nms
Well-Known Member
I am still a newbie, but I can attest that the best way to learn something is to have a reason to learn it for!
Arizer portable heater tech discussion
- Thread starter stickstones
- Start date
OF
Well-Known Member
The ceramic body is isolated from the air path? I believe this is not right according to the pictures shown previously. This would also make it impossible for hotter air(than oven air) to enter the oven which is obviously happening. I think you have a personal deal against solo being convection
No, that's not what I said, did I? I said " is buried in a ceramic body isolated from the airpath", the ceramic body isolates the metal?
You might see my instance it's conduction (and I suggest I've 'won over' most who objectively looked at this) as a 'personal deal' but I see it as actually understanding the technical terms bantied about by those who don't seem to. Do you have any evidence you can point to that I'm incorrect in that? Just because sales types told you so, and you wish it was true since you know 'convection is better' doesn't make it so.
What evidence do you have for "This would also make it impossible for hotter air(than oven air) to enter the oven which is obviously happening"? How, exactly, is this obviously happening? TIA. There was considerable effort to show this by well intentioned Members earlier in this thread, they failed to show any air hotter. Arguments were made then that the very minor contact with the vent hole walls was superheating the air. Is this what you claim? I've suggested a simple test (pulling the stem up so conduction is blocked) that seems to show the heated air is not sufficiently hot to support normal vaporization. As you would expect following Thermodynamics.
If we're going to use technical terms (which I think is generally a good idea) we should do so accurately.
No magic or unicorn action here.
OF
nms
Well-Known Member
Misunderstanding on the ceramic body.
I won't go into this but I'll go into something else:
List of fallacies:
Moving the goalposts (raising the bar) – argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded.
Appeal to science
As you can see, I'd love to discuss this objectively, but I don't find room to do so. I apologize dearly if I am wrong to you and all members, as it is a clear possibility. My belief was based on the limited research done in this topic, and my conclusions were taken from that. Since this discussion heavily abuses fallacious logic, I won't have it. You may be absolutely right, but this is not the kind of environment where I find a discussion valuable. I mean no disrespect and I don't mean to attack you.
I won't go into this but I'll go into something else:
List of fallacies:
Ad Hominem/Poisoning the Well: Attacking the people argumenting in order to reduce their credibility.
Ad Hominem/Poisoning the Well:
Moving the goalposts (raising the bar) – argument in which evidence presented in response to a specific claim is dismissed and some other (often greater) evidence is demanded.
Appeal to the stone (argumentum ad lapidem) – dismissing a claim as absurd without demonstrating proof for its absurdity.
Appeal to science
As you can see, I'd love to discuss this objectively, but I don't find room to do so. I apologize dearly if I am wrong to you and all members, as it is a clear possibility. My belief was based on the limited research done in this topic, and my conclusions were taken from that. Since this discussion heavily abuses fallacious logic, I won't have it. You may be absolutely right, but this is not the kind of environment where I find a discussion valuable. I mean no disrespect and I don't mean to attack you.
OF
Well-Known Member
So, cheap shots aside, you don't have any evidence to offer? Understood. This is a Forum, for the exchange of ideas? I've presented mine with the reasoning and citations to support them. I'm ready to defend my understanding with logic, established principles and examples (including proposed experiment to test them).
Again, if you read back in this thread you'll see that those who insisted otherwise made some honest mistakes on how Thermocouples work and when these errors were explained dropped the issue. And if you read Solo/Air/ArGo threads you'll find many people saying '....since this a conduction vape....' where a few years back that didn't happen.
Thanks for your opinions, but for now I see them as nothing more than that, opinions without any support. I offer support, I believe, and so far nobody has found fault with that. Including you?
Regards to all.
OF
nms
Well-Known Member
Alright, if you can put your cheap shots aside, I'll go in for a productive discussion. If cheap shots come into play again I'll vanish from the thread, as I have no personal vendetta, affiliation or particular love for any device.
There are two or three main points where people have failed to agree:
- The heater's ability to heat the air that goes around it and to the heating chamber:
I'd appreciate if we could make an estimation of the heater surface area and use the average measurements taken from the heater temperature which was above 300ºC and see if it is indeed possible to heat the air above oven temperature according to math, both for still air and for different air flow speeds.
Edit: To be considered that if for some weird reason the big temperature drop, expected after draw(not seen in the graphics, maybe due to sample rate or whatever else to be defined) made the heater overshoot temperature right on draw start, there is a possibility to be quantified, that the temperature increase seen could be by conduction causing an increase in oven temperature after draw. I find it weird that this effect would have such instant responsivity, because conduction means going from ceramic to metal, to glass, to herb, to thermocouple, but until some math is done, this is also a possibility.
- Explaining why in the graphs done the temperature increases for the whole duration of the draw. A few attempts at this were made. This energy must come from somewhere and given the small surface area of the thermocouple and limited air heat transfer adding that conduction cannot transmit more power during draw(edit: unless we consider the possibility of temperature overshoot mentioned above), as cold air would otherwise cool the chamber, we can only assume it comes from hotter air, which would mean convection. I'd be happy to see other alternatives for this.
- If there is convection if it can be sustained continuously, meaning the heater can keep the moving air hotter during draw, or if it is only able to heat the air above oven temperature while the air is still. I assume this would result in temperature decrease mid draw as cold air cools the oven.
If we can objectively address all these issues, maybe we can finally come into an agreement.
There are two or three main points where people have failed to agree:
- The heater's ability to heat the air that goes around it and to the heating chamber:
I'd appreciate if we could make an estimation of the heater surface area and use the average measurements taken from the heater temperature which was above 300ºC and see if it is indeed possible to heat the air above oven temperature according to math, both for still air and for different air flow speeds.
Edit: To be considered that if for some weird reason the big temperature drop, expected after draw(not seen in the graphics, maybe due to sample rate or whatever else to be defined) made the heater overshoot temperature right on draw start, there is a possibility to be quantified, that the temperature increase seen could be by conduction causing an increase in oven temperature after draw. I find it weird that this effect would have such instant responsivity, because conduction means going from ceramic to metal, to glass, to herb, to thermocouple, but until some math is done, this is also a possibility.
- Explaining why in the graphs done the temperature increases for the whole duration of the draw. A few attempts at this were made. This energy must come from somewhere and given the small surface area of the thermocouple and limited air heat transfer adding that conduction cannot transmit more power during draw(edit: unless we consider the possibility of temperature overshoot mentioned above), as cold air would otherwise cool the chamber, we can only assume it comes from hotter air, which would mean convection. I'd be happy to see other alternatives for this.
- If there is convection if it can be sustained continuously, meaning the heater can keep the moving air hotter during draw, or if it is only able to heat the air above oven temperature while the air is still. I assume this would result in temperature decrease mid draw as cold air cools the oven.
If we can objectively address all these issues, maybe we can finally come into an agreement.
Last edited:
KeroZen
Chronic vapaholic
Curiosity my dear, curiosity...
But indeed since it's a sensored system, resistance change doesn't matter much. But current must still be monitored in case the material has a negative coefficient and resistance lowers as temperature rises, as to not exceed the power supply capabilities.
other design elements can reduce the current draw - for example, my heater wants to pull 20 amps (6.4 volts, .33 ohms) from my LiFePO4 batteries (they can supply 70 amps continuous) but the 16ga power cable probably limits that to below 10amps.
My heater with the PWM wide open (100% duty cycle) increases temperature at 40°F per second. There must be a formula for calculating power draw from that factoid.
i still would like to know the formula for heat transfer to the air passing the heater walls. Even in an idealized case.
Last edited:
nms
Well-Known Member
It is not at all a simple deal as with conduction, because in conduction both parts of the system are static, in convection, even without forcing air movement, the air does move as it heats.
en.wikipedia.org
en.wikipedia.org
Heat transfer - Wikipedia
Convection - Wikipedia
OF
Well-Known Member
I'm not aware of any, such systems end up being mighty complex what with heat losses, air flow rates and so on.
All is not lost, however. You can measure the average current over time to maintain temperature, then measure again under typical airflows, again when holding temperature in regulation. The extra power (current times voltage) is the heat that's being transferred into airflow.
For sure not simple. Remember when a conduction system is making vapor (which it does almost constantly in standby), heat (energy) is also used up making that vapor. If it condenses again locally, no net loss, but if, OTOH, the vapor leaves......
I don't think you can always say heat is being transferred to the load in convection. In many cases (like say Go) there is nothing to force a significant amount of heated air into the load until you hit it. Rather there, heated air simply 'backs up' and out the inlet ports since there's basically no resistance that way as opposed to through the load.
And that, coupled with the much higher heater temperatures (therefore greater conductive losses to the outside) and generally higher airflow if convection systems contribute to the much deserved reputation of convection being a serious power hog. This clue, alone, should be enough to convince folks that the outstanding battery life alone means Solo isn't using convection?
Curiosity my dear, curiosity...
But indeed since it's a sensored system, resistance change doesn't matter much. But current must still be monitored in case the material has a negative coefficient and resistance lowers as temperature rises, as to not exceed the power supply capabilities.
Good point, as long as the heater is 'in the loop' errors will be sensed and compensated for. I'd never stopped to consider protecting the power supply in that case as 'worst case' design usually covers this. Still a good point.
Regards to all.
OF
nms
Well-Known Member
OF, pure convection is indeed all that, because you need to transfer 200ºC of heat energy into ambient temperature weed through air alone. That's a lot of energy to transfer via a low heat capacity, short conduction span fluid**. But on hybrid devices, the oven is generally put to a stable temperature near the intended vaporization temperature`*. The air reaching this, doesn't need to transfer that much energy to elevate the temperature just a few more degrees. This doesn't mean that convection is no longer happening, as I've come to believe, air a few degrees above the temperature in the oven will transfer this additional energy to the weed as it passes through, and this is a fluid transfering heat, so it's convection, and this does change the experience, opposite to entirely cold air going through, which despite being convection, would be cooling convection and receive* heat from the weed. **
Last edited:
OF
Well-Known Member
I'm with you (I think) right up to the hybrid devices part. I know of no such vapes (where useful vapor is produced by conduction and superheated air), do you? Conduction means that the load temperature will eventually reach the temperature of the oven body it's in. This is the hottest source in the vape? No air heated to a higher temperature than that can happen by conduction from that hot body to cooler air. Any such heated air will always come out cooler than the cup body, even if it makes truly serious contact which Solo cannot do due to the very very small fraction of the air molecules rushing through the ports that actually contact heated metal. Even molecules that come very close are blocked from direct cntact by the 'boundry layer' of air immediately in contact with the surface which is not actually moving (as happens in high speed airplanes, boat hulls and such.
I've been thinking of a true hybrid vape since someone here suggested it a bit ago. One with two separate heater systems. Interesting idea but I'm not sure how well it would work out in practice. Holding the load at temperature before hotter air is introduced could be a fast track to combustion? What would limit the temperature of the load in such cases?
Again, I know of now available vapes that can honestly demonstrate hybrid vapor production, does anyone?
Fun stuff.
OF
nms
Well-Known Member
I think you forget one detail:
The air goes in direct contact with the heater for a given amount of time. The weed does not.
Conduction takes time and while transfers heat in faster it also transfers heat out faster.
The heat from the heater, the hotest part in the system will first heat the ceramic element, which is also in contact with air and as measured before with whatever error at more than 300ºC, then it will heat the metal chamber, then it will heat the glass(this for sure will take a while) and then it will heat the outer weed as it crawls to the inner weed. Last two should be pretty slow deals.
Is it so hard to believe that convection plays and important role and that air is indeed transfering acquired heat from the ceramic element to the herb in the chamber faster than conduction can provide it?
This is the question I think math would solve. I don't have the background to do this right now nor the time to learn it, if I do find the time I will but for now I'd just hope that someone else could fill the void in my ignorance with the necessary math. I'm sure we can find someone, or re-post this in a forum more inclined to such topics.
PS: Also the thermistor in the center of the weed test wouldn't actually result in lower temperature during draw if no coming air was adding energy and was removing it instead? What explanation do you have for this detail? Even if the heater suddenly overshoots temperature how can it travel all media to provide such a responsive heat increase to the center of the chamber? If no energy was being provided by the air but removed how would the balance allow this to happen?
The air goes in direct contact with the heater for a given amount of time. The weed does not.
Conduction takes time and while transfers heat in faster it also transfers heat out faster.
The heat from the heater, the hotest part in the system will first heat the ceramic element, which is also in contact with air and as measured before with whatever error at more than 300ºC, then it will heat the metal chamber, then it will heat the glass(this for sure will take a while) and then it will heat the outer weed as it crawls to the inner weed. Last two should be pretty slow deals.
Is it so hard to believe that convection plays and important role and that air is indeed transfering acquired heat from the ceramic element to the herb in the chamber faster than conduction can provide it?
This is the question I think math would solve. I don't have the background to do this right now nor the time to learn it, if I do find the time I will but for now I'd just hope that someone else could fill the void in my ignorance with the necessary math. I'm sure we can find someone, or re-post this in a forum more inclined to such topics.
PS: Also the thermistor in the center of the weed test wouldn't actually result in lower temperature during draw if no coming air was adding energy and was removing it instead? What explanation do you have for this detail? Even if the heater suddenly overshoots temperature how can it travel all media to provide such a responsive heat increase to the center of the chamber? If no energy was being provided by the air but removed how would the balance allow this to happen?
Last edited:
OF
Well-Known Member
I don't think I've missed anything, but will consider it. Thanks.
Do you have evidence of this "more than 300C" temperature? I sure didn't find it. I think you're a bit mistaken in how the oven is assembled. Please check out the seventh photo on the right side:
Arizer Air 2 Teardown and Disassembly | Best Vaporizers
Arizer finally dropped the upgraded Solo 2 and Air 2; this Summer we did a full teardown of the Solo II and now the Air II is getting the same treatment.
You can see the heater, screwed against the bottom of the oven body? That thing of the other side is the temperature sensor (where the small leads go). That is the point that's regulated, the heater body. Due to the excellent conduction between heater and cup the cup is very close to this same temperature, close enough I think for us to ignore differences? But for sure there's not 100C difference there...... If there was, as you point out conduction would slowly pull the cup up to 300C at idle? This (knowing that conduction takes time) is why I'm so confident the heater body (or cup) is not an important source of heat to the incoming air.
Thank you, I don't know the vape, never even touched one. Do you by chance know of any documentation or teardown photos of this? What are the two temperatures? Is the 'convection' really hotter or is it simply a different implementation of preheater (which will, of course, boost vapor production by 'stealing less heat' but will in fact make no vapor on it's own)?
Without peeking I'm sure the maker claims
I assume you own one, how does it behave in use? Does a heat soak (no draw) improve the next hit like a typical conduction vape? Or does a pause let the load cool and make it harder to get a hit going on the next pull like typical Convection vapes do? Can you keep pulling and end up combusting (another convection trait)? How's the battery life (convection is a power hog)? TIA
For sure no such set up exists in Solo. It might with this one? Thanks for the lead, but I think I need to understand a bit more to comment intelligently.
OF
nms
Well-Known Member
The blue (and white) wire does power the heater, but it is the lower "donut". The upper donut has clear leads and is the temp sensor.
Edit: I took some pictures to show the donuts better. Notice the blue and white/clear wires going to the bottom donut (heater).
Here you see the clear wires going into the temp sensor on the upper donut.
I ran an experiment measuring both ceramic discs during heatup to 7:
Notice that the heater gets hotter than it did in my first graph comparing the heater to the chamber floor. I'm thinking that is due to the fact that this test was run just like you see it in the pictures, exposed and outside of it's normal home where it is insulated a bit (first test was done with the entire assembly put back together). The heater in turn has to work harder to get the temp sensor to read ~260°C. That's the max temp the heater reached in my first test so it seems that Arizer programmed setting 7 to be 260°ish at the only sensor.
The fact that this was in question boggled my mind as well. That's why I felt that it needed to be addressed.
The chamber wall is possibly at a lower temperature, because it is in contact with the upper disc, which does not contain the heater, the lower one does. That's how I understood it. I would assume there is a gradient from the lower disc to the top disc of decreasing temperature, but the temperature of this disc assembly is still higher than the temperature at the center of the filled oven according to the graphs posted before, so while the average of the heater assembly may not be as high, it'll still be higher than the herb temperature, and the consideration as to whether this heat will transfer to the air and subsequently to the herb, remains.
Temperature is measured on the second disc, and is regulated based on the input here. I don't think you can get the system to 300ºC on the oven wall, let alone the herb, because as much as conduction heats the second disc, the oven wall, the glass and the herb, all these media loose heat by conduction just as fast. Remember that the glass will be a huge heat sink, and so will the chassis. So even with the heater always on, it'd never happen. Also it's easy to forget the chamber is isolated from the chamber wall. It is in contact with glass that will be a retardant on any heat energy applied through the wall and unlike other conduction vaporizers with closed chambers, loose heat through the rest of itself, keeping the herb at a lower temperature than what is provided by the wall at all times.
Last edited:
nms
Well-Known Member
Marcus Storz got a patent for hybrid tech. He then used that tech to create the Volcano Hybrid. Also the new Firewood touts adding conduction to it's mostly convection design.
Oh, and of course Arizer portables.
There are plenty of others as well. It's not a short list.
My current under test belief is that the delayed conduction in the solo from the conductive heat pathway(disc 0-> disc 1-> metal wall-> glass -> herb->herb), as well as the associated pathways of heat loss is the great engineering achievement that permits it to be a true hybrid from a single heater.
Farid
Well-Known Member
Has anyone considered modeling the arizer heater in CAD and performing a finite element analysis? I don't think experiments with temperature probes provide enough information to get a full understanding of the heat transfer at play.
My gut tells me that what OF says is closer to the truth, mostly because the design of the heater doesn't seem to facilitate convective heat transfer. There just isn't a great enough heater surface area to air volume ratio for me to believe that the heater is capable of heating the incoming air to vaporization temperatures, even for a second.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you assuming the flow around the heater to be laminar? Because it's my understanding that if the flow is turbulent there will be more mixing between the boundary layer (heated air in this case) and the bulk fluid. Not that I think this would be enough heated air to heat the rest of the incoming air enough to contribute to vaporization of the load.
My gut tells me that what OF says is closer to the truth, mostly because the design of the heater doesn't seem to facilitate convective heat transfer. There just isn't a great enough heater surface area to air volume ratio for me to believe that the heater is capable of heating the incoming air to vaporization temperatures, even for a second.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but are you assuming the flow around the heater to be laminar? Because it's my understanding that if the flow is turbulent there will be more mixing between the boundary layer (heated air in this case) and the bulk fluid. Not that I think this would be enough heated air to heat the rest of the incoming air enough to contribute to vaporization of the load.
nms
Well-Known Member
Sounds like you're the guy to do it! Wouldn't it be fun to decypher this mystery with a nice simulation once and for all? I get the feeling you've got the experience we've been missing here.
I'm not entirely sure on how much air goes around the heater and if there's enough contact for convection to happen as hypothesized. Such hypothesis comes into play as a way to explain:
"Also the thermistor in the center of the weed test wouldn't actually result in lower temperature during draw if no coming air was adding energy and was removing it instead? What explanation do you have for this detail? Even if the heater suddenly overshoots temperature how can it travel all media to provide such a responsive heat increase to the center of the chamber? If no energy was being provided by the air but removed how would the balance allow this to happen? "
OF
Well-Known Member
Yep, I agree, if such heating of the air was a major factor you'd expect different construction (like lots of exposed metal to heat the air and channeling to control it) like you find with convection vapes?
Yes, it's not streamlined in there, but turbulent flow is a relative thing. At the atomic level, passing molecules are prevented from making 'hard contact' for the most part by a layer of molecules against the surface which aren't themselves moving. Heating of passing air must be minor, the heated air averaging much lower temperature? Normally we find structures like in Go? Or VG, lots of hot surface. And much hotter surfaces. Or, taken a step further, the thermal cores that Thermovape used where the entire body runs at about 1300F so that IR is flying all around a much larger area (volume, actually) for the air to pass through and get heated by IR (not contact as might happen here).
Again, I suggested an experiment a while back. Easier to do with ArGo, but still easy enough with Solo/Air. Insert a stem into a hot oven with no draw (no possible convection) and let it soak before taking a hit. Then insert a (cold) stem into the seal but not all the way into the oven (convection possible, but not conduction). Puff away, using all the convection possible. Which gives results more like normal? Have you done that? What did you find?
Still wondering how the 'two heater' hybrid system I'm informed of works. What are the two temperatures and how are they related to the 'dialed up' temperature displayed? Anyone know?
Thanks.
OF
Farid
Well-Known Member
My guess is that the heat transferred by conduction heats the bottom and outer layers of the herb first, as it heat soaks through the rest of the chamber. When you take a draw, that hot vapor is displaced, passing over the thermistor in the center. While this seems like convection, since hot fluid is seeming to change the temperature within the load, in order to qualify as convection vaporization that hot air needs to contribute to the vaporization of the load. Meaning that the temperature change needs to be significant enough to heat the herb to reach vaporization temperatures.
I think this design contributes to the good flavor the Solo is known for. Since the center/top of the herb takes a long time to heat soak you get many hits which taste great and produce vapor, the vapor being produced from the edges of the load, and the flavor being preserved in the middle. Then once the oven finally heat soaks the middle gets vaporized and the last few hits lose that flavor.
I think a lot of people mistake the fact that the flavor is preserved so well to mean that the oven has convection heating at play. Once we divorce ourselves from the notion that convection is naturally better (which I disagree with vehemently, and I imagine OF does as well) this discussion becomes a lot easier, since saying the Solo is conduction is no longer perceived as pejorative.
Sort of a side note, but this topic (vaporizer heat transfer, not arizers specifically) was topic for my heat transfer final project. I discussed how convection is perceived to be superior, and how people often project this onto their beloved vaporizer of choice - and how manufacturers sometimes adapt to this by advertising their vaporizers accordingly. My professor remarked how it's not exactly a lie to call all vaporizers convection, so long as they don't specify that they mean convection cooling and not heating in many cases
Last edited:
It doesn't look like the video is embedding for some reason, here's a link if its not displaying:
Yes the convection mode is proper, if anything I would say the conduction aspect serves as the "preheater" (similar to a comment @nemesis_567 made earlier about conduction serving to keeping the load at temperature) but in reality both modes of heat transfer produce vapor in that device. You can easily observe the conduction power by adding a bit of hash or extract to the bowl and watching it vaporize directly off the conductive ring which encompasses the bowl.
Yes I own one as well as Arizer portables so Im familiar with both platforms.
Pausing the session does not cool the load because the hybrid heating utilizes conduction to keep the load at temperature. This is why the Mighty allows pretty dense vapor with rather short inhalations, at lower temperature settings than most vaporizers. It's not like the Arizers where it needs a heat soak between hits. With the Mighty you can see vapor ooze out of the mouthpiece like the end of a lit cigarette when you're not inhaling.
The battery life is quite respectable for a single 18650 (Crafty) or dual 18650 (Mighty) design still to this day and I believe the conduction aspect helps out a lot there compared to pure convection devices. I would say the Crafty is probably really close to the Air in terms of number of bowls per charge.
Other differences is the S&B vapes use an aluminum conduction ring/convection heater versus Arizers stainless steel floor which as you know aluminum being many times more thermally conductive, should increase efficiency. Also the conduction ring on the S&B vapes has much more surface area than the Arizer heater, so there is more direct conduction contact in the Mighty, even if we were to exclude the convection element below the bowl entirely.
I think I've read of a few runaways occuring over the years regarding combustion (these are pretty old devices at this point) but its not something that is typically possible to combust with. The maximum indicated temperature on the display is 410F so it's not designed to really ride the edge of combustion.
That just goes to show how different we all are which I think is beautiful because, IMO it's one of the worst tasting vapes ever. My Arizers vape completely unevenly unless I do the most drawn out of temp stepping, thus I find it to be one of the fastest vapes at turning to "popcorn" because of that. I honestly despise the grassy, green chlorophyll hit from the first draw or two that so many people love off the Arizers.
Farid
Well-Known Member
@invertedisdead When I say good tasting, I should have specified I meant good tasting compared to other conduction session vapes. I agree that convection vapes often taste better, but I think this comes at a cost: hotter, harsher vapor that needs conditioning, larger chance of combustion, the need for stirring, and often (not always) less dense vapor on the beginning of the inhale.
Wrt "hybrid" heating, as shown in the mighty video, I wonder what temperature the conduction oven gets to. If the conduction element preheats below vaporization temperature, but above ambient air temp thus reducing ∆T needed to be achieved by the convection, does that still constitute conduction heating? I agree it changes the function of the vaporizer, but is it technically "hybrid" or is the convection still the heat transfer which vaporizes the load?
I think this is where OF is coming from when he says "hybrid heating doesn't exist in any vaporizer he knows of". If it did, I think combustion would be an issue. The only way I can see hybrid heating really working in a vaporizer would be if one section of herb is heated by conduction and another section by convection. But if the same herb is heated to vaporization temps by conduction and convection simultaneously wouldn't the convection element push things over the edge into combustion during the inhale?
EDIT: thinking more about this, I think there is potential for conduction and convection to work simultaneously on the same herb as a hybrid since vaporization occurs across a range of temperatures. The conduction element could be set at the low temp levels of vaporization, and the convection could bring the load to the higher temp levels. I still don't believe this is at play in the Solo based on the small surface area of the heater, but it seems very possible in the mighty. Not having owned a mighty sort of disqualifies me from discussing it in depth.
Wrt "hybrid" heating, as shown in the mighty video, I wonder what temperature the conduction oven gets to. If the conduction element preheats below vaporization temperature, but above ambient air temp thus reducing ∆T needed to be achieved by the convection, does that still constitute conduction heating? I agree it changes the function of the vaporizer, but is it technically "hybrid" or is the convection still the heat transfer which vaporizes the load?
I think this is where OF is coming from when he says "hybrid heating doesn't exist in any vaporizer he knows of". If it did, I think combustion would be an issue. The only way I can see hybrid heating really working in a vaporizer would be if one section of herb is heated by conduction and another section by convection. But if the same herb is heated to vaporization temps by conduction and convection simultaneously wouldn't the convection element push things over the edge into combustion during the inhale?
EDIT: thinking more about this, I think there is potential for conduction and convection to work simultaneously on the same herb as a hybrid since vaporization occurs across a range of temperatures. The conduction element could be set at the low temp levels of vaporization, and the convection could bring the load to the higher temp levels. I still don't believe this is at play in the Solo based on the small surface area of the heater, but it seems very possible in the mighty. Not having owned a mighty sort of disqualifies me from discussing it in depth.
Last edited:
OF
Well-Known Member
Marcus Storz got a patent for hybrid tech. He then used that tech to create the Volcano Hybrid. Also the new Firewood touts adding conduction to it's mostly convection design.
Oh, and of course Arizer portables.
There are plenty of others as well. It's not a short list.
Thanks, Stu. So I got curious about Volcano which I've seen/used only once (and the owner wasn't in favor of me taking it apart for some reason....). So I went to Al Gore's web to try to find an example of this 'two heater' system. I found this peek inside:
Looks like a single heater with single point temperature control to me, although I couldn't find the sensor in that video. As I recall, we loaded the herb and started it up and blew bags from the exhaust (the air pump ran the show, constant flow?) in one pass? I don't really see a conduction path to the load (past minor heating from the screen?) I'd call this convection? I also found this photo of the original (mechanical) one that clearly shows the thermostat attached to the (only) heater.
Redirect Notice
www.google.com
Now even more confused.......
OF