air bubbles plus a longer contact time will result in a greater amount of soluble material entering the solution. Scrubbers work well to remove particulates and cool the air.
I even modified my shop vac to be a scrubber. The hose connected to the side continues through and down to the bottom. I removed the filter bag from the inside and then poured a couple of inches of water at the bottom. The air / dirt coming into the hose must pass through the water before getting pulled out with the fan. The dirt and dust impinge on the water becoming trapped. I just dump the dirty water down the drain like you would with a Rainbow vac. Hell of a lot cheaper than a Rainbow and much more suction. My shop vac never looses suction because there is no paper to get clogged. I can vacuum wet and dry at the same time.
Water filtration can be a good thing.

 

[momofthegoons]

Yes, but would it filter out potential gasses?

 

[Alan]

Yes, but would it filter out potential gasses?

If the gasses are water soluble, they will be taken out.There would need to be some research done to determine the solubility of the potential gasses in water.

If you exhale through a straw in water and blow bubbles, the CO2 is water soluble and will drop the PH of the water (acidic).

 

[zymos]

Also depends how much contact there actually is with the water- regular bong vs shower heard perc., for example...

 

[t-dub]

Or a fritted disc (see my sig), which seems to be the new thing in this world, borrowed from chemistry labs, they have been used for sparging and gas washing for quite some time . . .

"The purpose of sparging is to saturate the enclosed liquid with the gas, often to displace another gaseous component. The purpose of a scrubber or gas-washing bottle is to scrub the gas such that the liquid absorbs one (or more) of the gaseous components to remove it from the gas stream, effectively purifying the gas stream."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laboratory_glassware

 

[zymos]

The word "sparge" comes from the same root as "asparagus", from the use of the ferny leaves of asparagus by priests to sprinkle holy water on people...

 

[t-dub]

The word "sparge" comes from the same root as "asparagus", from the use of the ferny leaves of asparagus by priests to sprinkle holy water on people...

That was interesting, thank you very much, I love learning things like that

 

[Stu]

I recently bought a pyrex scrubber with fritted disk on ebay. I wanted to see if the frit was usable as a water filtration device for vaporizing. I made a little video of my experiment here: http://fuckcombustion.com/threads/david-goldsteins-fritted-disc.5930/page-10#post-236369

If anybody can make any use of this item (I have no use for it myself) or would like to experiment with it, I'd gladly donate it for the cost of the shipping.

 

[underdog]

Dave,

I was looking through the thread, and maybe i missed it, but i didn't see a msds sheet on the insulation...only the silicone and glue. Do you have a link?

Also, I would like to revisit design. It appears that the HI, TT and now the Pod all have enclosed airpaths without the use of silicones or adhesives...would you agree? My inital concerns regarding the resistor in the path seem to be unnecessary, as well as present in all log vapes it turns out.

Oh, I didn't post an MSDS for the insulation since it didn't have any real precautionary statements but if you want to see it here you go: alumina fiber insulation

To answer your specific question on design I would disagree that the HI, TT, PD and the Pod have closed core designs. I would describe a close core (or enclosed airpath as you phrase it) to be one that is physically closed.

I close the core by using the glass bead and silicone to physically plug the hole where the resistor is inserted. This leaves no physical hole for any kind of contaminant to enter the air path whether dust, vapor/fumes, or physical debris.

The HI, TT, Pod and PD Logs you mentioned are by my definition open core designs as they do not physically close the hole where the resistor is inserted. This leaves aphysical hole that dust, vapor/fumes or physical debris could enter the air path through. http://www.burntstone.co.uk/AFmsds.html

 

[stickstones]

Dave,

I think you are mistaken about these vapes. The PD was probably open construction, and I don't know about the Pod, but I think the TT is similar to the HI. I don't see any bottom hole in my HI, and it is fully disassemblable, and Alan has said the HI is closed except for a little pocket at the bottom that is not open to other sources. Maybe Alan can set me straight here if I am mistaken.

I am fairly certain that the screw in design of the HI seals the top chamber from the bottom chamber, making it a closed system. And I certainly don't think any air is getting in through that hole once filled with the resistor.

 

[Alan]

That is correct stickstones. Since the heating element threads into the bottom hole, air cannot flow from the space below the core. It is just a closed air space. Any roasting debris that does fall into this space can easily be cleaned by removing the heating element. Since there are no hazardous materials below the core (or anywhere) there is no concern of hazardous fumes from below the core. I wouldn't be able to seal the core from the center hole anyhow since fumes (if there were any) could get around the outside of the outer sleeve and to the air intake. I just chose to not use any hazardous materials in my design so I wouldn't have to attempt to seal it.

 

[underdog]

Dave,

I think you are mistaken about these vapes. The PD was probably open construction, and I don't know about the Pod, but I think the TT is similar to the HI. I don't see any bottom hole in my HI, and it is fully disassemblable, and Alan has said the HI is closed except for a little pocket at the bottom that is not open to other sources. Maybe Alan can set me straight here if I am mistaken.

I am fairly certain that the screw in design of the HI seals the top chamber from the bottom chamber, making it a closed system. And I certainly don't think any air is getting in through that hole once filled with the resistor.

I have to disagree stickstones, while the PD is by far the most "open" of those designs all of them are open.

The pod design is open because the bottom of heating chamber (core) is not closed where the resistor is inserted and the incoming air travels through the wooden body of the Pod to reach the core.

The PD design is open because the entire bottom of the heating chamber (core) is wide open to the wooden body, the solder/flux joints and the power plug. The PD is the most open of the designs being discussed.

The HI/TT design is open because the bottom of the heating chamber (core) is not closed where the resistor is inserted. As Alan states back in Post #148 :

...The hole separating the core from bottom cavity is 5/16" in diameter. Just large enough for the resistor to pass.

The resistor isn't used to plug this hole (and can't effectively) so the core is left physically open to the wooden body, the solder/flux joints and the power plug (the closed air space Alan refers to in Post #194).

Whether or not any of that warrants any concerns or is problematic wasn't part of the current discussion. The question originally was:

...Also, I would like to revisit design. It appears that the HI, TT and now the Pod all have enclosed airpaths without the use of silicones or adhesives...would you agree?

So, again, to answer the question.. no, I disagree as I've explained above.

 

[zmurder]

The resistor isn't used to plug this hole (and can't effectively) so the core is left physically open to the wooden body, the solder/flux joints and the power plug (the closed air space Alan refers to in Post #194).

(I just took apart my HI to check)

The resistor does plug the hole, thus sealing it from below.....it screws right up in there. BUT you are correct that a small amount of wood is exposed to the hot air path right above the resistor's base. It seems incorrect to me to say that the hot air path is open to the power plug, since that is below the complete seal made by the resistor's base screwing into the wood path leading up to the vape's core.

 

[underdog]

Thanks for checking on that zmurder, I don't have an HI so I'm just going on other peoples statements and pictures. I didn't say the hot air path is open to anything just that the core, which includes the air path is physically open and not able to keep things isolated. With the plug I mean that the back end of it, where the resistor leads are soldered on are in that lower chamber which isn't isolated from the top.

If you turn your HI upside down for vapor bonging and it's possible for stuff (wood dust, debris, whatever) to fall down in there, not necessarily a problem but it is a possibility.

Does anyone have a HI core that's not in an HI? If someone could snap a picture of what the bottom of the core looks like with the resistor inserted it's normal depth then we could have a better idea of what we're talking about.

 

[momofthegoons]

I have done some online Googling of Burntstone Ceramic and have discovered that it is a name of a distributor in the UK, not the brand name of the insulation used. Alumina fiber insulation is the type of insulation, but not the brand. Dave, could you please provide the actual brand name of the product you use so that I could look up that individual product's MSDS sheet?

 

[underdog]

MoTG I don't have more info so no-can-do. A printed version of the MSDS that I linked to is what was included with the insulation I got. A lot of materials supplied buy industrial supply houses aren't brand-specific which is why they will use a single MSDS to cover items of a same type. So when the MSDS I linked says: Manufacturer > Various that's all we get.

 

[momofthegoons]

I was just wondering. There are several brands of alumina fiber insulation, all with their own MSDS sheets. I had hoped we could figure out which one it was. I was also hoping for a MSDS sheet that was a bit more current; this one is 12 years old. But, if you don't know the brand, you don't know the brand. Thanks.