Feather Palm Testing

[topofmurrayhill]

That line is the top of the melt pool. By nudging the pillar you could see the wax slosh. The line got more distinct in the 5 minutes it took to set up the camera angle and get a few different exposures. In 10 or 15 minutes that spot would have looked almost transparent.

[lrbd]

you know I am not supposed to be doing anything this week but I received CSN wicks today and snuck upstairs to make a pillar with a 9. Will let you know how that goes. I spoke to a women at candle science today so nice and helpful . We'll see

[topofmurrayhill]

Good move getting CSN. I just made a 9 that I'll probably start testing tomorrow. That wick worked perfectly in a 15 hour votive burn. It seems pretty small for a feather pillar but I'm curious.

[topofmurrayhill]

End of burn 4 for CDN 10 and 12. CDN 12 didn't cut it so close this time but is leaving a fairly thin shell.

End of burn 8 for 36-ply flat braid.

Both burns 4 hours.

[cybersix]

Never knew about that wicking guide LOL!

Good to know we aren't far from what the producer said.

Thanks for the links.

Check it out. Atkins & Pearce has a wick selection guide that I don't remember seeing before.

http://www.apwicks.com/download/wick_selection_guide.pdf

It seems that our size discussion makes sense based on their recommended sample sets for palm pillars. The set for 2-3" pillars includes FB 30 at the high end. The set for 3-4" pillars includes FB 36 at the low end.

As far as 12-ply is concerned, Wicks Unlimited either doesn't sell it or didn't have space in the table for it. They do use the test numbers from Atkins & Pearce. This is the entire set:

http://www.apwicks.com/rate_chart_classic.htm

The photo is the end of burn 7 for 36 Classic.

[cybersix]

End of burn 4 for CDN 10 and 12. CDN 12 didn't cut it so close this time but is leaving a fairly thin shell.

End of burn 8 for 36-ply flat braid.

Both burns 4 hours.

It still looks fine to me, my old good friend 36 classic.

Perhaps it's one that gives me the result I like best, an almost self consuming pillar.

Are you going to draw some conclusions or it's too early?

I plan to test a 30 ply in the next days, and continue burning the 36.

[topofmurrayhill]

Are you going to draw some conclusions or it's too early? I plan to test a 30 ply in the next days, and continue burning the 36.

I will try 30-ply for comparison, but I think the 36 works great. That is the type of burn that I'm most interested in. So far I got it with CSN 12 and 36-ply.

I will also try the 36 in tortoise shell palm for you. I have to get back to that wax. It' bothering me. Maybe other people have more tolerance for inconsistent burns and flames dying out, but I don't like it. Every type of wick takes one step down in that wax. CSN becomes inconsistent. CDN becomes practically unusable.

So we will try the "Classic" flat braid in it. I will also try RRD, even though I said I wouldn't. It's the only other NST2 wick I have. That was the treatment that seemed to hold up the best in tortoise shell.

[cybersix]

I will try 30-ply for comparison, but I think the 36 works great. That is the type of burn that I'm most interested in. So far I got it with CSN 12 and 36-ply.

I will also try the 36 in tortoise shell palm for you. I have to get back to that wax. It' bothering me. Maybe other people have more tolerance for inconsistent burns and flames dying out, but I don't like it. Every type of wick takes one step down in that wax. CSN becomes inconsistent. CDN becomes practically unusable.

So we will try the "Classic" flat braid in it. I will also try RRD, even though I said I wouldn't. It's the only other NST2 wick I have. That was the treatment that seemed to hold up the best in tortoise shell.

Well thanks for the test in the tortoise shell palm, then!

I also like a good consinstent burn.

But let me understand, you first said that you get a good burn with CSN too, then that it becomes inconsistent. Did I miss something?

I don't have experience with RRD, I have a sample pack but never tried them.

Thans again for all your testing!

[topofmurrayhill]

I also like a good consinstent burn.

But let me understand, you first said that you get a good burn with CSN too, then that it becomes inconsistent. Did I miss something?

I'm just comparing feather to tortoise shell palm. Yours might be different, but most wicks burn worse for me in tortoise shell. They trim too much and burn inconsistently. Usually on the second burn the flame gets quite small. Other people must see this too, so I guess they tolerate it. For me it's hard to accept, because if I saw a paraffin pillar burn like that I would think it's defective. And it's frustrating because I otherwise like the wax, so I want to find how to get the best result.

[cybersix]

I'm just comparing feather to tortoise shell palm. Yours might be different, but most wicks burn worse for me in tortoise shell. They trim too much and burn inconsistently. Usually on the second burn the flame gets quite small. Other people must see this too, so I guess they tolerate it. For me it's hard to accept, because if I saw a paraffin pillar burn like that I would think it's defective. And it's frustrating because I otherwise like the wax, so I want to find how to get the best result.

Sorry, I didn't understand you were saying CSN being inconsistent in tortoise shell palm.

I just made one pillar long time ago with that wax and used the 36 ply, not much difference than feather or crystal.

So.. it maybe the answer once again.

But I had only 200 grams to test, and since I didn't like the cracks I was getting after burning I never went into serious testing.

[topofmurrayhill]

I just made one pillar long time ago with that wax and used the 36 ply, not much difference than feather or crystal.

So.. it maybe the answer once again.

But I had only 200 grams to test, and since I didn't like the cracks I was getting after burning I never went into serious testing.

That gives me some hope, even though it would surprise me if the answer was simply to use plain flat braid. But we will see. The 36-ply tester is in the mold.

Maybe the cracks in the melt pool would normally bother me, but the wick issues helped me to understand that the cracks are no problem at all.

[cybersix]

That gives me some hope, even though it would surprise me if the answer was simply to use plain flat braid. But we will see. The 36-ply tester is in the mold.

Maybe the cracks in the melt pool would normally bother me, but the wick issues helped me to understand that the cracks are no problem at all.

As I said, never did a serious test.

But maybe here there are some pics.. somewhere, I'll see if I can find them.

Is it challenging enough for you?

ETA:

I found the few pics I posted when I tested this wax, called "spider" here in europe. Test burn with a 36 ply, but let it go. There is also one pics of the cracks when it cooled. I believe it was at the end of the first burn.

http://www.craftserver.com/forums/showpost.php?p=547405&postcount=5

http://www.craftserver.com/forums/showpost.php?p=549305&postcount=17

Edited April 1, 2010 by cybersix

[topofmurrayhill]

It looks exactly the same as far as I can see.

[lrbd]

wait so do you like the CSN ? The 9 was too small as you said. Though we have pic on this thread of a 9 working it didn't work for me. I am burning votives with a 7 now and pouring a pillar with an 11.

[cybersix]

It looks exactly the same as far as I can see.

You mean the same of a feather palm pillar burn?

[topofmurrayhill]

You mean the same of a feather palm pillar burn?

You tortoise shell palm looks like the one that CandleScience sells.

[cybersix]

You tortoise shell palm looks like the one that CandleScience sells.

Oh ok, LOL I can be dense sometimes.

Yes I believe it's the same type. Maybe not the same manufacturer.

Now I should have it at my disposal my supplier told me to try the one he sells when I talked to him about cracks that I didn't like.

it's from PT Sumi Aiashi, not lipidchem.

Maybe one of this days!

[topofmurrayhill]

The manufacturer of the CandleScience palms is PT. Sumi Asahi.

[topofmurrayhill]

The first photo is the end of burn 9 for the 36 Classic. All burns were 4 hours except for one 3-hour burn. I am going to call this the end of the test. I'm sure it could go 2 or 3 more burns, but I didn't cut the wick short and don't want to go too close the the bottom. I can also save some time because I already see the results. This pillar burned down in the way that I wanted. Occasionally I thought that the burn was a little fast, but my feeling about the results is otherwise positive.

The second photo is the end of burn 5 for CDN 10 and CDN 12. Obviously it was not routine. Talk about "saved by the bell." The CDN 10 tester came as close as you can get to a blowout without spilling wax. At the end of the test period there was a hole in the candle. So that is the end for CDN 10. I haven't decided about CDN 12. It has been leaving some very thin spots on the shell, especially in burns 2 and 3. The melt pool gets very large. I don't have a good feeling about it. I wonder if CDN 14 would be better or worse.

[Stella1952]

Sumi Asih is relatively useless for information so far as I have been able to find (not to mention the annoying flashing product list); however, Lipidchem has a lot of very useful information for palm wax chandlers.

For reference or interested parties, here are their websites:

PT Sumi Asih Oleochemical Industry

Lipidchem

I wonder if CDN 14 would be better or worse.

CDN 14s are blowout city for 3" palm wax pillars in my experience. However, if one is wicking for complete consumption, they work well if not burned for extended periods of time (4+ hours). If burned longer than 3 hours or so, they blow out.

The CDN 10 above might not have blown out if the heat from the wick had been kept centered. The lopsided burn is a problem one cannot ignore.

Edited April 1, 2010 by Stella1952

[topofmurrayhill]

The CDN 10 above might not have blown out if the heat from the wick had been kept centered. The lopsided burn is a problem one cannot ignore.

The successful wicks in my tests were not sensitive to being turned. I don't want candles where someone has to check how they're doing every time they walk by. The problem with these wicks is that they burn out wide.

I actually cheated to help the CDN 12 by turning it 180 degrees, at which point more of the shell on the opposite side melted down. However, the melt pool is so wide on the 12 that it wouldn't take much offset in any direction to cause a problem. And it had two "too close for comfort" situations in the first three burns.

We have a CDN 10 that can be used to create a luminary shell if one wished to do that. But the candle doesn't do that on its own--the user does it by fiddling with the candle to make it come out right. I figure if I wanted to create a palm wax lantern, I could easily just pour a shell.

Then there is the CDN 12, which is large enough to partially consume the shell and make it follow the burn down the length of the candle. That would be the main thing I'm looking for, but it teeters on the edge for at least several burns and generally doesn't look robust or carefree.

Then the next size up is apparently "blowout city" so I don't seem to have the wick I want.

Edited April 1, 2010 by topofmurrayhill

[Stella1952]

We have a CDN 10 that can be used to create a luminary shell if one wished to do that. But the candle doesn't do that on its own--the user does it by fiddling with the candle to make it come out right.

Tell that to the one I burned out on my porch during the last week! It threatened to report me to the candle cops for negligence! I lit it in the late afternoon, enjoyed it's aroma every time I went out on the porch during the evening for a smoke, turned it once or twice because the breeze was making it burn off-center and extinguished it before hitting the sack at 2-4 am.

I don't know HOW I could pay LESS attention to a burning flame without just leaving the house with it burning! I also don't understand the prohibition against turning something that's burning lopsided! It's not like ya need a power winch & a come-along... Takes less effort than hiking up one's jeans!

I figure if I wanted to create a palm wax lantern, I could easily just pour a shell.

Yeah you could, but it wouldn't be nearly as much fun nor as sensorily (is that a word?) enjoyable as burning out the shell the old-fashioned way. Edited April 1, 2010 by Stella1952

[lrbd]

ok so I poured a pillar Crystal palm from candles and supplies they claim to be a one pour. I hope so I had a friend come to take me to lunch after I poured it so no wrecking . wicked with a CSN11. Will keep you posted.

[topofmurrayhill]

Tell that to the one I burned out on my porch during the last week!

Yah but you have those teeny flames. It doesn't resemble anything I'd wanna make. I don't even know how why you measure container diameters to the fraction of an inch but apply some alternate reality to how pillars should burn.

You're using this wick that burns small in palm because it's not quite at home. Then you add 5% stearic, which I tried in an offline tester and it was murder on the wick.

Basically, I can get a stronger burn putting a votive-size CSN wick in a 3 inch pillar than you're getting out of CDN. If we're going to compare function to dysfunction then we'll always be speaking a different language.

[Tribalvixen]

Hi I have only been playing with Feather palm since Sept last year but I wick that size pillar with CDN 14 or 16 depending on FO. I get awesome ht. The last one I tested was Tuscan Melon and apricot from CS wicked with a CDN 16 and I twist the wick. No blow out. I dont test for only 4 hours sometimes 6 sometimes all day.

Tammy