Jump to content

Double Wicking Straight Sided Tumbler (Libbey Jar)


AprilArnett
 Share

Recommended Posts

I've been testing single wicks for my Straight Sided Tumbler (Libbey Jars) for months and months, I'm still at a loss on which single wick performs ideally for this jar!!!  The jar is 3.06" in diameter, 3.5" in height, wax weight 8.5oz, volume 12.1oz. I'm using IGI 6006, 8% FO, most FO are purchased from Candle Science and The Flaming Candle. I've tested nearly every size in CD, HTP, and ECO wicks. Lately, I've resorted to testing double wicks. I've been the most satisfied double wicking with ECO 4's. Even melt pool, throw is outstanding, little to no soot, some mushrooming with certain FO, but not all. My concern is the glass gets really hot once it's burned down to about the middle of the jar. I tried wicking down to 2 ECO 2's, but the melt pool was not reaching the sides on the 2nd and 3rd burns. Any suggestions?

Edited by AprilArnett
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • AprilArnett changed the title to Double Wicking Straight Sided Tumbler (Libbey Jar)

Hi April.

I've never used IGI 6006 wax but sounds like you have been making good progress with the wick testing which is the worst part of candle making. Yes, double wicks or even single wicks can cause too much heat as the candle melts further down in the jar. You may be onto something with the ECO 2s or possibly another wick in that similar size.

 

As I have learned on here from others, especially from @TallTayl, you shouldn't get hung up on your candles reaching a complete melt pool (melted wax from side to side) on the 1st, 2nd or even possibly the 3rd burn. Sometimes the 4th or 5th burn will achieve a full melt pool without over heating then or later as the candle melts down. Of course this doesn't mean that you want a candle that is tunneling terribly. A container with a thin wax ring can be fine and end up melting after a few more burns. It's a balancing act between the heat build up and the wick size. It's also a matter of taste or your preference of how you want your candle to look and perform or even what your customers want in performance. What you consider a great burning candle may not be what I consider a great burning candle. We all probably have our own slightly different opinions on that and I don't think a "perfect" candle exists, close, but not perfect. Hope this helps and will give you a new perspective on your wick testing. 😉

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Single wick containers that size. Doubles are too much. 6006 doesn’t burn with a wide melt pool, so don’t get hung up trying to make it do what it doesn’t want to do. The MP is not a concern as long as you end with a clean jar.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bfroberts said:

Single wick containers that size. Doubles are too much. 6006 doesn’t burn with a wide melt pool, so don’t get hung up trying to make it do what it doesn’t want to do. The MP is not a concern as long as you end with a clean jar.

 

2 hours ago, Laura C said:

Hi April.

I've never used IGI 6006 wax but sounds like you have been making good progress with the wick testing which is the worst part of candle making. Yes, double wicks or even single wicks can cause too much heat as the candle melts further down in the jar. You may be onto something with the ECO 2s or possibly another wick in that similar size.

 

As I have learned on here from others, especially from @TallTayl, you shouldn't get hung up on your candles reaching a complete melt pool (melted wax from side to side) on the 1st, 2nd or even possibly the 3rd burn. Sometimes the 4th or 5th burn will achieve a full melt pool without over heating then or later as the candle melts down. Of course this doesn't mean that you want a candle that is tunneling terribly. A container with a thin wax ring can be fine and end up melting after a few more burns. It's a balancing act between the heat build up and the wick size. It's also a matter of taste or your preference of how you want your candle to look and perform or even what your customers want in performance. What you consider a great burning candle may not be what I consider a great burning candle. We all probably have our own slightly different opinions on that and I don't think a "perfect" candle exists, close, but not perfect. Hope this helps and will give you a new perspective on your wick testing. 😉

Thank you so much for your response!! It has given me new insight! I agree, I think I'm getting too hung up on melt pools. The Eco 2's performed well, but I wasn't satisfied with the melt pool on the 3rd burn, no tunneling, but my expectation was for it to melt wider, so I wicked up. Going back to the drawing board. Thank you again!! 

  • Like 1
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, bfroberts said:

Single wick containers that size. Doubles are too much. 6006 doesn’t burn with a wide melt pool, so don’t get hung up trying to make it do what it doesn’t want to do. The MP is not a concern as long as you end with a clean jar.

Thank you for your response!! I'm getting too hung up on melt pools 🤦‍♀️.  I've tested nearly all in Eco, CD, and HTP, I'm just not satisfied with the results, aside from melt pool. Any suggestions?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

42 minutes ago, AprilArnett said:

Thank you for your response!! I'm getting too hung up on melt pools 🤦‍♀️.  I've tested nearly all in Eco, CD, and HTP, I'm just not satisfied with the results, aside from melt pool. Any suggestions?

When I used 6006, I liked Eco 6 or 8 with containers around 3” in diameter. I’m not sure if 6006 is still the same, but that’s where I’d start testing. A 2 week cure is best. Burning too soon can be unreliable. CD and LX also worked well for me.  The trick to a good clean burn IME is allowing adequate cure time, not overloading with FO (6-7% is all you need) and holding back on a full MP until the 3rd or 4th burn.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, bfroberts said:

The trick to a good clean burn IME is allowing adequate cure time, not overloading with FO (6-7% is all you need) and holding back on a full MP until the 3rd or 4th burn.

 

Yes, that sounds real good. Next time I make some test candles I'm going to experiment with lower FO %s, I've been getting carried away and I'm afraid I'm just wasting it. And with testing FO %s it seems more reliable or noticeable if you start low and go high instead of the other way around.

Edited by Laura C
Link to comment
Share on other sites

While scouring wick charts, I noticed early on that most melt pool widths are pretty narrow. The labs use a standard paraffin 140*F wax usually. Those waxes form a small pool that is “U” shaped. The flame gently melts the sizes of the wide “U” into the pool throughout the life of the candle. Rarely do you ever see soot on those candles or carbon heading of the wicks.
 

 When I looked further into my own experiments, it made so much sense.  Don’t wick for full early pool since the end of the candle is where most fail safety tests due to extreme heat. Once the container hits 170*F (or 140*F or 175*F depending on which set of safety limits you are looking at) it is an automatic fail for candle safety by ASTM standards. 
 

looked at some ancient commercially made candles, and current McCalls brand to confirm that small pools work extremely well - especially when powerburning. The jars are always cool to the touch and the scent throw is magnificent. The hang up will catch up reliably once you learn the balance of the wick to the fuel in your choice of jar. 

 

 

  • Thumbs Up 1
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...