Jump to content

4627 - Should I wick up or down?


Recommended Posts

Help please! I'm working with 4627, 6% FO, and no dye in 8oz metal tin (3" diameter) and 6oz (?) glass containers with a 2.75" diameter. What do you do when the melt pool stops growing in diameter but continues to get deeper? Do you wick up or down? I have tried HTP, CD, ECO, and Zinc and am currently testing with the Premier 700 series. Has anyone had any luck with these in 4627? Even though the initial flame height looks good, after several minutes the flame decreases in height to around 1/2"+ and melt pool does not get larger. Wick up or down?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi - I have a similar issue and I'm using the 4627.

 

I find with this wax you always need to wick up.  It highly depends on the fragrance you are using and also the height of the jar seems to make a big difference also.

 

I found the HTP works best for me in this wax.

 

Couple of questions;

 

1 - What is the height of each container

2 - What fragrance are you using

3 - Are you using single or double wick

4 - What size wick are you using

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest OldGlory

The amount of wax standing on the sides of the candle is called 'hang up'. How much hang up do you have in this candle? 1/8th"? 1/4"? Use a ruler.

How long did you let the candle burn? One hour? Three hours?

How deep is your candle and how far from the original level that you poured?

Increasing the size of the wick will increase the size of the melt pool. When I test a wick I pour at least 2 sizes very close together, like a 740 and a 745. I have a lot of years of pouring candles under my belt so I usually have a good idea of where to start. If you are new, you should consult the chart provided by the wick supplier.

Single pour waxes and natural waxes often require that you wick up from the chart suggestion.

As your candle burns down into the container it will get hotter inside the jar/tin. A little bit of hang up, like 1/8th" might be ok, and the heat could catch it up as it continues to burn.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Crvella and OldGlory, thanks for your response. I'll try to address all your questions.

 

The dimensions of the 8oz tin: 3" diameter and 2" high. I fill it to about 1 3/4" high. The glass container is 2.75" wide and about 2 3/8" high. I fill these to about 2" high. I'm using 6% of Japanese Cherry Blossom. (Personally, I don't like this fragrance which is probably adding to my irritability :) ) I'm using a single wick but I'm seriously considering going to a double wick for the 8oz metal tin. I power burn my candles like how I think my customers will do. I usually don't extinguish my test burns until either 1) the wax starts to discolor considerably in a short amount of time such as a half hour (i.e. wick too big); 2) the melt pool ceases to grow in diameter but deepens to at least 1/4" or; 3) tunneling starts to occur. I find that because my containers are relatively shallow, a second burn tends to exacerbate the original problem because the containers are not deep enough to allow the sides to "catch up".

 

I have downloaded probably every wick chart available on the internet (it doesn't help much when they list as many as 12 wick sizes of one type of wick for a certain candle dimension!) and I have found that when I follow these, they are pretty way off (clear underwicked by at least a couple of sizes). I also collect notes on different companies' and individual recommendations which I found to be a little more accurate. I keep copious notes of all burns, noting flame size and shape, any soot or flickering, flame after 15 minutes or so, melt pool size, depth, wax color and so on. Because my containers are so small to begin with, I'd like to keep hang up under a 1/4" --I think 1/8" is acceptable-- because as I mentioned above subsequent burns tend to make the hang up even larger.

 

So far, ECO 6 and CD 12 seem to work the best in the glass containers but the 8oz tin is giving me a heck of a time. I've heard over and over again that HTP wicks are the best for this wax but I can't get consistent results even with the same FO and percentage. 93 and 104 start off good - nice flame and full melt pool after 2 hours but the flames get taller and wispier over time with trace soot. Is this acceptable given the full melt pool?

 

Also, OldGlory, do you have a suggestion on the WI-wicks? 

Edited by boogieluv
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest OldGlory

Ok, first off, I don't use that wax. I do make lots 8 oz tins (which, for my waxes, hold about 6.5-7 oz of wax depending on the wax). I am very familiar with the size and shape and how they burn wax.

I would try a 790 Premier, plus one size up AND one size down. Try Wickit.net. or Aztec in Knoxville.

Your wax may be one of the waxes that will always require wicking up. So far it sounds like it is. So when referring to the wick suggestion charts, you find the suggested size, skip right past that and go to the next size or two. Some fragrances will require even a little more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have downloaded probably every wick chart available on the internet (it doesn't help much when they list as many as 12 wick sizes of one type of wick for a certain candle dimension!) and I have found that when I follow these, they are pretty way off (clear underwicked by at least a couple of sizes). I also collect notes on different companies' and individual recommendations which I found to be a little more accurate. I keep copious notes of all burns, noting flame size and shape, any soot or flickering, flame after 15 minutes or so, melt pool size, depth, wax color and so on. Because my containers are so small to begin with, I'd like to keep hang up under a 1/4" --I think 1/8" is acceptable-- because as I mentioned above subsequent burns tend to make the hang up even larger.

 

I'm eating my words. In case you didn't see my other post New (?) wick guide on candlescience, I noticed that CandleScience changed their wick recommendations for 4627 to LX wicks. Last night I decided to try the LX-20 wick in the 8oz metal tin as recommended in the new guide for 3"-3.5" containers. Sheer perfection. The flame was a little on the small side at first but grew taller over time. Absolutely no flickering or soot. 1 1/2 hours later, the melt pool maxed out in width but the entire candle --including the 3/16 - 1/4" hang up on sides was being consumed-- as indicated by the clean sides. Four hours after initial lighting, the flame was still nice, the candle had decreased in height by about 3/16", hot throw was great. Extinguished candle. Melt pool showed only minimal darkening. Only downside was a lot of wick mushrooming but given the overall performance, I can live with that. Relit candle this morning. Perfect flame and absolutely no flickering or soot. Previously, with every other wick regardless of size or type, I always got a very tall, wispy, flame with soot at least for the first hour or so after relighting. I'll post an update on second burn later today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I spoke with someone at Candle Science about the changes to the wick quide. When I asked her about the switch in particular with 4627, the new recommendation of LX that was previously ranked as third best, she didn't really answer the question. She just said that they changed the format so it would be easier to use. She also said that in the future they will be conducting their own burn tests so the wick guide may change.

 

Update on LX-20 in 8ox metal tin: 13 hours total burn time later, melt pool is now down to the bottom on the container with 1/8" to 1/4" hang up. Flame is still going strong with no flickering. I started another burn test with 7% FO and dye. Burn wasn't as good, melt pool smaller with more hang up. Wicked up to LX-22 and its looking like a winner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

UPDATE ON 8oz METAL TIN (3"x2") with LX-20, 8% fragrance, no dye: After 24+ hours of total burn time, candle is totally gone with the exception of 0" - 1/8" of wax left on bottom. Finally. Success!

 

I tried HTPs from 93 all the way up to 1212 with no success. None gave a full melt pool. Tunnelling and lots of hang-up was an issue with all sizes. I hope you have better luck with it than I did!

Edited by boogieluv
Link to comment
Share on other sites

UPDATE ON 8oz METAL TIN (3"x2") with LX-20, 8% fragrance, no dye: After 24+ hours of total burn time, candle is totally gone with the exception of 0" - 1/8" of wax left on bottom. Finally. Success!

 

I tried HTPs from 93 all the way up to 1212 with no success. None gave a full melt pool. Tunnelling and lots of hang-up was an issue with all sizes. I hope you have better luck with it than I did!

Oh that's great news - I bet you are relieved to have finally got there.

 

I'll let you know how I go with the HTP testing.  We are currently burning double wicks from 52 to 93 with nothing but straight wax; to get a base line.

 

Now if I could only get some LX wicks locally 8-)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

I am new to the forum and so glad I came across this thread. I too use and love 4627 but have difficulty wicking. Spoke with candle science regarding their recommendation of THE LX SERIES Glad to see you found success. I will be leaving the wild flames of Eco behind. Thanks for sharing!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So glad I came upon this thread; I am currently in a scramble trying to wick an 8oz jelly jar/ IGI 4627... Simple enough, not!

Every test with HTP's has been unsuccessful. If the melt pool is full, then the flame is super high and smokey. If the flame is good then the melt pool sucks.... Argh.

I noticed the CandleScience wick guide update as well and just ordered a sample pack of LX's. I hope to a find a winner!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

So glad I came upon this thread; I am currently in a scramble trying to wick an 8oz jelly jar/ IGI 4627... Simple enough, not!

Every test with HTP's has been unsuccessful. If the melt pool is full, then the flame is super high and smokey. If the flame is good then the melt pool sucks.... Argh.

I noticed the CandleScience wick guide update as well and just ordered a sample pack of LX's. I hope to a find a winner!

.

Just ordered them as well. Love the comfort blend. Need a wick I love as well!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recieved my wicks yesterday along with a new fragrance from candle science. I rewicked a previous candle and I burned it ( I know I should let it cure but I was in a bit of a jam) and my God it was perfect. The rewicked candle was made with igi 6006. Then I made 4 new candles.  A stragiht edged 90z jar wicked with the LX16 using the Comfort blend and candle science Rasberry Macroon.  No cold throw no Hot throw but perfect flame.  UGH..So now Im thinking should I change wax, should I change fragrance?  That IGI 6006 and the peppermint eucalyptus was pure heaven...Im here at work just thinking about getting back to my presto pot and trying some other avenues.  I have an event on the 4th and now I decide to experiment..Smart huh? smh

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Kinesis - I'm so glad you found success with the LX wick. Good luck with your wax, FO, and deadline :)

 

Jfear - I got the same results with HTPs no matter what wax and containers I tried it with. I don't even bother testing with HTPs anymore. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I recieved my wicks yesterday along with a new fragrance from candle science. I rewicked a previous candle and I burned it ( I know I should let it cure but I was in a bit of a jam) and my God it was perfect. The rewicked candle was made with igi 6006. Then I made 4 new candles.  A stragiht edged 90z jar wicked with the LX16 using the Comfort blend and candle science Rasberry Macroon.  No cold throw no Hot throw but perfect flame.  UGH..So now Im thinking should I change wax, should I change fragrance?  That IGI 6006 and the peppermint eucalyptus was pure heaven...Im here at work just thinking about getting back to my presto pot and trying some other avenues.  I have an event on the 4th and now I decide to experiment..Smart huh? smh

Let them cure longer, or it could be the FO doesn't work with your wax. It's much easier to replace an FO than a wax system.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let them cure longer, or it could be the FO doesn't work with your wax. It's much easier to replace an FO than a wax system.

You right..and i think i may have to go up a wick size  Im using a  straight edge jar 9oz and a LX 16 wick.  I used 1oz pp.  Its not getting hot enough and the pool is taking a while to go across the container.  Flame is nice though so im a little concerned with that though. Go up in size will probably give me a larger flame

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If your worried about a taller flame with a larger wick, try trimming your wicks shorter. When I first start my burn test, if a flame is too high, I extinguish it, trim it a smidge and relight. Works every time.

The problem with using a big wick & trimming it shorter to make it work is: what happens if a customer doesn't trim the wick that short & the wick gets huge & something awful happens. It is a pain to keep testing, but customers don't always follow instructions to trim short. HTH :)

Edited by ChandlerWicks
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally understand where you're coming from. That's why between test burns, I don't trim my wicks because I don't think my customers will either. And so far with the LX wicks, I haven't found a problem with flame height like I did with HTPs. Of course, the largest container I work with is 3" in diameter so I'm not dealing with very large wicks to begin with.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I totally understand where you're coming from. That's why between test burns, I don't trim my wicks because I don't think my customers will either. And so far with the LX wicks, I haven't found a problem with flame height like I did with HTPs. Of course, the largest container I work with is 3" in diameter so I'm not dealing with very large wicks to begin with.

Hey Boogie...what size LX are you using for the 3 inch container? I have a LX 16 in a 2.75 inch and its not burning hot enough

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

That's one of the things that I like about the LXs - the flame. It may be on the small side but very full-bodied. It'll grow bigger the longer it burns. If you're using straight 4627, I'm not surprised about going up to a 24. I'm burning a 24 now and that's with 60% 4786.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...