EricofAZ

I use a flat mould. I can see where the concave would be a problem. Also, I pour gently of course but I let it cool and seal up a bit before filling the mould. There is a slight visual issue to deal with when the first pour cools and the second fills the container so keep that in mind. Decorating seems to cover up pretty well.

It is always worth the time to check out the dollar stores. I found these little gems for $0.50 each and bought a bunch. I might go buy a bunch more if they have any left.

They hold a tealight perfectly or a taper. Center them in the mould and pour and they stick real nice (make sure there's no mould release on them.

I often use square braid for palm pillars. Dunno how they hold up in the acid. Seems to be fine for a few testers that are a couple of years old now.

its not just the temp but the ability to stick and resist oils. I never liked the clear.

Though I have to qualify that and tell you it was in aviation. The clear never stuck if there was even a trace of oil and it burned off fast in engine heat. The red was way better. I used to seal J tubes on Allison engines (the 600 degree air flow tubes from the compressor to the turbine section) with the red.

The price should be pretty close. There is also a copper color that works and I use it now sometimes for wicks. I also use a glue gun sometimes. Works fine. Mostly I use wick stickums and have no problem with those. The glue dots suck so the roll I bought went to the office for nick nacks and paper glue stuff.

I can't tell you what some local city law might be, but there are quite a few folks in the US that sell oil candles like that. Maybe you should call Joe over at candlefun and ask. Looks like his kit you're using.

interesting that the article mentioned non-polar items. Would this be a neat way to find out if your FO is polar or non-polar when using in gel wax?

Very nice indeed. Great labels, they go well with the candles.

Yup, it is fun making stuff like that. I can see that you really put some thought into them and must enjoy it.

Love the illumination. Good job.

I really like the spherical ones. Pretty.

I agree on the pillar. The depth tells me it burned a while so I think that the wick can be slightly bigger to make the wall slightly thinner.

I think the containers look fine, but I can't tell how long they were burning. No opinion on the votive. Kinda looks OK to me but not sure.

I feel for you. I could think of a bunch of things we do as men that we wish we could fix. The beauty of a hurricane is that it is a one of a kind to be cherished. When gone, it is gone.

The only way to fix it that I can think of is if you were to perfectly match the mold and the insert, then pour the melted wax into the gap and smooth it out.

The better way to fix it would be a very nice replacement candle. A very nice dinner. A box of Hawaiian Host Chocolate Macadamia Nuts. Doing laundry for a week. Vacuuming for a week. Washing her car, maybe even buying a new one for her. A gift certificate to Gadabout. And if those don't fix the broken hurricane, buy a heated jacuzzi. Oh, and get the cat a new toy.

Welcome. The cost of starting up is not in the supplies or regular business things, though those things are important. The cost is in testing and learning.

I sell now but it took about 8K before I was comfortable doing that. Granted I am more cautious than others in general, and it was more of a hobby than a business start up, the cost to learn is a bit nebulous. Read a lot. Test. Develop one type of candle you do well and then start adding to your line.

New size, new wax, new FO, all requires testing and sometimes the test goes bad so you have to rebuild the unit and start over with a new wick or different mix ratios.

Soy is difficult to start with because it does not always take well to FO's. Many here have made soy candles throw like no tomorrow. Personally, I found it a frustrating place to start. Paraffin is the easier, but if you do your research well and get the help you need then soy could be OK.

Best wishes. Please don't short cut. Do your testing. Get your formulas stable before selling.

The hotter you pour, the less likely your tart will pop out. I learned the hard way that clamshells and cups soften and bond with the wax if the temp is too high. I would think that tarts need to be pretty low MP anyway for electric warmers so I made sure I was using low MP wax for the project and letting it cool to just barely pouring ability.

Nice shapes. Melts should be fun to use so that is a great way to make a product folks would enjoy buying.

I've done this mix and yes, it kills the crystal pattern. I use palm because it handles EO's very well and throws like crazy with EO's. The paraffin mix lets me wick down for containers (palm needs a really hot wick in containers and I don't like the container temp).

Since then, I found a mix for EO's in paraffin that works really well for me so I don't need palm. I might go back to palm for pillars just for the crystal look.

And yeah, the prices are a hoot.

I don't recall the formula, but I did think that this 'shroom of last year should be painted and decorated. I was thinking about inventing a new art form of painted mushrooms!

Horsescents, you remember correctly. I probably do need to build mine a bit hotter but I doubt I'll ever go to 175 on the glass. I've had testers tell me the opposite, that they like the throw, but there's enough feedback to take the GF seriously.

Personally, I didn't think her Yankme candles threw better, just sooner. They seemed to get to FMP faster and that was the issue. I was working on a way to get a faster FMP without compromising the container temperature and now that I have some "stuff" out of storage I'll continue a bit more on this project.

I guess it would be appropriate to experiment a bit and see what the glass temp is when the FMP is 1/4 inch deep and when it is 1/2 inch deep and when it is 1 inch deep. That would be some data that I don't have at the moment.

I'm not saying we can fool proof candles. Heck, when you build a better foolproof candle, the world seems to produce a smarter fool.

I'm just saying that we ought to think about it and if we can build a better and safer candle, we should. I'm not ready to dismiss the science of this just because it seems difficult, but I know the safety of electricity and the safety of hot coffee and the safety of lawnmowers and bicycles and cars and turbine powered helicopters has been enhanced over the years. So I think we can look at a candle and ask the same question about how to make it safer. I'm sure you would agree.

Not all safety enhancements are efficient. Car batteries that first went to "waterless" to avoid hydrogen explosions didn't last as long as the ones that needed water to be added. Today they are better.

There are five ways that products get better over time. The first is the best - builders who want to make their stuff better and safer. Another is the gov't that regulates the product. Another is a banding together of builders in a guild or association that issues guidelines. Another is the consumer when they stop buying the product. The last (or first) is the court system that drives all the rest when someone is hurt and should not have been.

This last one is very effective in driving gov't and guilds to higher standards but probably the most heartrending because it means someone got hurt.

As for the GF picking up the candle, she's been educated and doesn't do that any more (Yeaah!). I recall another story on here about a gal who's aunt forgot and left one burning too long and tried to get it out the door and went to the hospital with burns. If people can let go in a second and drop it on the floor, no big deal, but people don't always do that. They mistakenly think they need to save the carpet, or worse, they drop it on themselves and probably can't strip their clothing and get to cold water fast enough - like Stella Leibeck.

I've stayed out of this thread because, well, quite frankly some of the replies have raised my ire.

The 175 degree max is OK for preventing most approved containers from cracking. But that's not enough.

http://www.accuratebuilding.com/services/legal/charts/hot_water_burn_scalding_graph.html

Hot Water Causes Third Degree Burns…

…in 1 second at 156º

…in 2 seconds at 149º

…in 5 seconds at 140º

…in 15 seconds at 133º.

... from http://www.burnfoundation.org/programs/resource.cfm?c=1&a=3

Wax takes longer to cool than water so take those numbers and think "its worse."

If you use 125MP wax, why on earth is it necessary to burn so hot that the glass gets to 175?

Stella Leibeck was burned with 3rd degree burn injuries to her thighs and needed skin grafts in the McDonald's coffee case. The experts testified that the temp was about 165 degrees or so. (And with 700 prior burn victims, it was time to say enough is enough.) (Go read the real truth about that if you like. What was reported about the case in the press was very misleading.)

I believe we have a responsibility to our consumers and saying that caveat emptor "buyer beware" and that consumers should know they have hot candles is not enough.

We live in a "safe" society. We have electricity in the house that can kill in seconds, but its safe because of how it is wired and used.

Does that make people complacent? Yeah, probably does. Should we build hot and unsafe candles to avoid complacency? NO! We have to remember that there are many who can't read, are young, uneducated, etc., who like candles. So build a safe candle.

I test for abuseiveness. Sometimes I burn for 24 hours or more. I can get a good candle that forms a melt pool in a half hour (people want to smell it quickly) and still keep the glass touchable.

I'm going to warn, and direct people to the candles.org safety site for more information. But I'm not going to rely on that to give them a hottie that I know will burn if they make mistakes.

We can't protect against everything. Yes, it is hot. There is fire. Lets just try to minimize the injury if someone screws it up.

You know those long campfire lighters? I found one with a bendable tube at a dollar store that takes refill butane. WOW, that's great.

That'll teach you to buy scents you don't want in your house. At least it isn't mandle scents like cow farts.

I started out with paraffin junk from ebay and made a few candles that were good to smell and burned nice. I took advice from google.

Then I found this site and started believing that soy was the way to go so I did. Lots of dead candles that didn't throw at all. CB135 was what I thought to be the best soy. NOPE.

After messing with soy for a few months I went back to paraffin and then some palm.

Now two years later I understand. The right craftsperson who has devoted to soy can make soy sing like an opera queen. The rest of us just get the fat lady that screeches.

Paraffin is easier to learn and that is very important IMHO. There is some "frustration" getting a formula right or wicking right. Paraffin is easier in this regard which means to me that I can keep my attention at this craft longer.

There is no doubt that a good soy candle can wow everyone. Getting there is like tackling quantum black anti-matter before you learned simple addition. (Or so Einstein, my cat, says.)

The Peak candle kit with the 4630 paraffin is a great place to start. My advice is to start there and get going and don't let the others here intimidate you. Look at the count of their posts because it might mean they know what they are doing and it might mean they've been at it a while on this forum. It also might mean that they have settled on something they really like and that might or might not be the best place for you to start.

More than I care to think about. I bought a lot of FO's and EO's because I thought I might like them. Most I do. I have an addiction and need help.

Hello, My name is Einstein and I'm an FOaholic.

Don't clap, please, the encouragement is BAD!

Very nice, I like the wedge colors and the crystal formations.

Probably no difference with the microcrystalline wax temp options. If both are saturated to the core, they should burn the same. But like Stella says, test, test, test.