Pouring Temperature Mysteries

[Quentin]

I have had these question in the back of my mind and keep forgetting to post them. When I've been instructed to add fragrance at xxx degrees, I've noticed that there is an immediate drop in the temperature of the mix. Sometimes a dramatic drop. Often dipping below the pouring temp. range. I know WHY that is happening, but not sure what to do about it.

 

Do I just keep stirring for two minutes or so and pour regardless of the what the thermometer tells me, or do I need to raise the heat back up to the pouring temperature? The other question is similar. As I'm pouring from the pot to the mold or container, the temperature obviously starts to drop. Do I stop pouring and heat it back up again or just pour till I'm finished?  

 

The only information I've found that is even slightly related to this subject has been something to this effect: "Never put the pot back on the heat source and leave it while you're working. This could cause your fragrance to "dissipate".    I'm not buying THAT idea. If that were true, you would never be able to reheat your wax for the second pour!  You could never save any leftover wax to use on another project. I think the candle making hobby/business is full of folklore and anecdote that has been passed down from generation to generation and accepted as truth but never checked out by many of us. What IS the answer to my two questions?  This makes me wonder about the consistency of the product I'm producing. Calgon, take me awaaayyyyyyy... 

[Scented]

On 10/3/2018 at 11:42 AM, Quentin said:

I have had these question in the back of my mind and keep forgetting to post them. When I've been instructed to add fragrance at xxx degrees, I've noticed that there is an immediate drop in the temperature of the mix. Sometimes a dramatic drop. Often dipping below the pouring temp. range. I know WHY that is happening, but not sure what to do about it.

 

Keep your pot in its heat source while you mix. It isn't going to dramatically reduce the throw of your fragrance. I use a presto pot any more instead of pour pots, add the fragrance right before I'm ready to pour. The wax stays consistently warm. With the exception of some fragrances that are harder to mix, there really isn't a need to stir for 2 minutes etc. If you want more consistency while using pots, you could warm your FO in a bottle in warm water (just takes a while sometimes) ... wipe that bottle down to polished dry so that none of it gets in your wax ... add to your melted wax, stir. All that should do is not drop your temps significantly. 

Quote

 

Do I just keep stirring for two minutes or so and pour regardless of the what the thermometer tells me, or do I need to raise the heat back up to the pouring temperature? The other question is similar. As I'm pouring from the pot to the mold or container, the temperature obviously starts to drop. Do I stop pouring and heat it back up again or just pour till I'm finished?  

 

Finish your pour at all times, unless you seriously want pour lines to be part of your finished product. If the wax cools down way too fast before you've finished your pour, then consider raising the temperature of your wax before you start pouring. Generally, though, once all of the wax is inside its new home, there will be a collection of heat (unless you interfere with that) that should cause any wax that has started to cool to melt. Hope that makes sense. You can interfere with the heat that accumulates in a mold by either using a cold press or a water bath is what I'm getting out when I say interfere.
Too, there are times when you might want the pour lines to show, but usually not. Cold pours (rustics) are an instance for wanting what is called jump lines to show. They are similar to pour lines but pour lines are just an indication of where you stopped pouring and the overflow of wax on a repour. 

Quote

 

The only information I've found that is even slightly related to this subject has been something to this effect: "Never put the pot back on the heat source and leave it while you're working. This could cause your fragrance to "dissipate".    I'm not buying THAT idea. If that were true, you would never be able to reheat your wax for the second pour!  You could never save any leftover wax to use on another project. I think the candle making hobby/business is full of folklore and anecdote that has been passed down from generation to generation and accepted as truth but never checked out by many of us. What IS the answer to my two questions?  This makes me wonder about the consistency of the product I'm producing. Calgon, take me awaaayyyyyyy... 

So I agree to a degree. Fragrances will start to dissipate, but at how much and how fast, no ready conclusion. I mentioned I use a presto pot. It stays warm until I'm done pouring candles and I don't make solid color single pours so there's waiting time between layers often. There will be a certain amount of dissipation because heat causes the scents to release but the fragrance isn't like a firecracker ... a one-shot deal. Whatever has been released is insignificant to me, but the higher the heat the faster the release, so it can be burned off. If I have a fragrance that can't keep stinking while I'm making, then that's a fragrance I won't be using. It hasn't happened yet and I have been making for 25 years. There just isn't a way to keep the fragrance from dissipating some unless you don't use it and keep it in dark amber bottles. Another thing is candle making has evolved. What they had way back when was limited to the advancements of technologies. 

 

Edited October 5, 2018 by Scented

[strugglebrother]

Just add the fragrance at 5 degrees higher temperature than the temperature you want to mix it with...

 

My temperature usually drops 3 to 5 degrees when I add the fragrance oil.

[Quentin]

On 10/3/2018 at 1:29 PM, Scented said:

If you want more consistency while using pots, you could warm your FO in a bottle in warm water (just takes a while sometimes) ...

Good idea.  Warming it by any amount would have to help the situation some. 

18 hours ago, strugglebrother said:

Just add the fragrance at 5 degrees higher temperature than the temperature you want to mix it with...

 

My temperature usually drops 3 to 5 degrees when I add the fragrance oil.

Good, helpful stuff from both of you. These comments are the type I'll print out and add to my notebook as well as any others that come along. I think I take a lot of stuff I hear and read a little too seriously some time, which causes distraction that can lead to the really serious mishaps.

[YellowButterfly]

Great questions, Quentin. I've noticed this as well, since I'm new to the game, and I've been heating the wax to 185/190 degrees. I poured those candles a week ago, so I could test one tonight and see how it does...

[Forrest]

On 10/3/2018 at 11:42 AM, Quentin said:

I have had these question in the back of my mind and keep forgetting to post them. When I've been instructed to add fragrance at xxx degrees, I've noticed that there is an immediate drop in the temperature of the mix. Sometimes a dramatic drop. Often dipping below the pouring temp. range. I know WHY that is happening, but not sure what to do about it.

 

I have been thinking about this a lot also, and have reached some conclusions. First off, doing a back of the envelope calculation, without taking density into account, for wax at 190 adding 7% FO at room temp will cause the mixture to drop to 182. The second thing is that you should stir the wax well before adding the FO to make sure all of the components in the wax are blended. Next you should add the FO slowly while stirring. The reason for this that pouring the FO in all at once will cause a cold zone where wax may solidify. Lastly so long as all the wax stays hot enough so that none of the components solidify, stirring is more important than temp. Stir well before pouring also. In the end you are trying produce a homogeneous solid out of the various liquid components.  

[Quentin]

2 hours ago, Forrest said:

Next you should add the FO slowly while stirring.

I've started to do this and it does help. Something else that I'm sure I must have learned back in school somewhere that I had forgotten. Keep stirring. Our old friend Friction will bump the molecules together and keep their temperature from dropping so dramatically.

[Arch Rock]

My goodness you guys .  .  .  IMHO, you're making this more difficult than it has to be.  I'm a psychotherapist.  If I give someone a psych test, there's a Bell curve that helps delineate "normal" from "abnormal" and the difference between can be anywhere between 5 or 15 points, depending upon the test.  I have to take this into consideration when analyzing the results.  Same goes for candle-making.  Most waxes and fragrance oils and wicks are very forgiving and provide chandlers a pretty decent variance.  That said, my CD-10 wick will perform very differently in my vanilla compared to my Apple Jack 'n Peel.  I wonder if Quentin might be too focused on wax pour temp instead of the biggest variable - scent oil and supplier.  The same-referenced CD-10 will perform differently with different vanillas from different manufacturers.  My advice would be to dial-in the fragrance itself.  If your pouring temp and wax remain the same, the only other independent variable is your fragrance oil (assuming your jar has remained the same). 

[Paintguru]

I actually add my oil to an empty pour pot and then pour in my hot wax from another pour pot.  Once all the wax has been added, I swirl it around for a little bit until it looks mixed, cool it down to 145 and then pour.  I do have cavity issues around the wick that I'm trying to work out, but everything else seems to be good.

[TallTayl]

2 hours ago, Paintguru said:

I actually add my oil to an empty pour pot and then pour in my hot wax from another pour pot.  Once all the wax has been added, I swirl it around for a little bit until it looks mixed, cool it down to 145 and then pour.  I do have cavity issues around the wick that I'm trying to work out, but everything else seems to be good.

This is an interesting point.  It spreads the cold spots around a bi more than pouring fo into hot wax.  In beeswax when not careful the cold fo makes a big blob that takes a lot of energy to redistribute.  The other way around the cold bits are much smaller.  In either event, the heat gun sure does help. I like heating cold pour pots at the start. It sure helps prevent the blobs of lower melt point ingredients in the wax blends from precipitating out. 

[Quentin]

13 hours ago, Arch Rock said:

I wonder if Quentin might be too focused on wax pour temp instead of the biggest variable - scent oil and supplier. 

Very possible! This post has made my day. Really. You're a psychotherapist. I'm a psychiatric patient. What are the odds we would meet here?You used the word "focusing". Your diagnosis is right on target! A.D.H.D. A big ROFL going on here. Today will be a good day. I can see it coming.  You gotta love it. 

[Quentin]

On 11/9/2018 at 12:52 PM, YellowButterfly said:

Great questions, Quentin. I've noticed this as well, since I'm new to the game, and I've been heating the wax to 185/190 degrees. I poured those candles a week ago, so I could test one tonight and see how it does...

I've moved on from worrying about that temperature drop. I find it annoying since I want everything to work out perfectly. When I first noticed it happening, my first thought was "Oh no! I've damaged my fragrance oil beyond repair."  Of course, I had absolutely nothing on which to base those feelings. Panic is my first reaction to just about everything that doesn't turn out the way I expected. I need to step back a little and remind myself that all I'm really doing is melting wax, adding some nice smelling stuff, some color and sticking a piece of string in it. It's not a crisis like a nuclear war or anything. 

[YellowButterfly]

8 minutes ago, Quentin said:

I've moved on from worrying about that temperature drop. I find it annoying since I want everything to work out perfectly. When I first noticed it happening, my first thought was "Oh no! I've damaged my fragrance oil beyond repair."  Of course, I had absolutely nothing on which to base those feelings. Panic is my first reaction to just about everything that doesn't turn out the way I expected. I need to step back a little and remind myself that all I'm really doing is melting wax, adding some nice smelling stuff, some color and sticking a piece of string in it. It's not a crisis like a nuclear war or anything. 

Same here, Quentin. When you're a perfectionist and a chandler, you spend most of your time shaking your head and such. 

[Forrest]

17 hours ago, Arch Rock said:

I'm a psychotherapist

Maybe you could start a FO addition support group over in the FO forum

 

[Forrest]

17 hours ago, Arch Rock said:

My goodness you guys .  .  .  IMHO, you're making this more difficult than it has to be.  I'm a psychotherapist.  If I give someone a psych test, there's a Bell curve that helps delineate "normal" from "abnormal" and the difference between can be anywhere between 5 or 15 points, depending upon the test.  I have to take this into consideration when analyzing the results.  Same goes for candle-making.  Most waxes and fragrance oils and wicks are very forgiving and provide chandlers a pretty decent variance.  That said, my CD-10 wick will perform very differently in my vanilla compared to my Apple Jack 'n Peel.  I wonder if Quentin might be too focused on wax pour temp instead of the biggest variable - scent oil and supplier.  The same-referenced CD-10 will perform differently with different vanillas from different manufacturers.  My advice would be to dial-in the fragrance itself.  If your pouring temp and wax remain the same, the only other independent variable is your fragrance oil (assuming your jar has remained the same). 

There are several variables involved in making candles; containers, wax, wicks, process, and FO are the main ones.  If you want to compare FOs  you need to fix your process and be consistent with it. Your process doesn't have to be perfect, but it needs to be good enough and be consistent. I've has several batches of candles that lacked HT due to process related issues.

[Quentin]

5 hours ago, Forrest said:

There are several variables involved in making candles; containers, wax, wicks, process, and FO are the main ones.  If you want to compare FOs  you need to fix your process and be consistent with it. Your process doesn't have to be perfect, but it needs to be good enough and be consistent. I've has several batches of candles that lacked HT due to process related issues.

I THINK I know what you're saying here. I'm pretty sure your occupation is an engineer of some sort from reading your posts. Would I be correct in that assumption?  Let me see if I get it from a Liberal Arts point of view. Then tell me if I'm even close. This may take some time. I'll pretend I have a line of candles. The line has two model numbers. Model No. 1 & Model No. 2.  Model No. 1 is a 16 oz round pillar. It is available in one color and one fragrance only. As long as I make Model 1 each time using the same wax from the same manufacturer, the same wick, and always with the one fragrance (we'll use Lavender) from the same company at the same fragrance load, then everything should turn out just the same each time. At least fairly close.  Naturally, that assumes that I'm staying as near as is humanly possible to the same temperatures for adding dye and fragrance in addition to the same pouring temperature using my Wizco hot plate and my HappyJoy4U Chinese thermometer. Am I correct so far? Time for a new paragraph.

 

Model No. 2--- my Premium Collection.  Model 2 is also a 16 oz round pillar but I offer it for sale in a dazzling collection of 3 colors and 3 fragrance choices. All the other stuff about the wax, temperatures, wicks, fragrance load and equipment is just like Model 1. Both come off the same assembly line.  Model 1 is my Chevrolet. Model 2 is my Buick with all the chrome and extras. My process is the same but because my Buick requires different fragrance and dye components coming from different sources, I can't make it to be a consistent reliable performer as I can with Model 1. Whew! I think that's what you just said.

[TallTayl]

I gave up shooting for perfection and settle for within a range of acceptable. 

[Quentin]

12 minutes ago, TallTayl said:

I gave up shooting for perfection and settle for within a range of acceptable. 

Yes, I think that's wise. I suppose you can purchase a laboratory quality thermometer for who knows how many $$$$$$$$. I doubt that you would accomplish much to justify the cost.

[Arch Rock]

9 hours ago, TallTayl said:

I gave up shooting for perfection and settle for within a range of acceptable. 

Exactly. 

[Arch Rock]

19 hours ago, Quentin said:

Very possible! This post has made my day. Really. You're a psychotherapist. I'm a psychiatric patient. What are the odds we would meet here?You used the word "focusing". Your diagnosis is right on target! A.D.H.D. A big ROFL going on here. Today will be a good day. I can see it coming.  You gotta love it. 

We're all psychiatric patients to some degree Quentin.  Before I went to grad school, I was in the candle biz for five years and will tell you that the most consistent product I manufactured was due to having a 300 pound water-jacketed wax melter, using wax from an international company in business for generations, and working with large scent manufacturers like French and IFT.  On the down side, mass production takes the joy out of the "art and craft" and I eventually got bored with it and wanted to pursue something more cerebral.  I will tell you that your medium - making pillars - is one of the most difficult to master consistently.  It's extremely difficult to get hot throw from pillars because you need so much vybar to make the thing stand alone and vybar "locks" scent and doesn't release it like container blends.  That said, I've gotten some kick-butt hot throw from votives.  Once again, as everyone else has suggested, keep it as consistent as possible and don't over-think the small stuff.

[Forrest]

12 hours ago, Quentin said:

I THINK I know what you're saying here. I'm pretty sure your occupation is an engineer of some sort from reading your posts. Would I be correct in that assumption?  Let me see if I get it from a Liberal Arts point of view. Then tell me if I'm even close. This may take some time. I'll pretend I have a line of candles. The line has two model numbers. Model No. 1 & Model No. 2.  Model No. 1 is a 16 oz round pillar. It is available in one color and one fragrance only. As long as I make Model 1 each time using the same wax from the same manufacturer, the same wick, and always with the one fragrance (we'll use Lavender) from the same company at the same fragrance load, then everything should turn out just the same each time. At least fairly close.  Naturally, that assumes that I'm staying as near as is humanly possible to the same temperatures for adding dye and fragrance in addition to the same pouring temperature using my Wizco hot plate and my HappyJoy4U Chinese thermometer. Am I correct so far? Time for a new paragraph.

 

Model No. 2--- my Premium Collection.  Model 2 is also a 16 oz round pillar but I offer it for sale in a dazzling collection of 3 colors and 3 fragrance choices. All the other stuff about the wax, temperatures, wicks, fragrance load and equipment is just like Model 1. Both come off the same assembly line.  Model 1 is my Chevrolet. Model 2 is my Buick with all the chrome and extras. My process is the same but because my Buick requires different fragrance and dye components coming from different sources, I can't make it to be a consistent reliable performer as I can with Model 1. Whew! I think that's what you just said.

You are correct, my degree is in electrical engineering, but I work as a systems engineer at NASA. I'll use your example for Model 1, suppose you wanted to offer that model in another FO. You would make the candle and do a test burn, it might work or you might need a different wick. Once you got the wicking right you would be able to tell if your HT was good, and if it was you would add the candle to your line. But let's suppose when you made the candle you changed something in your process, say reduced stirring time, and the candle had poor HT. How would you know if it was the FO or the process that was the problem. You can only test for one variable at a time. That is why I say you have to fix your process. Once you have a set process, container, and wax any problems are due to FO or wicking, It is my nature to try and turn this into an exact science, even though I know I never will.

[TallTayl]

Bingo. This is often why small batches are very difficult to scale up. Temperatures change, timing changes, variables change. But once you learn to control these variables scaling up or down becomes very simple.

[Laura C]

21 hours ago, Forrest said:

Maybe you could start a FO addition support group over in the FO forum

 

LMAO! 

[Laura C]

14 hours ago, TallTayl said:

I gave up shooting for perfection and settle for within a range of acceptable. 

I hear ya @TallTayl, that's where I'm at right now. LOL. Between being a perfectionist and the wax industry reformulating their waxes, I was going bonkers.  

[Quentin]

10 hours ago, Forrest said:

You are correct, my degree is in electrical engineering, but I work as a systems engineer at NASA. I'll use your example for Model 1, suppose you wanted to offer that model in another FO. You would make the candle and do a test burn, it might work or you might need a different wick. Once you got the wicking right you would be able to tell if your HT was good, and if it was you would add the candle to your line. But let's suppose when you made the candle you changed something in your process, say reduced stirring time, and the candle had poor HT. How would you know if it was the FO or the process that was the problem. You can only test for one variable at a time. That is why I say you have to fix your process. Once you have a set process, container, and wax any problems are due to FO or wicking, It is my nature to try and turn this into an exact science, even though I know I never will.

I got the part right about you being an engineer. After that, I completely missed what your original post was about. I see now that you were talking about good old-fashioned troubleshooting. If I go out to the garage in the morning and the car doesn't start, I would never start to attack the problem by removing the tires, popping the hood, randomly remove parts and check them all out until I finally get to the battery. If I walk into a room, flip the light switch and it doesn't come on, I certainly wouldn't start my investigation by going around the house and changing all the other light bulbs. I can't explain why that sort of horse sense hasn't carried over to my candle making. Instead of testing one candle, I've been doing my "testing/troubleshooting" by making an entire new batch.  So I really haven't been testing at all. I just thought I was!   Now I will say that I don't change the wax and/or the wick at the same time. I also leave the fragrance load the same (once I've checked that I've been in the prescribed range) but until reading the posts here the last couple of weeks I had no idea that the FO could be the culprit. @Arch Rock pointed out that perhaps I was concentrating too much on temperature and not paying attention to the other important factors. He wasn't the first one to tell me that in this forum, but for some reason that was the first time the light bulb turned on above my head. Patience. I must work on patience.