e-Cigarettes - Electronic Cigarettese - e-Cigarette-Blog.com

Hi all.

I regularly read this forum, and have now had some experience with all of this, and so I have an…..assumption, and some questions.

I think a lot of us have had this experience… You get a new atomizer, crank it up, and the vapor is AWESOME. You really enjoy this new atomizer, BUT, after about 4 days of use, the vapor is still acceptable, but no where NEAR what it was on day one. So, you wash, clean, scrub, change carts, bats, etc. but can’t seem to get it back to it’s original glory. I’ve had this happen to me with an Njoy, Generics, a mini, and now with my Janty.

So, I been thinking about the construction of the atomizer and trying to figure out what changes from day one through day four. Here is what I am thinking…

I don’t believe that the wire mesh used to transfer the juice from the cart to the atomizer and surrounding the porcelain pot is degrading. It’s function is simply to transfer and hold the juice, and I find it hard to believe that this role degrades so rapidly. Second, The heating element itself may become charred somewhat, but again, I doubt that it’s ability to produce sufficient heat to vaporize the juice disappears. I’m also ruling out the batteries here because if I use those very same batteries on another new atomizer, I’m back to AWESOME vapor again. So, this only leaves one element, the material used in the core of the heating element.

I’ve seen in some of the photos that this core is normally charred and black after use. It is believed that this cores role is to provide physical support to the heating element, and to provide a method for the juice to get from the steel wool to the heating element. Now THIS sounds like it’s a likely candidate to be the component that is so drastically changing over those magic 4 days. So my questions are…. Does anyone know what this core material is? And, if it’s role is as assumed, why are they not using the same steel wool that is used on top of and around the pot? I assume that it too could support the heating element, transfer the juice, and NOT burn up.

And, depending on input from all of you, I have one last question… Is there any way to disassemble an atomizer NON-DESTRUCTIVELY? If I thought I could actually take one apart AND put it back together in a functional state, I would probably like to experiment a bit with this core-material and try and identify why my atomizers are only my close friends for about 4 days.

OK, so what am I missing?

Tex|||After ripping several atomizers apart i have come to the exact same conclusion as the mesh is still clean and free of debris but the wick is charred and stops soaking liquid as it should.

I struggled at first with the cleaning and think i found the secret to getting them 100% back to life as the one i have at present is 11 days old after 2 cleans as good as new.(could also just be luck)

When the atomizer starts to block place it in a pan stood on the battery end and fill with water to the level of the collar, then boil the water for 15 mins or so.(this makes the atomizer hotter than the water and causes bubbles of air to rush up inside the atomizer)

Now swish it about, drain, blow out water, add 3 drops of liquid, full cart and hey presto.(can take a good half hour puffing to flush water out and liquid in)

This could all be luck or simply the use of different liquid but give it a shot and let me know what you think|||steam cleaning !!! now theres a thought. i have a steam steriliser here for baby bottles etc..i may just try that when my atomizers start playing up.|||Hi Ted.

Funny about your suggestion. I JUST got done boiling a generic pen style and my mini. Of course, the pen style atomizer I am playing with a Glycerin/Coconut flavoring mixture (cause I puff to much with the high nicotine ones and needed something to play with) but it is cranking out a LOT of vapor, but again, I can’t attribute it just to the cleaning. I am going to boil another two generic pens and will only use (factory) carts to test those.

As for the mini…It too appears (so far) to be producing a lot more vapor. Lets see if it lasts.

Boiling does (on my first try) appear to improve the atomizer performance.

Anyway, I’d still like to get some answers. I’m silly that way.

Tex|||Yep had a few goes myself and the key seems to be standing it on its end as this gets the air bubbles to pass through the chamber cleaning the wick.

I’m sure between us all we can find a solution to the clogging issue as it seems to be around every corner.||| |||Apostle that was a brilliant thought!

I hauled my trusty old ‘Steam Bee’ out the cupboard and put the nozzle onto my atomiser. It has a pressurised steam that shoots out in bursts so I was a bit afraid I would blow my atomiser to pieces but thought it worth the try. I could not believe the gunk it blew out. Better still I haven’t waited for it to dry out either and it is working beautifully!

Just one word of caution it does make the atomiser very very hot - so if anyone tries this bear that in mind.

I think I have found my holy grail for cleaning. It’s very fast to do as the little steamer heats up quickly. One gets a combo of pressure & steam with this device. And it is great for cleaning other stuff too.

JML Steam Bee from JML Direct|||Felt inspired by the first attempt so I just steamed all my atomisers. Again I just waited till the atomiser cooled and then started puffing! All working like new so far.

I found two things, firstly the burnt taste has gone from my one atomiser that I tried cleaning yesterday with alcohol and then boiling. I thought I had ruined it as it seemed dead, but this morning it perked up. Although boiling improved it I could still taste a charred type of undertone. That is sorted now and I feel really pleased about it as I detest that burnt taste.

Second thing was that it left my atomiser very thirsty! I dripped a few drops onto it but the cart still seemed to empty really fast. Topped it up and enjoying the feeling of having brand new out the parcel atomisers. Hope it lasts and things don’t go pearshaped tomorrow - but so far so good!|||These are great ideas.. I might have to try them out on some of the atomizers I tested and I didnt feel comfortable selling because the draw was more than it should be..

Phil|||a steam bee eh? would love to try this. anyone up for swopsies on an ultrasonic jewerly cleaner?…i know you are!!I found a cheap one at Amazon: Amazon.com: Electric Steam Cleaner: Home & Garden

Related posts

• Scratchy/tickley throat (0)
• Vapor-Less (0)
• two new e-ciggers, same house (0)
• Nazamataz (0)
• My thoughts on the DSE901b and PureSmoker.com (0)

So we’ve been talking about the burning taste for awhile.

I’m currently smoking a rn4081 or Super Cigarette, but this burning taste has eventually led me to ditch every atomizer, whether I use it exclusively with a cartridge or I exclusively drip. I’ve got 6 atomizers, 2 pen-style and 4 rn4081’s that produce smoke, but along with it, they produce a NASTY burning taste. My short term solution is to buy a bunch of rn4081 atomizers (if you look around, you can get them for $7 a pop) and just replace them when they start tasting burnt. No amount of cleaning will get rid of the nasty burnt taste.

SO then. Why the burnt taste? As Jarvis has explained and diagrammed for us here in this post, there is a wick inside the filament that soaks up the liquid, which is then heated to create the vapor.

Here’s a crude diagram:

This wick starts to burn after awhile, presumably because it dries out. And, from my experience, it dries out fairly easily. No amount of coddling seems to save it from drying out and tasting terrible in a week or two.

Additionally, there is the problem of the e-liquid itself leaving a residue behind. Perhaps this is also accountable for the taste: the liquid gets left behind, heats, burns, eventually it is a solid that is burning and that also could create a nasty taste. Here is a demonstration of the solids left behind (translated from Dutch)

So, what are the solutions? Well, I think, because of the solids left behind, that it is necessary to have a disposable atomizer. If there were no solids, or a dependable way of removing solids, we could have a permanent atomizer, but as there is no liquid that doesn’t leave one solid or another behind, then we are best served going with a disposable atomizer.

There are two disposable atomizers on the market today. The LoongTotem and the GreenCig. I have read no reviews of the GreenCig, but the LoongTotem reviews have been negative, across the board. It has some sort of paper in the cart that burns and creates a bad taste. (I searched for the image, but couldn’t find it. Can somebody help me out here?) So, there are no good disposables out right now.

Here’s what I’m coming to. How about a longer thicker wick that goes into a cartridge that is FULL of nicotine liquid. This instead of the absorbent wool that is currently used to suspend the liquid. The cart would last longer, and the wick would remain wet constantly. By the time the solids from the liquid start to accumulate on the filament, the cart would be empty, and we could put in a fresh one. Here’s another crude illustration:

Anyhow. It’s a thought. Aside from convenience, I think that, because of the inevitable solid accumulation on the atomizer, that a disposable cart will be the only way to go.|||Drawings are great … LOL … some massive paint skills going on there.

Good idea though. So many good ideas, just no funds behind them to back them up and get them produced. hmmm….|||man either you have a tablet, or your mouse skills are better than mine.|||Looks ingenious to me. You eliminate the "roll cage" over the heater element, assure a more consistent flow of fluid, and — important to me — get rid of the core material (polyester in some cases) that ends up as stray fibers in your atomizer or, worse, burned areas in your cartridge. Not sure why someone hasn’t tried your idea. And it shouldn’t be more expensive than the present setup, unlike making an ultrasonic mister, for instance.

Zippo lighter = inspiration.|||hell, if someone makes a good ultrasonic one, i’d pay the price.

With that being said, i would have no problem with disposable ones either.|||Yes I like these ideas. Here’s a sloppy manip of an earlier cross section I posted of a possible solution to the burning fiber. Incorporate a new coil/fiber, the steel wool bridge, and a bit of the ceramic into the cartridges. Would save a bit more material than the whole atomizer being thrown out.
|||Let’s consider for a moment what the atomiser does and the way it does it.

The device consists of a pot made of metal, ceramic, or a combination of those materials. In the centre of the pot is a heating coil with a material core centre. Surrounding the pot is a basket of steel wool. Rising above the pot is a bridge made of steel wool.

So that is the basic mechanical design, next what happens when we "smoke" it.

Before I talk about how the device works it’s a good idea to talk a bit about what each of the core components function is.

Steel wool bridge.

The bridge directly contacts the wool in the cartridge and by capillary action wicks the juice into the wool basket that surrounds the core pot.

Steel wool pot

This performs two functions,

i) it acts as the storage reservoir holding an amount of juice for use

ii) it performs the first stage of the atomisation process, more details below.

Heating coil

When heated to the correct temperature the coil creates mist from the droplets of PG and nicotine.

Heating coil wick

The wick seems to perform two actions,

i) it absorbs an amount of juice to provide it with direct contact to the heater coil

ii) providing thermal shock protection and heat caused deformation protection to the coil as it rapidly heats and cools.

Now we understand what each of the parts is doing, lets describe what happens

When we inhale on the device, the airflow is detected and the electronics kick in and connect the power from the battery to the heater coil and the timer circuit, after there has a continuous air flow of 3-5 seconds the timer circuit cuts the power to the heater coil.

When we inhale the liquid held in the wool basket is drawn into the central core of the atomiser in fine droplets, it’s these fine droplets as well as the small amount of liquid held in suspension in the heater coil wick core that is turned into the vapour we inhale into our lungs.

The amount of mist produced is reliant on a number of factors

a. the amount of juice held in the basket

b. the amount of fine droplets created by inhalation

c. the surface area of the heater coil

d. the internal airflow design funnelling the droplets correctly onto the heater coil

From this it would seem logical to assume that provided sufficient juice is available in the wool basket that a smaller sized atomiser will produce greater smoke volumes than a larger device. Think of water flowing through a pipe, a large pipe gives a slower flow, a small pipe gives a faster flow. This is rather borne out by the reviews we have all seen of cigar sized unit and the much smaller DSE901 based devices, the smaller DSE901 wins hands down. This is purely due to the volume of air being drawn through a smaller surface area of mesh at higher velocity than the larger device and being able to draw more fine droplets onto the heating coil. The viscosity of the juice is an important consideration here, too thick and it wont form the initial fine droplets as it is sucked from the wool basket, too thin and it will not be held in the wool basket, but instead flow through it.

I’m only assuming the wick in the centre of the heating coil performs the actions I’ve attributed to it, it would seem to be the most reasonable suggestions for it’s existence.

Is this what we can taste as a burnt taste in some atomisers ?

Yes I believe it is one of the providers of the burnt taste and quite probably the largest contributor. I think there are two other contributors.

The first is stray fibres from the cartridge coming into contact with the heater coil, note that it will need to be in contact with the coil directly not merely the wool bridge wick, although this will become heated it’s large surface area will rapidly dissipate the heat away.

The second is evaporated juice burning off the surfaces of the atomiser. Think of the oven in your stove at home, cooking in the oven causes the walls of the oven to become dirty, this is from spatter or the condensing of vapours from the cooking. If the dirt is allowed to build up, eventually it begins to burn each time we use the oven, this is usually obvious by the amount of smoke that is produced, clean the oven and the smoke goes away. On a much smaller scale the same thing is happening inside our atomisers. It may also be happening on the wick in the centre of the coil, that would account of the blackened lumps we have seen in pictures. So regular cleaning to dissolve and remove crystallised or dried up juice residue is vital.

Would a different heater coil design help ?

Perhaps.

The coil of relatively fine wire is a highly effective method of producing the highest surface area of a material given a specific volume of material available. I do feel the linear shape of the coil is not the best configuration and that a circular or preferably a spiral shape may prove to be a better design to use.

I have also given some considerable thought to different shapes and materials, for example, a ceramic heater platform in a variety of different shapes, cubic, thin square, orb, ring, multi-faceted, etc but I continue to come back to the coil of wire as the most reasonably efficient method.

That will do for my ramblings so far, I hope this gives you something to think about and consider and offers up a view of what’s going on inside your little device.

BTW, how the hell they can charge what they do for them is beyond me, they is nothing complex about the design, there are no exotic materials in the build, even the finish on them is really nothing out of the ordinary … If the build cost including packaging in China was much more than US$1.00 I’d be surprised.|||I like Jarvis’s idea. I don’t really see the necessity of having the steel wool bridge, however. I’ve been straight dripping, and I’m not trying for any degree of accuracy. So, plenty of my drips get into the ceramic pot, and directly on the coil itself, saturating the wick. I’ve found that when I put too much juice in, it doesn’t smoke. So then I tip the cig upwards to let the juice run away from the coil, draw, and get smoke. So, I’m imagining that it would function fine if I dripped without the bridge - the only thing here is that the bridge absorbs a little liquid and keeps me from having to drip so often.

So I’m proposing that the primary function of the bridge is not to draw liquid but to keep the cartridge wool away from direct contact with the coil. Only this and nothing (not much) more. It’s secondary function is just as MNZ says - it serves as a conveyance for the liquid from the cartridge down to the level of the filament. In fact, I just confirmed this - I pulled a bridge out of one of my nasty tasting atomizers, and it still produces smoke when I drip on it (still tastes nasty.) All that’s missing is a reliable conveyance.

Anyhow, here’s an iteration on MNZ’s idea, sans wire bridge and with a redesigned battery that works more like an audio jack or a pen cap. My concern with this is that the liquid would wick too fast and be used up too quickly, but this could be remedied with the wick material, I suppose. Also, I like MNZ’s idea of a spiral-shaped coil, rather than the current linear design. AND, I feel like the wick and coil would see the most action closest to the liquid reservoir, and I don’t have an answer for this at the moment.

|||Looks good jdrancor, with your wick design you could get rid of the steel wool bridge altogether, and perhaps even the ceramic reservoir part.
|||jarvis,

Yes I’m afraid the ruyan products are the same as everyone else’s all your paying for there is the name.

And I couldn’t agree with you more … If we were buying the device described in the original patent documents we certainly wouldn’t be having this conversation now. The described beast is about as far removed from what’s available as a Formula One car is to a lawn mower.

I think it’s all down to price, the whizzo beast that is in the patent would be hugely more expensive to manufacture and would exponentially raise the price.

Would I buy one if it was … say $500-$1000, I’m not sure.Guys, the thing to remember about patents is, they don’t have to work, and they don’t have to ever be actually built. They just have to be an original idea sketched out in enough detail to describe the idea and it’s implementation. Most patents are junk which doesn’t actually work, but it secures the IDEA.

Also, I’ve seen several sites that claim to have patents. There are probably dozens of different patents involved here. Some of them maybe for something as simple as adding one more airhole to the existing design.jd, I think the solid metal bridge is there to prevent the wool bridge from being pressed onto the heating coil. I would imagine that the turbulence and resulting pressure drop, suction effectively, of our inhalations could place quite a bit of pressure onto the wool bridge from the cartridge material, that coming into contact with the heating coil could potentially cause all sorts of nasty things to happen, not the least of which could be a wee shock in the gob mate ! Oh and the death of it’s electronics.

Looking at the possible airflow patterns, I think that the droplets are created from the basket surrounding the pot rather than from the bridge, that I think is there only to draw the liquid into the basket.
Here’s the simplest/cheapest solution to the burnt taste with the current e-cig design. With a minor redesign the steel wool bridge is hinged, it flips back, with tweezers you yank the old burnt coil/fiber out, and plug a new one in. Since it’s just a wire with a bit of thread in it it couldn’t cost more than a couple bucks for a whole bag of these things.

Related posts

• what makes an atomizer lose it potency and after how long (0)
• The Ideal E-Cig (0)
• The (0)
• Newbie has some questions (0)
• Naz (0)

1. Replace LED with laser. Take a drag and it shoots the laser. Very practical. And dangerous to the eyes of those around you.

2. E-hookah- If you die of nicotine poisoning, we will refund you 100% of your purchase price!

3. Bluetooth- Allows you to do synchronize with your computer or palm pilot. We have absolutely no idea why you would want to do this other than being able to say that you did.

4. iPod jack- because everything else has one.

5. Built in vibrating function- Makes a great massager

Look for all these sometime around when hell freezes over in our online shop.

|||yeah, made by google |||Um, |||Built in pez dispenser lol|||Rocket power, and a turbo booster!|||I’m thinking an easy-to-unfold Transformer. Pocketable before the mouthpiece and battery (or batteries) flip out. Use curved tubing inside, instead of a straight line from cartridge to atomizer. Incorporate the Venturi effect. Shrink the size; increase the battery power.

There is no reason these have to look like cigarettes. In fact, it’s unfortunate that they do. Looking and acting like a cigarette is asking for public trouble.

So let the mind roam. What’s the optimum shape to both carry and use? How should they be carried? Whimsy not welcome because it will have no mass market appeal. But everything else could be tomorrow’s e-vape device.|||If your dreaming, why not just like a pack of cigarette, with a hooka type mouth piece tube clipped to your collar, for hits when ever you need one.

Or clip on nose type, ala the Movie Dune|||What we need is super-dooper space age extra long life batteries made by Sedansa; Loong Totem type, recyclable atomisers; manual switches a la Janty; extra strong Wikid type eliquid made and tested by Ruyan and flavoured with Bickfords flavours; super mini size in rainbow colours with designer, custom carry case.||| |||Someone did this thread a couple of months back you dont get more wacky than that !

Related posts

• Scratchy/tickley throat (0)
• Changes (0)
• Nic Tolerance and Certain Liquids (0)
• Loongtotem E-Liquid (0)
• Addicted to buying e-cigs ! (0)

I know that’s none too subtle. Lemme try again: GET OVER HERE!

Speaking seriously, the only times I consistently see people’s faces tend to droop while showing off an e-cig is when I say that they are all made in China, and that’s where you gotta go if you want any of the best ones. There is a lot of trust in a brand that can claim they make their products "here" even when we’re talking about a product that could kill them (or talking about a product that can curb such a habit). Even here, among the products staunchest supporters, there are people who prefer US reselling ebayers to buying factory direct…and some cautionary tales that might keep people off the product as well.

I can’t speak for every North Carolinian, but we never (as a state) bashed RJR and PM on their tobacco product sales. I doubt we’d bash their competition. And if we can make Dells we can probably make these too.

Any way you slice it, this post boils down to a "do you have plans" post. Its a feature I think should be considered, and I’m surprised there’s been no suggestion post openly stating it.

Cheers.|||cost is always a large factor though. The cost of labor here is dramatically higher than it is in china. We can buy a $40 e-cig from china which sucks, or a $500 dollar e-cig from here that hopefully is good.

my numbers were pulled out of thin air, but you get the point.

-Dusty-|||I was gonna say essentially the same thing. Ruyan owns most of the patents for these devices, and sells licenses for manufacturers to make them. If a U.S. company decided to manufacture them, the license cost would be small compared to the labor cost. That’s why we’re losing so many jobs to Asia, particularly.

On a personal note, my daughter, a medical transcriptionist (not easy and $28 an hour for the labor), took the phone call that told her the biggest hospital chain she relied on is moving transcription duties to India. My daughter-in-law got a notice the same day that her reception counter job at an airline is being eliminated so cheap labor can answer phones at home, all tied together by computers logging reservations.

How does this country ever regain economic balance? We want to buy cheap goods, but be paid high wages. The two don’t work well in the same country. So we continue to ship our money to China or Saudi Arabia, never to see those devalued dollars return.|||It is an effort to not veer wildly into the benefits of bringing manufacturing back to the USA. The price we pay for practically everything does not reflect the actual value of the items. Cheap labor or not. Goods are made to be *purchased* rather than to be used. More often than not the items *look* like they should (it is shaped like a chair, colored like a chair, etc) but after six months stop performing the service promised by their appearance (the chair breaks.) We need to manufacture quality, and pay for quality, and stop wasting our money on stupid crap we don’t need. Okay. Done.

I would easily pay $200 for a made in the USA electric smoking device that was built to last and designed well. I think a device like that would have enough elements that differed, even from the Ruyan design, that patent problems would be minimal. Ruyan owns the patent on first generation designs that must be improved fairly dramatically to be brought on a large scale to the general population. At this point in time Ruyan is byfar the best manufacturer, but, I think we all agree on this, there is dramatic room for improvement. With a good design, and a good look and feel, and good taste, this product could easily supplant half the cigarettes in the US. I’d say, if anything could support a US plant, or even (dare I dream) start a trend back to US-based manufacturing, a next generation electric smoker could.|||you do make a valid point, but US design does not mean it has to be manufactured here.. Not saying it couldn’t be, but cost can be prohibitive.|||Doubt the tobacco lobby would be having it. Unless the the Pharma lobby countered with their own product, but that wont happen either. America isn’t what it used to be… too many ‘interests’ to protect, but hey, if you want a US driven company, than NJOY is an option: http://www.njoy.com/biographies.php|||

Related posts

• Nicotine regulation: UK future (0)
• Will E-Cigs ever become (0)
• what makes an atomizer lose it potency and after how long (0)
• The way to list a product (0)
• The TRUTH of mini e-cigarettes. (0)

Positive Thermal Coefficient Ceramics become extremely resistant above a composition-dependent threshold temperature. This behavior causes the material to act as its own thermostat, since current passes when it is cool, and does not when it is hot.

In layman’s terms, PTC ceramics have a natural cutoff point where they will no longer conduct electricity if they get too hot.

Would this not remove the need for safety features like timers while still giving the same benefit? Also, they can’t "overheat" as existing heating elements can, because they lose their ability to conduct heat at certain temperatures. The atomizers, in theory, would become safer, hardier, and more resistant to wearing out, with fewer required electronics for use, and thus also fewer parts that might fail over time.

These ceramics have a long life and a proven ability to act as a heating element in equipment like rear-window defrost heaters, space heaters, and hair dryers.

Biggest question is: can they get hot enough to vaporize nicotine solution before their inherent cutoff point?|||How hot do they get? And how hot do you have to get to vaporize liquid nicotine?

Someone here spitballed 300-400F for our heating elements. I’m not sure how accurate that might be. One seller told me his got to 220f, but I think that’s too low. You have to heat tobacco leaves to between 257f and 302f to vaporize the nicotine out. OTOH, maybe liquid form nicotine boils easier.

Cost would be another factor. Ceramics have to be manufactured, how pricey is this stuff?

Interesting idea, though. Maybe Ludo will see it and go HMMMMM.|||If I get too technical, quote something you don’t understand and I will try to explain. I’m posting most of the info from websites I’ve been researching around in. A lot of it is…not too easy to translate accurately, but I’ll try.

UL Recognition for PTC Heaters
Disc Style Size 0.100" to 0.750" (2.5mm to 19.1mm)
Rectangular Size Style Length: 0.100" to 2.00" (2.5mm to 50.8mm)
Width: 0.100" to 2.00" (2.5mm to 50.8mm)
Part Thickness 0.030" to 0.250" (0.76mm to 6.35mm)
Switch Temperature (Ts ) 40潞C to 180潞C
Voltage Rating (Vmax ) 12 volts to 240 volts
Resistance at 25潞C (R25 ) <100kW

Here is a link to some online info about them. That company appears to build them specifically for temp sensor apps, but they do make single sided heaters (range temperatures from 50潞C to 135潞C). Cost would be a factor. This is probably more expensive than steel wool…but they’re still pretty dang cheap.

A savings standpoint can be considered, however. If you purchased PTC wafers in bulk, and no longer needed to purchase capacitors, vacuum sensors or other fragile equipment, it would probably be less expensive for a PTC ceramic atomizer than for current ones. Like I intimate, all these would require for operation would be a power source, connecting wires and an on/off switch. The ceramics would be their own cutoff/safety feature. You can try to run current through them forever, they are chemically incapable of overheating.

Spectrum makes middle line PTC ceramic. Nothing exotic really; their PTC reaches null resistance at close to 130潞-40潞C

whats the conversion for f?

EDIT: nvm, i found a converter online. 180潞C is about 356F. 140潞C (still pretty good stuff) is near 284潞F; 130潞C=266潞F. 135潞C, the models for our purposes from the company I link, would be 275潞F.

So..if your friend is right about the liquid needing 220潞F to vaporize, they have more than a little breathing room. But if we need 400, then we’d end up being low even with quality PTC ceramic. But 400潞F, I believe, would be melting these steel wool atomizers into gloop. Well, maybe not gloop (steel has a melting point of around 1300潞C, and yes, I meant to type 2 zeros), but it would play havoc on the ultra thin wire/material.

In all honesty, I think those numbers are still very high. The vaporization point of water is only 100潞C. We may need near 150潞C to get nicotine out of tobacco, but once its out, do we need to get it to extraction heat levels again in our liquid versions? 220潞F is barely above boiling water temp (104.4潞 repeating C). I think the liquid/vaporization point for what we use is about that range. I think so because…cigarette smoke feels hotter than e-cig vapor. PG has a boiling point of 188C, nicotine 277C. I could very easily be wrong.

A simple experiment (which I will do soon) will be to boil some e-liquid on a stove top and register the heat of the liquid. I’ll get back to you with hard figures after the tests are complete.

Next big question: how to build a PTC ceramic so it can be flash heated to reach those temps quickly. I’m guessing a wafer or waffle plate could do the trick? ceramics do best in a thin strip, and would be easiest to manufacture. Think like the inside of a toaster; those little wave heater lines inside if you look through to hole when you have a slice of bread in there. it doesn’t take long for those strips to get red hot. A thin strip connecting the two contacts would probably be enough to do the trick with the minimum cost to manufacturers.

Keep in mind, that the original patent considers ceramics in their construction. They used piezoelectric ceramics in some of the prototypes; which do and are pretty much the same thing (note from the information that "sudden temperature fluctuations can generate relatively high voltages (in piezoelectric ceramics), capable of depolarizing the ceramic element". Those ceramics need a capacitor to regulate such temperature and voltage changes; as I understand things (which is my way of saying I could be wrong) PTC doesn’t.|||Minus Sign, I just read that original patent. Oh my goodness, but it is thorough! E-cigs were supposed to combine a heating element AND atomisation, and the liquid was to be injected by a pump, not leaked from a polyester filter. What we have on the market now is the result of cheapening what looks to be vastly superior, but more expensive products.

I haven’t studied those engineering drawings in detail, but those are not what we use. Those drawings are what the Ruyan inventor patented in 2004. My burning question now is why don’t we have those ultrasonic misters with liquid reservoirs and pressure injection, etc, etc. If Ruyan made one of those, it would be worth the necessarily higher price!

BTW: For the technically minded, the patent is at http://www.esigaretshop.nl/images/patent.pdf|||

Related posts

• The Ideal E-Cig (0)
• That darn burning taste (1)
• Newbie has some questions (0)
• what makes an atomizer lose it potency and after how long (0)
• The (0)

I would like my ecig to have a switch off period when you have had a cigs worth! because i do tend to over puff on it lol obviously the cut of switch could be switched off for those of us who just wanna puff none stop lol|||its been discussed many times … ecig companies (china) don’t listen to us unfortunately …||| |||I use disapproving non-smokers as a timer. They sorta shame me into putting it away every now and then…||| ||| |||I’m on it, Kit. As I said, I put it away every now and then. Probably good for me…|||Until the general public accepts that e-cigs won’t hurt them - we will still be treated as a smoker - an outcast. I will say however, that many non-smokers do accept my e-smoking, only a few question it’s safety.|||I’ve stopped being quite as confrontational (with staff anyway). It was fun for a while but I’ve lost most of the social exclusion feeling I had a month ago. My standard MO these days is to have the ecig in pieces as I’m buying a beer, then assemble it as I’m being served. Everybody looks - never fails. Then I tell what it is and say that the vapour they will see isn’t smoke. Most people are interested and 4 out of 5 times they ask me to demonstrate.

Emp||| A disassembled pen style fits perfectly in the new Camel Snus oblong tin. Camel first came out with a traditional round tin, then changed to a beautiful oblong one. The battery fits diagonally in the tin, with the atomizer and cartridge pieces on each side. There’s room even for an extra cartridge and a few teabags of snus. It fits easily in a shirt pocket and would be quite a draw at a bar. Now you’re ready for a night out.

Related posts

• Wheres the hit gone! (0)
• Vapor-Less (0)
• they do have a mind of their own (0)
• The Electronic Cigarette examined (0)
• My thoughts on the DSE901b and PureSmoker.com (0)

Some great ideas, copied over here from an inappropriate marketing thread about Camel Crush cigarettes….

|||I think that’s is a great idea.|||These ideas sound quite interesting, but I don’t quite agree with the idea of having to use more cartridges / capsules than we already do. It can’t cost a lot to produce them, but surely making more little pieces of plastic for the same job is a bit pointless? Are you meaning that the capsules dissolve entirely? What could the liquid be contained in that wouldn’t be toxic when inhaled?

I do like the theory though - at least for the convenience - changing cartridges can be a bit fiddly.|||Cross post from the closed thread:

Last time I saw a crushable capsule in a fag was on James Bond - and it KILLED the guy…|||I think the idea of a gel-capsule might cut down on costs. A more permanent type of mouthpiece could be devised, wherein the capsules are inserted into it, puncturing them in the process. After smoked, you could even toss them onto the ground, as they are water permeable. So all you would have to carry around with you is your e-cig and a little container of these capsules.|||i was just thinking of something similiar too like a cart similiar to the penstyle carts. it would encircled by a bolt like feature as you rotate it wouldpush more liquid out. would mean that one cart could be similiar to a packs worth|||

Related posts

• Which devices do you use and how? (0)
• whats ur Flava! (0)
• Wacky E-Cig Ideas (0)
• Value for money (0)
• Using tags - updating old posts (0)

Very simple: a FAST charger that charges 2 or 4 batteries in one go. I found one for the batteries of the E-sigar(illo):

The Soshine SC-S8 battery charger from Deal Extreme is a charger for two E-sigar or E-sigarillo batteries. It comes with a power lead with European plug and works worldwide on 100 to 240V.

It also comes with two Li-ion batteries of 400 mAh that fit the E-sigar(illo). This is a little more than the standard batteries of e.g. E-cig that are 350 mAh.

It does have an USB-A port. According to the manual which is written in some sort of 聯me Tarzan 聳 you Jane聰 English, this provides USB-power on the USB-port for any device that can be charged from an USB port (iPod, mobile phone). This USB port can also be used to feed the charger and charge batteries from the USB-port of a portable computer or USB car-adaptor.

The charger has two independent channels so batteries with different capacities and different discharge can be mixed; you can also charge one battery at the time. This is a fast charger, so the batteries are getting somewhat warm during charging, but this is normal and there is a thermal safety build-in at 40掳 C.

The charging procedure is bock standard: insert the batteries, the one or two red lights go on, the lights turns green and the charger is switched to stand-by when fully charged. One completely discharged 350-400 mAh battery is recharged in about one hour, inserting two batteries doubles the time. You do not need to unplug and replug the charger when switching batteries, as some chargers require.

So overall a very decent compact charger, that is quit quick and versatile.

Related posts

• [hacks] easyer draging (0)
• you all encounter sometime hard to suck?have to suck hard than the battery work (0)
• Yay! My Njoy will arrive on Wednesday! (0)
• WOW - Kissbox Classic. (0)
• Would LOVE to see Charger That Can Charge Two Batteries (0)

My experiences of drip-smoking have led me to the belief that a device able to provide larger quantities of nicotine solution to the atomizer would produce a denser, more authentic experience.

Clearly there would have to be a radical re-design to enable this. Currently, the liquid is delivered via the wadding in the cartridge, and the flow into the atomizer is limited by the physics inherent in the design. Additionally, the liquid would have to be made weaker, given the larger quantities being delivered.

The solution might be to have the liquid delivered in measured doses via a mechanical system incorporated into the cartridge. The wadding would be done away with and a partially sealed area created in the cartridge for the liquid. Perhaps a miniature version of the valve found on shower gel bottles could be used, or maybe the viscosity of the liquid would mean that a small hole could be used without the fluid leaking.

Pressing the end of the cartridge would force a measured amount of solution through into the atomizer.

Just thoughts!…….

SJ|||A lot of people are trying to find ways around the wadding in the cartridge or to make it last longer. On a different forum there are some very creative people.

One has tried "coarse steel wool" - which I just tried last night and I have to say it does work very well. I only had to refill one time today.

I had to use a language translator:
http://translate.google.com/translate?h … s&sa=N then go to page 4…..

Another one has tried: a "piece of cut rope", unravelled and folded back into the holder, then cut to length - he says so far he has only had to fill it 1 time a day. (this one I will try tonight).

http://64.233.179.104/translate_c?hl=en … s&sa=N|||I will also give it a go!

The thing is, though, that you still wouldn’t get the volume of liquid into the atomizer necessary to produce the density of vapor you get from putting a drop or two straight into the atomizer. Or would you?!

Thanks for the info

SJ|||Let’s hope lots of manufacturers and suppliers are reading these ideas. We need some brilliant new designs in case the liquid gets banned. In the "Mini" the cartridge is much closer to the atomiser but that only seems to achieve providing a mouthful of liquid nicotine |||Well I tried the "cut rope" technique last night and found that I like the "steel wool" much much better. It could be that I just packed too much rope into the holder but it seems to me that I had better luck with the steel wool.

Has anyone else tried these yet? Let me know what you think.

Rachel|||You might be inhaling dangerous "heavy metals" using steel wool |||Wow, some genius thoughts here fellas. But you might be harming your body with chemicals from the cut rope, or metal.

Just a thought, but keep the ideas coming.

check out my site for the Revelle electronic cigarette

You can become an independent distributor by joining or just buy one if you wish.

http://www.myrevelle.com/aashay|||I’ve been on that Dutch forum a lot and found the following replacements for the filling of the cartriges:

Fine mesh in surgical steel as used in aircondition filters. Do not use normal steel wool since this rusts and could provide a health risk

Cut rope made of natural fibre. Synthetic rope will burn and could be more dangerous than conventional cigarettes.

The white wool used in filters of fish thanks. Do not use cotton for the same reason as above.

I’ve been using the last one. One pak of wool will last you for years and it is easy to use. It does require a bit of experimenting on how much to use to fill the cartridge: to little and it leaks, to much and the cartridge delivers not enough fluid. Use just enough to hold the liquid in place even when turning the cartridge upside down. This give the most capacity for liquid, and maximises the flow to the atomiser. This is very comparable to the dripping method onto the atomizer(*). Injecting directly into the atomizer onto the coil however gives you the maximum smoke, taste and feeling.

(*) there is a lot difference between brands, types and even two atomizers from the same brand and type. My feeling is you have to be a bit lucky to get a good one, when buying.|||This is fun. Kinda like finding the perfect cigarette filter. Maybe I could shave down an old Kent Micronite filter and stuff it in the cartridge! Reckon a charcoal model would be better? Nah, might get a barbecue taste with that one. My Savinelli pipes use balsa filters. My Brigham pipes use maple. Course, we have to deliver moisture, not absorb it. One can’t substitute for the other. A better cartridge material? Let’s keep thinking.|||Great stuff guys!

I’m gonna get some of that white wool stuff (is it called rockwool?) and give it a go…..

SJ Ah, wonderful to see you can enjoy this now as much as I am, Windblown!

There is a more elaborate (and perhaps better in mechanical respect, certainly if you make new ones regularly) way to make the cartridge work like this also (made soon after this one by Yo Han, another member of my dutch forum trying to make it even better). It involves gluing (well, actually using watertight paste that also fills up any openings at the side) the small bottom-piece of another cartridge upside down inside the cartridge, making one hole in the middle of that inside-piece to let the liquid through.
I’m not sure myself though, if it’s okay to have part of the cartridge that you can never get to anymore for good cleaning. Plus I prefer the simplicity of the straw-solution… anyone can do this in 30 seconds, and it works equaly well as far as I have found (so far at least) once you get the hang of it (as to how much wool you need and how long the straw should be); and cleaning it out, plus making a bunch of them if wanted, is very easy (I keep one piece of straw at the right length in my ‘work-box’, so I can use that over and over for measuring off new straws).

@ SmokeyJoe; thanks for wanting to try it too Joe! It’s actually what happens when you put the heating filament in direct contact with the tissue and have that tissue covered in normal paper…

Although the smoke produced from an e-cigarette is nicely warm when it leaves the mouth piece, the heating element itself is extremely hot* and can burn tissue or paper easily. We believe some kind of glass vaporizing container could be a clean and hygienic solution.

*We consider the atomizer as a stove actually.

Related posts

• Smart Fixx - Excellent - Coupon Code! (0)
• Newbie has some questions (0)
• How long do NJOY cartridges really last? (0)
• e-cig.com (0)
• Crown7 review (0)

I started a review thread for the rn4081 or super cigarette a few months ago.
http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/php…–t272s50.html
All was going fine until a burnt taste about a month into smoking it. I’ve since gone through 3 atomizers, which aren’t expensive, but I’m just wondering if all other ecig atomizers are constructed the same way. The Huge design flaw in these is there is a synthetic fiber that the vaporizing element/wire is wrapped around that is used to keep the e-liquid around the coil. If the fiber gets the slightest bit dry or too hot, it will burn. You may not notice this at first, but eventually it will burn to the point where you can taste/smell it. Now I have tried removing the fiber completely, but as I suspected, it is what is keeping the heating coil from burning up completely, which it did after the first puff, it snapped. So if anyone has taken apart or knows how other atomizers are constructed, ones that have a more permanent method of vaporizing e-liquid, please let me know, as I’d like to buy one and get away from this super cigarette design.||| |||Here’s a quick cross section I drew in ms paint of the atomizer showing where the fiber is.

The heating element is coiled around this fiber, the capillary effect leaches e-liquid onto the fiber via the steel wool via the cartridge and when the coil heats up it’s vaporized. If there is no e-liquid, or if the coil gets too hot, the fiber burns, and eventually you will start to taste this. After a while the fiber turns into a little black lump and your atomizer is rendered useless.|||Nice job, Jarvis! Obviously you’re not just another pretty face! :mrgreen:|||There’s another thread on this, so yes, other membbers have noticed the fibers too. They’re like the wick in a candle.|||I like the drawing. Now I know where the fibre is suppose to be. Thanks…|||
In this picture that I also posted in the Super Cigarette review thread you can also see, right under the vaporizing coil (F), the black lump and crumbs that the fiber has fused into.||| |||Answer to question:

Yes; these are, to loosely quote TB, dumbed down versions of the original patent. But no; I’ve seen none of the superior designs marketed for sale to the public yet. There is a lonely thread in Tips and Tricks in which a few people are discussing home built construction of atomizers.||| This is a Ruyan company wholesale center, nicotine liquid and atomizer is all in one item. One shot use until liquid is gone than get another one and pop it in, no worry if the atomizer burns out. GREAT DESIGN I have got one on the way but any who here is the site

http://www.loongtotem.com/index.php?gOo … ticleid=30

And here is a VID

Bob I think ya talked me into buying soem E-Cigars from DealExtreme. Hows the vapor on them? I need good vapor. For that price htough I could buy 4 a month and still be nearly $100 cheaper than my regular cigarettes cost @ $13.60 for two packs of MarlboroI have a gamucci and this is a different It is more of a ball of metal than a strip. It has been going strong for a while now. I also have a few cheap back ups I got for 拢4.99 and they seem ok as well so maybe I am just lucky.

Related posts

• That darn burning taste (1)
• Should I take the e-smoking route? (0)
• Newbie has some questions (0)
• The Ideal E-Cig (0)
• Solution to Janty burnt taste??? (0)