Colie Glass
- Thread starter Xchadb
- Start date
Anonymouse
Sith I care
Could these be made with the cycling chamber working in the vertical plane rather than horizontal, like the Contrabasso designs? (swap the conic whirlpool for a vertical donut with water entrance/exit in rim and mouthpiece exit in the donut "hole".) These designs recycle vapor as well as water, for more diffusion (since vapor can go through the perc multiple times), whereas the whirlpool designs just recycle water (though make a pretty whirlpool when you finish a pull. Nifty visual gimmick but not really functional.).
Plus if you face the donut "hole" towards the user (unlike Contrabasso who faces his sideways and has a bent mouthpiece), you can watch the froth spinning round and round in the donut.
Plus if you face the donut "hole" towards the user (unlike Contrabasso who faces his sideways and has a bent mouthpiece), you can watch the froth spinning round and round in the donut.
colieglass
Well-Known Member
let me get my first design down before i start swapping things down. once you master something is when you spread it around... i dont wanna get good at this design, make 10 and be done with it.. just so every one knows and can please be patient, me and my partner are gonna rock out a huge run of honey to reti's and the recycler.. please give me some time though... thanks...
slowandsteady
Member
Are any of your pieces in local Colorado shops?
im pretty sure he drops tubes anywhere that will let him display his pieces, if you're in colorado and looking for a local pickup, just ask, someone will get a piece to you. If you're in Denver you're more in luck, if you're in the springs or southern CO i can help you out too. like i said just ask around
colieglass
Well-Known Member
yeah, we are in daddy danks, herbal daze, freakys, marleys, and randomly everywhere else i could get in, but chad is right. youre better off getting it direct. i just seen one of my honey to reti's for 300 bucks... just ask me ill get you a better deal, the head shops are in the business of ripping people off. you guys would drop your jaws if you knew what a headshops margin is.
Yes, clear is fine (actually, preferred) with me also. I sent a PM experessing interest in snapping one up six days ago but haven't heard anything back.
Oh well, I suppose I should wait for the vids anyway, see how well it fires.
P.S. I hope the clear ones don't have the marbles, etc.
Edit: And how hard would it be to get a vertical female input with enough offset for a Cloud?
I sold em all... Im making more, but they were on ebay... lol.
colieglass
Well-Known Member
slow and steady???? thats a colorado company, is it not?
Anonymouse
Sith I care
Ooh, please tell us you're online to post the recycler vid? I'm dying to see it in action.
colieglass
Well-Known Member
its been on youtube...
slowandsteady
Member
Not that I know of, but I could be wrong. It's a name I've used for a while on many of the forums I'm on.
Anonymouse
Sith I care
It's been on YouTube since yesterday, according to the video, and nobody posted the link in here.
colieglass
Well-Known Member
sorry, im new, i dont know what to do!
colieglass
Well-Known Member
custom, for chads lady's sister.. lol. mini stemline
Anonymouse
Sith I care
How are the honey/retis coming?
colieglass
Well-Known Member
theyre coming, give me another month, we are making them a little smaller this time i think... we made a couple and the smaller ones just look cooler. and yes, we are going to reinforce the joint so i can throw my new cloud on there.
Anonymouse
Sith I care
Aww. I felt the one weakness was lack of enough volume to do any real stacking. Plus there's a couple anecdotal reports of being able to pull water through if you clear it hard as-is. How does that work with the shrunk ones?
Is the reti chamber still a lower diameter than the honeycomb one? Never understood that.
Is the reti chamber still a lower diameter than the honeycomb one? Never understood that.
colieglass
Well-Known Member
why
why does it matter if the reti chamer is smaller??
why do you have to pull it so hard, that piece practically drives itself?
why does it matter if the reti chamer is smaller??
Anonymouse
Sith I care
People weren't saying they got water on a draw, just on the clear. Sure, you can consciously slow down as you pull the slide/vape to avoid it, but that's using technique, which isn't "driving itself". It'd be nice to pull and not have to plan ahead, as remembering gets harder the longer you're using it.
The free volume in a chamber matters as most evapouration happens in froth, not the perks themselves. Perks are just a means to generate bubbles. Gas passing through foam provides a huge amount of gas-to-liquid surface area for evapouration, and the relative low pressure caused by the draw makes those bubbles constantly expand as they rise, increasing that surface area further still, plus the pressure differential helps "pull" higher energy liquid molecules out of the liquid (i.e. increases evapouration further).
By reducing the volume available for foam you are limiting the potential moisture-conditioning a perk can provide (I hesitate to use the word "diffusion" as that just means "mixing", but it limits that too). You want each perk chamber to have enough volume to give that perk its head, that is, to stack freely under normal draw conditions as much as possible, but no more. The reti design is a turbulator perk, which focuses more on mixing the charge than producing lots of small bubbles, but the streams it does eject contain pulses of varying localised pressure which will expand chaotically and still produces a great deal of stackage, which would add extra moisture to the charge if you gave it room to allow it.
(Does dropping the tube radius make it take more or less effort to manufacture? I don't know the details of the assembly process, but I guess you're setting each perk in its chamber then welding them together? Would it be harder or easier to just use one longer section of the same wider diameter tube, and set both in it?)
It also occurs to me that an offset, bubble-style mouthpiece instead of the central tube-style might reduce the potential for water to travel up the mouthpiece? Plus, It'd look badass.
Disclaimer: I'm not a glassblower, and do not know an awful lot about the various arcane techniques involved in working glass. I do know rather a lot about physics, though, and while there is a lot of great technique and craftsmanship out there in the blowing world, there doesn't seem to be a lot of actual applied science, and, unfashionable though it might be, science makes shit work better.
colieglass
Well-Known Member
Well, we made this toro style originally, the water did not whip around like a reti perc, so if i did that you would have complained why it wasnt smaller. trust me there are many trials and tribulations before we actually release a piece for mass production, you put a reti perc in a huge chamber and it looks like a sprinkler when yiou pull through it, you need something to catch that water while it has momentum or it just hits the side and runs down. it doesnt function as a reti... I have read threads after threads on this forum alone so i will quote every other glass blower " no matter what we do, somebody is going to have an idea of how they think it could work better, thats why i became a glassblower." and you were just saying that people got water in their mouth and you want me to make this piece stack higher??? and the glassblowing world has no applied science?? whats about the honeycomb perc?
Anonymouse
Sith I care
You're misquoting a lot of what I said.
I was asking why it wasn't the same width as the one below, not why wasn't it wider. It seems to be adding complexity to reduce volume.
v.s. what I said:
"You want each perk chamber to have enough volume to give that perk its head, that is, to stack freely under normal draw conditions as much as possible, but no more."
No mention was made of a huge chamber, because that is indeed bad for performance. But it's also possible to be too small.
I was saying the free space in the chamber should be higher, so the stacking happens in there instead of up the mouthpiece. The perk is going to produce a set volume of foam at a given flow rate, and if the chamber can't hold it, it goes up the mouthpiece, and popping bubbles are going to throw water droplets up into the rising airflow. This flow is travelling much faster in the mouthpiece tube due to the restriction, so is much better at carrying free droplets upwards. You want the popping to happen in the chamber where the vertical flow is much slower and they can drop back to the reservoir.
I didn't say that. I said "there doesn't seem to be a lot of actual applied science", not that there isn't any at all.
I'm not attacking you; I like this piece, rather a lot, too. I just don't think it's perfect and am trying to explain why. Just because something is already good doesn't mean it couldn't be even better.
colieglass
Well-Known Member
i didnt think you were attacking me. but the most simplest answer to your question about why we didnt make the chamber bigger was simply cause i didnt think i needed it. The first honey to reti we made was ofcourse just going to be a sample, i didnt think it would end being our best seller. The first one that was pulled out of the kiln was soo sick, the base was over an inch thick and heavy as hell.. I pulled on it once and gave it just a light pull and realized that perc moved the smoke with more force than i had ever had. i loved the way it looked and i threw it out there. but there is tons of applied science when it comes to these percs. theyre all stolen or modified lab glass. im no physics major, but im not going to change the design of the reti unless my distributor tells me to cause they pay my bills. I like the slightly smaller tube for the second chamber anyway... it looks slick.
Anonymouse
Sith I care
Not talking about changing the perks, though. Just giving them room to spread their wings.