Discontinued Thermovape Cera
- Thread starter SameOldTim
- Start date
nopartofme
Over the falls, in a barrel
If that's really possible, it certainly lines up over here… I'd been using herb that had been pre-ground with the launch box in mind.
OF
Well-Known Member
This makes a lot of sense to me. I can see little 'mini cherries' getting sucked through, landing on dry tinder in a a hot whirlwind.....
That, I'd think, doesn't involve the normal clues of impending disaster? Not enough 'burnt popcorn coming' to trip the auto protect circuits?
A tiny shift in bud grind, curing, packing or whatever might make a big difference? One thing sure, something's up, guys aren't making it up. And experienced vapors generally avoid combustion naturally.
Good thought. I like it. Now if we can get some of those familiar with the problem to get into testing it?
OF
Quetzalcoatl
DEADY GUERRERO/DIRT COBAIN/GEORGE KUSH
OF, I mentioned it pages and pages back when someone posted a "bowl shot" picture and it was fine enough for the LB! I still think it's easier to overheat and burn tiny particles as opposed to more coarse grinds. All it takes is a gentle prod by a bit more heat than the sandy load can handle and it's up in flames. At least both times I've cherried my Box trenches it's been a very fine grind.
OF
Well-Known Member
You know, when YB mentioned it a few posts back the 'that sounds familiar' alarm went off in my head, loud enough to drown out the other little voices for a bit, but still not clear until Haywood brought it up (probably using slightly different words?) and it clicked in. A mental image of little tiny flaming fire arrows raining down on the wagon train brought it home in a flash.....so to speak.
It's funny how the brain puts stuff together sometimes. Suddenly the answer to something that made no sense days ago (and you haven't consciously rethought since) pushes it's way to the front of the line with 'here it is, dummy!' playing in the background. Einstein had a quote about it, something to the effect of 'sometimes the answer to a year's research will present itself over coffee'. Neat facility. Got us down out of the trees I think? You can only go so far on opposeable thumbs and use of fire you know. Written language and workable religion being largely over rated and all...... We lost that exclusive 'use of tools' thing a while back........too bad, I liked that one.
OF
YeeeBuddy
Well-Known Member
Yea Quetz I remember u askin me if my really fine grind fell through the holes and I wasn't sure at the time. Thanks for planting that thought in my head because same as OF after reading Haywood's post I remembered yours and then the gears started turning.
Lol I think we are onto something, I rarely combust so I didn't really put 2 and 2 together
I guess I was wrong
Lol I think we are onto something, I rarely combust so I didn't really put 2 and 2 together
OF
Well-Known Member
I think the key insight here is the 'flaming bits going through the holes' part, at least that was the link I didn't catch. I figured, like YB I think, 'OK, so what, a tiny bit combusts down there...'.
I now have a mental image like the news shots of the raging wildfires being driven by dry winds, with flaming branches landing on the trees on the other side of the highway.
It was the change of venue part that makes it seem logical now. It always seems so obvious looking back, doesn't it? I wonder what it looks like the times you never look back?
OF
I now have a mental image like the news shots of the raging wildfires being driven by dry winds, with flaming branches landing on the trees on the other side of the highway.
It was the change of venue part that makes it seem logical now. It always seems so obvious looking back, doesn't it? I wonder what it looks like the times you never look back?
OF
aj0125
Well-Known Member
You know, the more I think about it, that makes total sense. I will attempt to run a series of tests using different grinds to see if a fine grind is truly the culprit, as I suspect it will be. I encourage others having combustion issues to join me in testing and we shall vanquish this evil combustion together.
BLAZING OG
Vaping is a way of life!
From my hotel room @ the Cannabis Cup in Denver:
The dish on the left is some stuff one of the lovely ladies at the show gave me @ Snoop Lion. On the right we have the last smoked bowl, just as it appears out of the Cera. At the top are the silicone shield, a $10 glass bat I picked up that day, and the top of the Cera.
30 seconds later.
For the record, since I got FACED at the cup and lost my EO cart, I have basically been an exclusively LL user. I love it. Sooo much. Also, I use it everywhere. 'Sarah said the bathrooms here were really nice' now means 'Let's go hit this.'
But my new EO cart gets here tomorrow, and I have CO2 oil to try! Hooray!!!
Also, I have a technical battery question. How about these:
http://www.amazon.com/Samsung-Li-Io...04TSKXO2/ref=pd_sbs_misc_4#productDescription
One primary thing I noticed in the specs was the common discharge voltage - For everyone's favorite (out of stock) Panasonic batteries, the nominal voltage is 3.6V. These Samsung batteries are 2600 mAh versus 2250 for the Panasonics, and the nominal voltage is 3.7V.
Sooo... longer lasting batteries and a slightly faster heating time, or a really great way to break my favorite personal relaxation device?
Id personally go with the ones that were tested to perform best, some really knowledgeable people on here have stated that sometimes the higher mah batteries dont deliver as much oooommmphhhhhh as per say the lower mah, now iam sure they might last a bit longer but for instance the panasonic 2250 mah heat the cera up faster (same overall temp) vs the 2900mah panasonics!!!!
I hope this helps, you can purchase them whatever your favorite battery site is.
or check these out for reference------>
these are the 2250mah Currently Unavailable
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-CGR18650CH-Li-ion-shipping-Battery/dp/B00AKQQ990/ref=pd_sim_sbs_e_2
or these seem to be the same, some one correct me if iam wrong for double the price!!
http://www.amazon.com/Panasonic-CGR...TF8&qid=1367564234&sr=1-3&keywords=cgr18650ch
or these 2900pd (green panasonics)
http://callieskustoms.com/CalliesKustoms-Batteries.html
YeeeBuddy
Well-Known Member
I believer they are the same. Price ends up being pretty close its 12.50 for two, the 4 pack was around 26$.
Edit 4.50 shipping on 2 batteries ouch
Organica
Well-Known Member
Alright, for the sake of argument, let's just assume that I already know where to get the exact batteries that shipped with my Cera, which can be found here:
http://www.orbtronic.com/batteries-...li-ion-battery-button-top-panasonic-orbtronic
And let's also assume that I've checked out Orbtronic's other 18650 form factor batteries, found here:
http://www.orbtronic.com/18650-batteries
...and examined the discharge graphs for some of the other batteries, like the one found here:
http://www.orbtronic.com/protected-3400mah-18650-li-ion-battery-panasonic-ncr18650B-orbtronic
Noting that there are batteries listed as Panasonic, Samsung, Sanyo, LG, etc., with minor distinctions, my question was one of a specifically technical nature. Just because there's an answer out there, doesn't mean that's the best answer. As I understand it, the primary reason the Cera initially shipped with two 2250 mAh batteries was not because they were *better*, but because they didn't have the 2900 mAh batteries in stock yet. They threw in an extra 2250 mAh battery as a bonus because they thought the batteries might be perceived as *inadequate* due to the Cera's advertised battery life.
Ideally, I was hoping for an answer from OF, Tim, or another stoner engineer. But Haywood makes a compelling case for two batteries and a case being cheaper than a single Orbtronic that matches the ones I already have. Given the way I vape, the anticipated effects of repeatedly exposing a battery like this to high temperatures, and the fact that I'd rather have more batteries and change them out more frequently to avoid overheating issues (despite the fact that they're protected. Let's not forget that we're putting high discharge batteries IN A HEATER.), I found his solution to be pretty ideal.
If anybody has a good *technical* explanation for why some specific batteries are the very very best, I would love to hear it.
http://www.orbtronic.com/batteries-...li-ion-battery-button-top-panasonic-orbtronic
And let's also assume that I've checked out Orbtronic's other 18650 form factor batteries, found here:
http://www.orbtronic.com/18650-batteries
...and examined the discharge graphs for some of the other batteries, like the one found here:
http://www.orbtronic.com/protected-3400mah-18650-li-ion-battery-panasonic-ncr18650B-orbtronic
Noting that there are batteries listed as Panasonic, Samsung, Sanyo, LG, etc., with minor distinctions, my question was one of a specifically technical nature. Just because there's an answer out there, doesn't mean that's the best answer. As I understand it, the primary reason the Cera initially shipped with two 2250 mAh batteries was not because they were *better*, but because they didn't have the 2900 mAh batteries in stock yet. They threw in an extra 2250 mAh battery as a bonus because they thought the batteries might be perceived as *inadequate* due to the Cera's advertised battery life.
Ideally, I was hoping for an answer from OF, Tim, or another stoner engineer. But Haywood makes a compelling case for two batteries and a case being cheaper than a single Orbtronic that matches the ones I already have. Given the way I vape, the anticipated effects of repeatedly exposing a battery like this to high temperatures, and the fact that I'd rather have more batteries and change them out more frequently to avoid overheating issues (despite the fact that they're protected. Let's not forget that we're putting high discharge batteries IN A HEATER.), I found his solution to be pretty ideal.
If anybody has a good *technical* explanation for why some specific batteries are the very very best, I would love to hear it.
aj0125
Well-Known Member
I have found myself 3 bowls into a test session with the LL cart thinking: This battery won't get hot enough to explode in there, will it? I am confident Thermovape would not do that to us as killing your customers is just bad for business.
b0rd2dEAth
New Member
I miss understood what you meant before, but honestly I am glad that I don't put a dime inside it everytime. Sounds like a bitch lol. Honestly after slightly hyperextending the spring, its kept the shape and has never changed, making the battery fit perfectly every time with no need to drop a coin in my Cera. lol If you are really scared of damaging your spring dont be. Just be careful, only slightly extend it, and it should be good for a lifetime.
Organica
Well-Known Member
Here's hoping that Thermovape is more ethical than every alcohol and tobacco producing company on earth. Not to mention firearms manufacturers, pharmaceutical companies, energy companies, Monsanto, and most governments.
But yeah, I tend to smoke with a couple of other chicks, like heat...bowl.bowl.bowl.bowl...cool off, battery change..bowl.bowl.bowl.bowl...cool off (order Thai delivery) ...repeat. It gets to the point where we're resting the Cera on trivets and stuff because it's too hot to put near anything melty.
BLAZING OG
Vaping is a way of life!
Darb
Well-Known Member
No it won't. I've stretched mine and had it compress again. That spring will get weak and break if bent over and over again.
OF
Well-Known Member
I think you're close to right. The originally planned battery never happened. It's not some 'off the shelf' battery you found with Google. It was (and is, I have one) a custom made unit by a small US (family owned I understand) maker. Made with special PCBs and a no longer available base cell from Japan. Mine has a somewhat crooked jacket with no markings at all. It was one of 3 total (color coded) units I was given to Beta test. I don't know for sure which it is (blind test). They switched to an off the shelf battery sensing continuing battery problems (good forethought IMO), going to the best such unit from their testing.
That's the best answer for you I think? Without getting too technical (and I'm not privy to all those details.....), TV tested a bunch of options and found the units they offer for sale the best. I tend to agree with them, having tied them personally. As I said before, I personally bought 8 of the 2250s to stash and I fancy myself to make educated choices in such matters. While you can still get them, I think the 2250s are exceptional.
Naw, bad PR to have them blow up.....
Heat is not good for long life for sure but I think there's no real danger of explosions here. Notice there's vents under the top contact? There's a rupture disk (typically) under that that will vent the gasses out before they can get enough pressure up to fold the crip on the battery back (the usual failure without the vent). This is a proven system, common in most vapes. Notice T1 and Ultra supplies have a vent hole in the sliding sleeve? Same idea. Likewise you'll find a hole in the bottom of D9 products.
Batteries like this sometimes go south on their own. Rare, but accounted for. Folks take bombs seriously these days, look at Boston....
I think they're a stand up outfit, as I think most do. I see no reason to 'dis' them or the groups you mention above as a class. Unless, of course, you know something we don't?
This is Capitalism in action, it has good and bad aspects. "Buyer be ware" is the rule.
IMO you can buy from TV with confidence.
Not a bit of it. An advantage of being honest, I really meant it then and now.
Thank you very much. I of course agree with you, top picks.
And thanks to you too Darb, for the same reasons? I could wade right in and get all geeky about why springs are heat treated after forming and all, all about alloys, grain boundaries, dislocations and all that good stuff but experts (real or imagined) either already know that, trust you or aren't listening because they know better. The eyes of the rest just glaze over which is very understandable. Waste of time I think?
Cold forming springs near their elastic limit (as these are) does not work....or that would be recommended I guess?
Thanks for the confirmation, sometimes that 'logic' works when no other does......
OF
Organica
Well-Known Member
*sigh*
From the Thermoessence FAQ: "We use custom made 18650 2900 mAh 3.7V Rechargeable battery for our Cera Vaporizers. They are made with japanese cell, and the protective circuitry is over wrapped in the US. We recommend using these batteries explicitly as we have done testing and research"
Okay, guys. I realize that I may be the only person here that doesn't accept a popular 'this feels better to me' as scientific evidence, but if there's anybody who can give me valid numerical data on the reason why popular (restated) opinion seems to be against the manufacturer's advice, I'd like to know. Also, has anybody tested any of these 3100 or 3400 mAh batteries? Has anybody collected numerical data at all?
^^^Numerical data by people who know what they're doing.
Even though I finally convinced myself the 2900 went a few minutes more I think the 2250 gave better service.
^^^With absolutely no offense to OF, this is exactly the type of NOT SCIENCE by an authority figure that lets a lot of people wander around saying ignorant isht like 'glass is really a slow moving liquid'. If Einstein's E = mc^2 were replaced by a smart looking guy saying 'I finally convinced myself that physics measurements are going to feel the same to any bodies traveling at the same universal rate of acceleration in the same direction', it wouldn't be special relativity, it would be NOT SCIENCE.
He says he alternated the batteries, load after load. To me, an adequate scientific test would be to take each of the different battery contenders, charge them fully, then start each in a cool Cera under full power, take temperature measurements at the top of the heating core, record the heating and current values over time with a specific cutoff of 'although constant current will heat above this temperature, it is useful so we rest the battery at (400F? 450F? to take into account probable room temperature convection?) until it is back down to (250? 300?), then resume full current.
Results would look something like:
2250 mAh (protected) - 48 minutes of serviceable heating @ 3A current, requiring 75 seconds to achieve initial smoking temperature of yF yielding 36 minutes within ideal temperature range. Above x degrees, current increases / drops to xA current (OR) Current is invariable with regard to temperature.
It's obvious that a lot of people here have at least some basic machining knowledge. I thought maybe somebody also had an ammeter and a pen. I really have no desire to buy 6 different batteries and rig some wire leads for my ammeter to go through these vent holes, but I assumed somebody involved in the manufacture of the Cera had actually already done that.
(There is no such thing as 'too technical' when talking to an engineer)
From the Thermoessence FAQ: "We use custom made 18650 2900 mAh 3.7V Rechargeable battery for our Cera Vaporizers. They are made with japanese cell, and the protective circuitry is over wrapped in the US. We recommend using these batteries explicitly as we have done testing and research"
Okay, guys. I realize that I may be the only person here that doesn't accept a popular 'this feels better to me' as scientific evidence, but if there's anybody who can give me valid numerical data on the reason why popular (restated) opinion seems to be against the manufacturer's advice, I'd like to know. Also, has anybody tested any of these 3100 or 3400 mAh batteries? Has anybody collected numerical data at all?
^^^Numerical data by people who know what they're doing.
Even though I finally convinced myself the 2900 went a few minutes more I think the 2250 gave better service.
^^^With absolutely no offense to OF, this is exactly the type of NOT SCIENCE by an authority figure that lets a lot of people wander around saying ignorant isht like 'glass is really a slow moving liquid'. If Einstein's E = mc^2 were replaced by a smart looking guy saying 'I finally convinced myself that physics measurements are going to feel the same to any bodies traveling at the same universal rate of acceleration in the same direction', it wouldn't be special relativity, it would be NOT SCIENCE.
He says he alternated the batteries, load after load. To me, an adequate scientific test would be to take each of the different battery contenders, charge them fully, then start each in a cool Cera under full power, take temperature measurements at the top of the heating core, record the heating and current values over time with a specific cutoff of 'although constant current will heat above this temperature, it is useful so we rest the battery at (400F? 450F? to take into account probable room temperature convection?) until it is back down to (250? 300?), then resume full current.
Results would look something like:
2250 mAh (protected) - 48 minutes of serviceable heating @ 3A current, requiring 75 seconds to achieve initial smoking temperature of yF yielding 36 minutes within ideal temperature range. Above x degrees, current increases / drops to xA current (OR) Current is invariable with regard to temperature.
It's obvious that a lot of people here have at least some basic machining knowledge. I thought maybe somebody also had an ammeter and a pen. I really have no desire to buy 6 different batteries and rig some wire leads for my ammeter to go through these vent holes, but I assumed somebody involved in the manufacture of the Cera had actually already done that.
(There is no such thing as 'too technical' when talking to an engineer)
OF
Well-Known Member
Now look, I disagree, essentially calling me a liar is offensive. As does ignoring what I just said while we're on the subject.....
Didn't I just tell you the custom made batteries you just threw in my face didn't pan out? You've never seen them, and won't.
Again, this has been tested. TV did their homework. IMO it's not realistic to demand those results. Accept (and be guided by them) or not, but please stop sounding like you know better if you don't?
I've pointed to the major issue in the unusual case we have here, internal resistance. AKA "Thevenin Resistance":
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/electric/thevenin.html
This is not usually a published spec, it has to be determined experimentally. It's what causes 'voltage sag under load'. And "under load" is what we care about.
Are you really ready to discuss this fine point of Circuit Analysis? I'm ready here, having taught it more than a few times over the years.......
Ask my advice and take it or leave it. Reasonable and fine by me. But please don't make out like I'm blowing smoke unless you have something more than "'this feels better to me' as scientific evidence".
TIA
OF
nopartofme
Over the falls, in a barrel
The more I think about it, I think this tech conference is gonna be great for TET. People happening to run across TET's website, or this thread, or TechCrunch's article, and seeing pretty pictures, is one thing. Lots of people walking by their booth and seeing the Cera in person a few feet away, in both SS and Ti, is another thing altogether! Not to mention the recent victories in WA and CO giving more people cause to stop and pay attention to a device like this. I imagine things will be pretty busy over there for them!
I wonder if they might even be using the new EL cart to demonstrate? Any lucky FC goers able to attend could get a neat sneak peek…
I wonder if they might even be using the new EL cart to demonstrate? Any lucky FC goers able to attend could get a neat sneak peek…
Organica
Well-Known Member
Re-read it. I didn't call you a liar, no more than I called Albert Einstein a liar. I'm not going to try to flop my MS out on the table to prove that I don't have to 'take your word for it' when I didn't ask for advice, I asked for a technical explanation. Any bluster about 'I know enough about ___ that I can't be questioned until you prove you have bigger science balls than me' is exactly the opposite of promoting factual data transfer or scientific discovery.
I would renew my request for numerical data, but this appears to have devolved into something completely unproductive despite my best efforts. I'll let the experts in Cali get their first cup of coffee and call them directly. I had hoped that my (still unanswered) question might have a useful answer that others on the internet might also have a use for. To me, that's the point of such forums. Crowdsourcing of information is kind of the point of this, yes?
Or perhaps it's to create a digital tribal village with one witch doctor who can't be questioned about the common cold until you prove that you can also speak to nature spirits and make fire.
"This is not usually a published spec, it has to be determined experimentally. It's what causes 'voltage sag under load'. And "under load" is what we care about.
Are you really ready to discuss this fine point of Circuit Analysis? I'm ready here, having taught it more than a few times over the years......."
The internal resistance is going to be the same across all the 2250's or 2900's or 3400's (or whatever) that you buy from the same manufacturer under the same model number. (Or it should. Maybe I'm the only person who has actually watched batteries being made and knows that tolerances in the manufacturing process will ALWAYS cause slight variations in such things. These are extremely minor and won't be noticed by 99.99999% of consumers) However, these are BOTH extremely minor contributing factors compared to the overall major specs of the battery.
I agree that the practical behavior of all of these battery types in the Cera has to be proved experimentally. The short answer would appear to be that nobody here has done such experiments. There's nothing wrong with that. You not having the data I want is no indictment of your big sciency balls.
What I am looking for is DATA. Not 'Take my word for it' and certainly not 'You must be able to prove you have more knowledge of electrical minutia before I will agree that data is any more valid than my stated opinion'.
I would renew my request for numerical data, but this appears to have devolved into something completely unproductive despite my best efforts. I'll let the experts in Cali get their first cup of coffee and call them directly. I had hoped that my (still unanswered) question might have a useful answer that others on the internet might also have a use for. To me, that's the point of such forums. Crowdsourcing of information is kind of the point of this, yes?
Or perhaps it's to create a digital tribal village with one witch doctor who can't be questioned about the common cold until you prove that you can also speak to nature spirits and make fire.
"This is not usually a published spec, it has to be determined experimentally. It's what causes 'voltage sag under load'. And "under load" is what we care about.
Are you really ready to discuss this fine point of Circuit Analysis? I'm ready here, having taught it more than a few times over the years......."
The internal resistance is going to be the same across all the 2250's or 2900's or 3400's (or whatever) that you buy from the same manufacturer under the same model number. (Or it should. Maybe I'm the only person who has actually watched batteries being made and knows that tolerances in the manufacturing process will ALWAYS cause slight variations in such things. These are extremely minor and won't be noticed by 99.99999% of consumers) However, these are BOTH extremely minor contributing factors compared to the overall major specs of the battery.
I agree that the practical behavior of all of these battery types in the Cera has to be proved experimentally. The short answer would appear to be that nobody here has done such experiments. There's nothing wrong with that. You not having the data I want is no indictment of your big sciency balls.
What I am looking for is DATA. Not 'Take my word for it' and certainly not 'You must be able to prove you have more knowledge of electrical minutia before I will agree that data is any more valid than my stated opinion'.
I don't know if it's been linked to in this thread before, but there's a good 18650 comparison resource here -> http://lygte-info.dk/review/batteries2012/Common18650comparator.php
There are a couple cells where the curve really looks good for use in the cera- the INR mentioned previously, and the LG D1. That said, the only batteries I've used in the loose leaf are the stock 2900s and the amazon 2250s. The 2250s work far better for me, despite being rated fewer mAh. It's the internal resistance that OF mentions- often overlooked, but important in a high demand application like this. With lower internal resistance the coil will get hotter faster, and less energy will be wasted creating unwanted heat inside the battery!
Also, I second the request for info on the EL cart- I'm waiting on one and I'm excited to see what TV has come up with. Glad I have an ava res to puff on in the meantime!
There are a couple cells where the curve really looks good for use in the cera- the INR mentioned previously, and the LG D1. That said, the only batteries I've used in the loose leaf are the stock 2900s and the amazon 2250s. The 2250s work far better for me, despite being rated fewer mAh. It's the internal resistance that OF mentions- often overlooked, but important in a high demand application like this. With lower internal resistance the coil will get hotter faster, and less energy will be wasted creating unwanted heat inside the battery!
Also, I second the request for info on the EL cart- I'm waiting on one and I'm excited to see what TV has come up with. Glad I have an ava res to puff on in the meantime!