Jump to content

C6 wicking nightmare


Recommended Posts

50 minutes ago, Peggy T said:

My main concern is that a non-full melt pool could lead to tunneling.

Coconut wax is pretty soft and mushy as it burns. Don’t worry about tunneling it catches up easily by mid point.

 

Beyond mid point, if wicking for early hot melt pool you may be in for a surprise 😬. The last third of coconut wax container candles gets lava hot. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Peggy T said:

I'm not quite sure I understand what you do. How do you stick a wick in here? Thanks.

Just poke a hole using skewer and stick a wick (or in your case might be two: Eco 10 & 8) in there.  If the wick preforms really bad, then you just pull it out and put another type of wick.  If you find the ones very close to your liking, then that is the time you make a candle with fixed wick and go into full burning test.  You can eliminate a lot bad wicks in short time doing this way.  Good luck!

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, TallTayl said:

Honest question. Why is everyone so worried about a full melt pool so early on in coconut wax?

 

 Coconut wax is profoundly different from other waxes not really needing a full pool to outperform other waxes. 

I agree and don’t understand it myself just based off the results I got wick testing several coconuts ..... 

large wicks and coco do not play nice and honestly coconit is just so much softer in general I have never had a tunneling problem unless I had air pockets mixing it with other waxes 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok....I am not going to throw in the towel even though this is frustrating. 😂I have not had to go through this testing process in 5 years so in some ways I'm new to it all. This new candle uses a new wick (ie--not wood as I've used for years), new jar and new wax. I've underestimated just how different all these factors are.😂

 

The ones I was testing today certainly looked like they were tunneling but I will just keep going and hope that they catch up! I'll add in some testing of the smaller wicks I had discounted previously...and I'll burn them all the way down. 😊

Here are some of the ones I tested today. These pictures are after the second burn which was around 5 hours.

Thanks for everyone's assistance this far. I am most appreciative!

IMG_20190825_214517.thumb.jpg.3e29f2f34074489b55479be5ee8476fd.jpg

IMG_20190825_214645.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Premier 775 is not going to work.  HTP 1212 is very close by looking at your picture, and only thing you need to solve is to put curling into consideration and find the right wick position.  How was the burning characteristic of HTP 1212?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is my understanding that you wanted to create higher end candle line with best burning characteristics.  Yes!  It must have full melt pool which is almost impossible to achieve with the wicks available to us thru suppliers when container is bigger than 3" in diameter with vegetable wax.  The picture below is my 14oz (my supplier thinks it's 16oz) tin candle with 3 5/8" inside diameter using 100% soy wax with maximum FO load allowed.  I am going to show you how I achieved that full melt pool with cool burning characteristic.  The temperature of wax right below the flame is 116F, one inch away is 111F, and near the edge is 104F.  Outside of container is so cool, I don't even bother to take measurements.  My other container I am using has 3 1/8" diameter with same wax. 

 

In my opinion with any type of vegetable wax, we need a big but cool flame.  Big but cool flame?  This might not make sense at all.  But, I find that every wick has different burning temperature.  I have no idea why this is true.  Most hottest burning wick that I know is Cottonwood wick by Atkins & Pearce.  That little sucker is really powerful that it's going to burn the soy wax(not thru the wick, it will burn your wax with heat power) after 2 1/2 hours.  The coolest burning wick that I know is Tube wood wick, and among regular wick would be the ECO wick.  So, you need to really wick up with ECO.  Many of wick guideline available thru suppliers are way off on ECO wicks.  For your container and wax, it should work decently with size ECO 18.  This will create little hotter flame than one mentioned above with my candle, but it should be very acceptable as a finished product.  I showed you how to create ECO 18 in prior pos ting, so I am going to skip how to make ECO 18.

 

But, if your goal is to create higher end candle, then ECO 18 is not the perfect solution.  You will need to try combination of Tube wood wick and ECO.  This will bring the flame temperature down little bit more for better burning characteristic.  It involves wood wick which you had been using, but totally different wood wick.  My candle picture you are looking at has combination of ECO 14 & Tube wood wick.  I think your candle would need ECO 10 or 12 & Tube wood wick, but it is your job to find out.  For your reference, that Tube wood wick has fire power of ECO 7 size, and it is designed to use with combination of regular wicks.  It will not work by itself.  Once again, have fun with your journey!  

 

20190825_195418.thumb.jpg.4163086e49fe20655e03217eaa18263f.jpg

 

 

20190825_202923.thumb.jpg.767a618db32306d80b85a4301ed4674a.jpg

 

20190825_195823.thumb.jpg.d699b213b52f541f4d5532b9a9143096.jpg

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 8/25/2019 at 9:42 PM, Peggy T said:

Ok....I am not going to throw in the towel even though this is frustrating. 😂I have not had to go through this testing process in 5 years so in some ways I'm new to it all. This new candle uses a new wick (ie--not wood as I've used for years), new jar and new wax. I've underestimated just how different all these factors are.😂

 

The ones I was testing today certainly looked like they were tunneling but I will just keep going and hope that they catch up! I'll add in some testing of the smaller wicks I had discounted previously...and I'll burn them all the way down. 😊

Here are some of the ones I tested today. These pictures are after the second burn which was around 5 hours.

Thanks for everyone's assistance this far. I am most appreciative!

IMG_20190825_214517.thumb.jpg.3e29f2f34074489b55479be5ee8476fd.jpg

IMG_20190825_214645.jpg

Neither of these look like a coconut wax. The first pic looks like some really sketchy C3. The wax “shelf” is not a characteristic of any coconut waxes. You see that sometimes in palm wax candles, but not to this degree or roundness. It’s like way too much polymer is in that wax.

 

The second looks like somewhat acceptable C3. In which case, cotton core wicks or eco may be useful. 

 

If c6 is a quick entry into the coconut market, they may have just used C3 as a base with a little coconut oil tossed in. 🤷🏻‍♀️

 

Anyone have a tech document on how much (or little) actual coconut wax is in c6?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, TallTayl said:

Neither of these look like a coconut wax. The first pic looks like some really sketchy C3. The wax “shelf” is not a characteristic of any coconut waxes. You see that sometimes in palm wax candles, but not to this degree or roundness. It’s like way too much polymer is in that wax.

 

The second looks like somewhat acceptable C3. In which case, cotton core wicks or eco may be useful. 

 

If c6 is a quick entry into the coconut market, they may have just used C3 as a base with a little coconut oil tossed in. 🤷🏻‍♀️

 

Anyone have a tech document on how much (or little) actual coconut wax is in c6?

 

I have to say I feel a little bit better knowing that my results seem atypical based on these pictures. I have no idea what the % of coconut is in C6. I did hear back from the chemist at Cargill and he recommended Premier's 700 or 800 series. I'm going to show him these pictures and see what he thinks. I don't have any 800s, so I just tested between 765 and 799. None were acceptable, IMO. I will see if he will share the coconut %.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The chemist at Cargill told me the % of coconut was proprietary, which I expected. The way he phrased it made me think it isn't super high.  In terms of performance, it definitely throws better than my previous blend of 90% 464 and 10% coconut 83. Im going to try some premier 800s next.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As I suspected C3 and c6 are pretty much the same.

https://www.cargill.com/doc/1432078141913/naturewax-c-3-and-c-6-product-handling.pdf

 

Since Cargill sells coconut 1 (hydrogenated coconut oil available at any soap supply store) and coconut 2 (coconut 1 with a little soy) I can only suspect c6 really is C3 with a dab of coconut 1. It looks just like that.

 

note, C3 and c6 have a fragrance max load of 6% unless adding other ingredients to manage the overload. 

 

I know percentages exist for other cargill waxes, since. I found a tech doc for c1 stating it is soy with 20% palm wax. It looks, feels, smells and performs much like c1 with 20% any random container palm, so.... just guessing. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hmm....very interesting. Thank you for the sleuthing. I don't know anything about C3 so I'm pretty much in the dark. I do have some additive that Cargill sent me a sample of a while back. I've never tried it but I could give it a whirl and see if it makes a difference. 

For folks who are more familiar with C3 any additional words of wisdom? 😂 I feel like I'm playing some sort of detective game.

Thanks y'all!

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...