The Vape Pen - reviewed

[MoeOnTheMoon]

Funny, I think the thinking was that if they called it a vaporizer, everyone would say, "But wait! It's NOT really a vaporizer!!! You can't call it a vaporizer!"
But instead people are saying, "Wait! this thing is just a vaporizer!"

I don't really know what it is, technically. Not sure I care. Seems like semantics to me.
Though maybe I can get someone to clarify for those of you who seem to care, why they decided to say it is an atomizer more than a vaporizer.

I think it may kind of be like the old Certs commercials (for those of you old enough to remember these, from what? the sixties?):
1st twin: "Certs is a candy mint!"
2nd twin: "No, Certs is a breath mint!"
Announcer: "Stop! Stop! You're BOTH RIGHT! Certs is a candy mint AND a breath mint!"

 

[Purple-Days]

Yeah, I'm old enough to remember.

Some think semantics means 'an unworthy argument'.

But semantics, "It is often used in ordinary language to denote a problem of understanding that comes down to word selection or connotation.", from Wikipedia.

So yep, it's semantics in a sense. Caused by the use of a word that has a definition that does not apply.

Can you call it semantics to refute the use of the word 'dog' to describe a 'cat'? Or is it correction of ignorance (in a nice sense)? Just doesn't seem to be atomization (a truely misleading word, by itself).

(Face it Tom. Our language is further corrupted each day. Seems any word can mean anything, and you are rude to suggest that someone should use a dictionary and standard definitions. )

 

[MoeOnTheMoon]

Yeah, I'm old enough to remember.

Some think semantics means 'an unworthy argument'.

But semantics, "It is often used in ordinary language to denote a problem of understanding that comes down to word selection or connotation.", from Wikipedia.

So yep, it's semantics in a sense. Caused by the use of a word that has a definition that does not apply.

Can you call it semantics to refute the use of the word 'dog' to describe a 'cat'? Or is it correction of ignorance (in a nice sense)? Just doesn't seem to be atomization (a truely misleading word, by itself).

(Face it Tom. Our language is further corrupted each day. Seems any word can mean anything, and you are rude to suggest that someone should use a dictionary and standard definitions. )

I did not mean "an unworthy argument" - I didn't even know there was an argument; I meant that there seems to be a problem of the fuzziness of the definition, or at least the standard meaning of the word. Maybe (?) there is a standard scientific definition of "atomizer" but it seems like it just means taking a liquid and turning into a fine mist, which I believe may also be called a vapor. Not sure. All I KNOW is this:
The vapor that comes out of a Vape-Pen looks very much like vapor that comes from a vaporizer though I think I'd say a very light vapor.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

vapor is a a gaseous form of whatever you are vaporizing.

after reading about E-Cigs and similar items I am beginning too understand how they work... what it looks like they do is simultaneously nebulize then atomize the tiny liquid particles... two separate processes too achieve vaporization.
it explains why it needs low heat too vaporize... by nebulizing it into smaller particles it is easier too apply heat too them causing them too go from liquid too gas phase.
kind of like grinding herb too expose more surface area too the heat so it vapes easier. This thing smashes the liquid into small and easy too vaporize particles.

it has too both processes too achieve vaporization. Cannot have one without the other, won't work.

and as far as i can tell... Heat Based Atomization is just a specific type of vaporization. I believe vaporizer too be a broad definition, and Atomization (when used via heat) is a specific type of vaporization. Nebulization would be atomization without heat. each one is just a differing stage of breaking down a substance, eventually arriving at a gas state. Nebulize into atomize into vaporize. That seems too be the route the E cigs and similar products take. Most of the things we are used too do not nebulize or atomize. There is no need too. But since this uses a liquid as a delivery vehicle, needs an entirely different process in order too function.
and if you really wanted too get technical with big words. Most vaporizers we are used too work with sublimation. Which is going form a solid state too a gaseous state and skip the liquid state.



and a total side note... never thought researching vapes would cause me too access all the chemisty I learned in college... I can only say, Hey I did learn something and remember it... neat.

 

[Purple-Days]

Not an argument, Moe (my own poor choice of words). Just discussion . Just explaining that most people think 'semantics' is 'trivial'.

So under the definitions above (atomizer and nebulizer) the word 'spray' was used in all of them. Pammy uses a nebulizer for her asthma. There is a definite 'spray' under pressure. An atomizer, the squeeze ball on a perfumer also uses pressure and a venturi.

"Maybe (?) there is a standard scientific definition of "atomizer"..." Well sure, to turn into atoms, don't you suppose? But that obviously is not happening (nor would it be desired) and as suggested molecularizer may come closer in desired meaning, though still not true to form.

I contend that both these words indicate a spray and pressurized liquid being forced through a narrow opening to create a mist, not vapor. And using those words in relation to a heated liquid producing vapor are inaccurate (unless I have missed something about pressurized liquids in this device).

As Devo says, "vapor is a gaseous form" where atomiser and nebuliser indicate a mist (fine droplets produced by mechanical action).

Again, I propose Glycolizer as a Class of vaporizer. (generic for this type of system)
Or, feel free to come up with another name. But I don't think atomiser or nebulizer work for this application.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

i think atomizer and nebulizer only work for this if used together. But I like your word.. Glycolizer. Much better than saying glycol based vaporizer.

 

[Hippie Dickie]

Most vaporizers we are used too work with sublimation. Which is going form a solid state too a gaseous state and skip the liquid state.

is this right? i thought the contents of the trichome glands is a liquid.

and, in my lexicon, a mist is not the same as a vapor. Otherwise, we would consider rain to be a vapor, which it is not.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

from my understanding if I am wrapping my head around it, ECigs create a mist which it then vaporizes. So it is no longer mist. but it could be closer too a cloud/fog than vapor, so there is still the potential it could be mist. would have too ask someone who has intimate knowledge behind design and function too see if I am correct in my assumption that it is vaporizing the mist it creates.

I am not familiar with the exact physical nature of trichromes. If they contain liquid then no it is not sublimation. however if THC is stored within the vegetable matter of the bud in conjunction too the trichromes then there would be some form of sublimation happening. Sublimation is going from a solid state too a gaseous state via temp and pressure.

given the right conditions vapor can easily turn too mist and vice versa

 

[Hippie Dickie]

most of the THC produced by the cannabis plant is contained in the trichome heads. i think the trichomes are a waxy substance that contains a liquid.

 

[Purple-Days]

Hippie, we have been through sublimation in another thread (forget where) and I think these folks are confused, the trichrome does not sublimate, it goes from solid to liquid to gaseous. Again folks won't use a dictionary... or have little understanding of the physical world and the science used to describe and understand it.

Oh, and if you shake a bunch of trichromes, dry sift, you get kif. Press the kief and it doesn't ooze, there is no liquid. It makes hashish. The trichrome heads are waxy, and plastic. A solid.

So, am I missing the pressurization portion of these devices? Otherwise, how are they making 'mist'?

 

[Hippie Dickie]

i can imagine making a mist using an oscillator (crystal? ceramic?) at ultrasonic frequency - low power, no heat, could be quite small.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

Im not looking things up in a dictionary. College educated in Biology and Chemistry, degree in BioChem. I was unaware of the nature of Trichomes. I have worked with sublimation and know it quite well and have a good understanding of it and how it works, however most of my experience with sublimation is chemicals not plant matter. Worked with plant extracts, but not the plant itself
so I retract my use of the word Sublimation in this case. Now if i were too use Sublimation in an example concerning using a vaporizer I would be closer in describing the main concern people have with using brass... the fumes from it would be closer too sublimation.
pressurization could most likely be achieved by inhaling the substance through a tiny hole.
create a vacuum on one side of a hole which would then suck the material through the tiny hole at a fast rate.

 

[Purple-Days]

Oops, didn't know it was you in the quote Devo, you would not be one of the folks who I refer to as not using a dictionary. The other person, in that other thread wasn't so familiar with sublimation and I thought it was a regurgitation of that.

I do not even deny the sublimation of THC, at room temp, let's say. Much like water ice sublimates at sub-zero temps. But it is so insignificant in our applications as to be nearly meaningless.

Ahh, inhalation pressure. Eureka. Is that what is happening?

Hmmm, crystal oscillator, damn Hippie... that's outta sight.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

you know what, actually thinkin about the pressure example i gave... wouldnt the hole have too be before the heater? because if you look how an Ecig is made the heater is before the cartridge and the inhalation hole is on the opposite side of the cartridge.. maybe this thing is mist (like clouds and fog)

for it too work how I thought it would it would have too go from cartridge too tiny hole/nozzle then on too the heater too be vaporized. but from the looks of how they are made it is the opposite set up. Heater then cartridge then tiny hole.
so maybe this thing only makes an extremely fine mist.
which would mean this thing works exactly like a fog machine... not true vapor but visible mist. (now that I actually got from looking up Fog Machine on the internetsss)
now... if they were too switch the set up it would be possible too achieve a true vapor.
one thing I do notice with Ecigs compared too Vaporizers... the vapor from a vaporizer will stay in the air alot longer than what you exhale from the Ecig (I got too play with one yesterday) kind of hard too notice if there is poor lighting. but if you do have good lighting in a closed room you will notice there is still vapor floating around for a few minutes, just not as visible. I did not notice this with the Ecig. (Reason I say Ecig because it is similar in delivery method too the Vape Pen)

I do not even deny the sublimation of THC, at room temp, let's say. Much like water ice sublimates at sub-zero temps. But it is so insignificant in our applications as to be nearly meaningless.

Freeze Drying.. My favorite form of sublimation. tis fun doing this with wet clothes in the winter...



now with all that said... I still wanna try this thing with some MJ Liquid. Im curious too how strong it is and the duration of the high. In a sense this is a THC tincture... so your pretty much getting the full range of the THC. Can't really dial in what effects you want like a vaporizer (using higher or lower heats), but this is an interesting alternative too what too do with your ABV, make a vape pen tincture. Waste Not Want Not

 

[nicelytoasted]

Sublimation can be achieved in a vaporizer, if the pressure drop is large enough, imo.

Refer to any triple point diagram and notice that as the pressure drops, a substance can indeed go from a solid to a gas without going through a liquid phase.

Problem is, we would need a phase diagram for THC and measure the pressure drop to see if this does occur in a vaporizer.

 

[Purple-Days]

Hypothesis: So taking the idea of suction (mouth or lung powered) and a venturi tube, where the pressure is lowest at the smallest diameter... apply heat at that low pressure point (at maximum constriction) where the boiling point is at a minimum and this would vaporize (entering mist... oscillating crystal injection?) at maximum efficiency. Reducing pressure and boiling point and required power... Sound right? As theory?

 

[Hippie Dickie]

(entering mist... oscillating crystal injection?) ... like a piezo-electric nozzle on an inkjet printer, spitting THC juice onto the heater coil.

ah ha!! For example ...

Omega Piezo produces a wide range of vibrating elements (unimorph equivalents) for use in applications including: alarms, speakers, atomizers, mist generators, and many others. The geometry and characteristics of our standard sound elements are listed in the following table.

 

[Purple-Days]

I thought of piezo electronics as soon as you mentioned crystal oscillators, but am only familiar with the spark applications and didn't know for sure that piezo could be applied.

But as Pammy has been saying to me for a long while, "If they would just make an inhaler..." like her asthma med dispenser. It is a pressurized nebulizer that gives an exact dose and even has a counter on it to tell how many doses are left. I really think this would be the ultimate administration tool (no power required, super stealth, instant use, pocket size etc.). Someday...

 

[Hippie Dickie]

then the whole matter becomes one of how to create the "juice". i've been puzzling about extraction of the THC from the bud for some time now.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

I thought of piezo electronics as soon as you mentioned crystal oscillators, but am only familiar with the spark applications and didn't know for sure that piezo could be applied.

http://i38.tinypic.com/wbcple.jpg

But as Pammy has been saying to me for a long while, "If they would just make an inhaler..." like her asthma med dispenser. It is a pressurized nebulizer that gives an exact dose and even has a counter on it to tell how many doses are left. I really think this would be the ultimate administration tool (no power required, super stealth, instant use, pocket size etc.). Someday...

There is an actual inhaler being developed in sweden. I do believe it just got approved for human trials. I cannot recall the name. But I remember hearing about it on the Norml Daily Stash. Similar too an Asthma inhaler.
However, I think it may be synthetic THC

and about making the juice. There is a recipe somewhere on here either in this thread or one of the other ecig threads on here.

 

[MoeOnTheMoon]

Just f.y.i.:
I got this information from my contact at Vape-Pen:

The reason it is called an atomizer and not a vaporizer is because it says "atomizer" in the patent description.

And this bit of info:
"The unit looks just like an e-cig because it uses some of the same patents. The atomizer is one component and the battery is another. We modify both of these components. "

 

[MoeOnTheMoon]

For those of you who had doubts about whether or not the Vape-Pen is legit or not, here's somewhat of a legitimizing review which was unsolicited. This review was written by a guy who who is a buyer for one of the biggest medical marijuana dispensaries in Oakland, CA.

I know you guys are skeptical by nature re new vapes, so here's the thing: Can I prove it was unsolicited? I'm sure if someone asked the guy he'd tell you it was. Can I prove it was written by who it says it is, or that this guy really exists? That part could be proven fairly easily if someone really wanted to go to the trouble.

So anyway, this was a glowing endorsement of the product by someone who buys weed for a well known dispensary, who went to Vape-Pen.com and wrote this on the Testimonial page, himself:
http://www.vape-pen.com/vape-pen-testimonials/post/937417

One thing he says on there is that it is no substitute for taking a big hit off the bong at home, and I would totally agree with that. In my experience using the vape-pen is a much milder form of medicating than using something like even the vapor genie. However it does do the job and -again I will say- it is the total discreet-ness of it that makes it "better" than some other portable options, at least in my humble opinion. With most other portable vapes, you would have to still be sort of concerned of having someone - say, Law Enforcement - look right at you while you are taking a hit, but with the Vape-Pen, you could do so with almost zero chance of the cop thinking anything was wrong because there is basically no visible vapor or odor.

 

[DevoTheStrange]

I finally had a professor friend over at the local university totally explain how the pen works too me. He said it is a basic type "Atomizer" not what I would consider a "Vaporizer". He said it works like a simple spray bottle. Only instead of a pumping action forcing the liquid through the atomizer. You are using a vacuum force too pull the liquid through the atomizer.
You are taking a warm liquid, atomizing it, and the sudden introduction too colder moist air cause it too turn into vapor.
Because it was below freezing outside he showed me a simple experiment.
He took some boiling water, put it in a spray bottle. He said this part represents the heater and the liquid. Heater heats the liquid only.
He then set it too where the spray would get its finest mist. this is the atomizer.
Then we went out side. When he sprayed it into the colder air (He explained it must be partially moist air or wont work right)... It came out in a big huge billowy cloud. He explained this was the equivalent too taking a hit. Was fun too play around with making little puffs of cloud.
He explained too me that the device is a true atomizer and not a vaporizer. The vaporization part of it is actually happening inside your mouth, not inside the device.

 

[Purple-Days]

Totally cool Mr. Science type friend... And a totally reasonable explanation of how these work. Several factors, including atomization and pressure and temperature differentials? Seems 'atomizer' alone won't cover the effect and not just a simple 'heated' vape either. Hyrbrid vaporization? E-cig for lack of better terms.

 

[reece]

(Face it Tom. Our language is further corrupted each day. Seems any word can mean anything, and you are rude to suggest that someone should use a dictionary and standard definitions. )

The problem is, even the dictionary is being corrupted. Irregardless is now in the dictionary because people use it, incorrectly, so much. I say in a few years we will also see conversate in the dictionary.