Jump to content

Question using BW-917


Recommended Posts

Hello

 

I have been browsing the contents of this server for quite a while now taking as much information as I possibly can, and I have learned a lot. Still learning too!  consider myself a novice working with both coconut and beeswax. However, I'm encountering a bit of a discrepancy in terms of what I learned and my experiences from using BW-917. From what I have read about using coconut wax and blends that use coconut wax, using wicks that burn cooler like CDN is ideal. Beeswax on the other hand is quite hard, and using wicks that burn pretty hot is effective for this. I would think mixing the two together leads to the wax needing a hotter burning wick than a CDN. However on threads that I read on this server, coconut wax blends that contain beeswax still get recommended to use CDN as opposed to say, HTP and CD. This part is a little confusing to me.

 

In order to continue testing BW-917 I think I need some clarity on how to proceed in my testing. The current problem I am having is that wicks like ECO and the P700 series produce fantastic HT in my candles and they start off with a seemingly normal burn. When I get towards the middle of the jar burnwise, the flame starts to weaken and of course the meltpool in turn also gets shorter. This is the opposite of what I would expect from a candle that continues to burn down into the jar. The flame does not die out if I continue to burn it all the way down. There is also no hang up on the sides either, just a minimal melted surface and a flame that is ~.25in tall.

 

Here are the stats of what I'm currently working with:

 

9oz jar

ECO-10 (example)

BW-917 wax

no fragrance

 

result: 3/4 into the jar...

 

.43in flame

.03in meltpool

 

and burning a candle that has about a 7% FL into it with the same jar, wax and wick does the same thing. 

 

I try to wick up. I go from an ECO-10 to a 12, and even a 14. The same thing happens. Flame is strongest at the start, and then consecutive burns become much weaker. The only difference I've seen is the 14 started off with a really large flame (1.1in), and then on the end of the second burn the flame height goes to .06in. The same thing happens with the P700 wicks.

 

HTP and CD wicks are the only wicks that maintain a steady meltpool throughout the life of the candle.

 

What does this mean?

 

I can keep testing but I am at a point where I am not sure how to interpret the information I am recording or where to go from here. Currently my testing as lead me to believe that hotter burning wicks are effective with blends using beeswax, yet when I see wick recommendations like CDNs for Coconut 84 (coconut/beeswax) I get confused. There must be something I'm understanding incorrectly or information I'm missing about the properties of the wax. Any guidance would be amazing. Thanks!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Have you tried to wick down? I know that sounds counterintuitive but I have found that sometimes that helps with the wick drowning out towards the bottom of the jar.  

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I have! I only wicked down to the point where I thought the Baseline would be, and I did not wick any lower than that. It is pretty much the same across the board and I recorded very minor differences. It is quite difficult reading material about this wax as there isn't much, if at all, information about working with it. That's why I decided to make this post and hopefully get experienced users with either coconut or beeswax or a blend of them to see more about the properties and behavior of those waxes for more foundational knowledge. I appreciate your response ❤️

Edited by audreyb0t
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Air circulation lower in proportionally tall jars can begin to restrict full combustion of wick.

 

or, the wick is consuming itself - being challenged by the acidity of the natural waxes. 
 

or, the fragrance is a clogger.

 

or hangup is melting and filling the melt pool deeper than the exposed length of wick can handle.

 

A coconut blend simply having beeswax in the blend doesn’t give much to go on. I’m not familiar with that blend and will need to look at the tech docs to see how much (or little) is used. Marketing materials for wax blend are often coy, calling it proprietary, so testing is more difficult than it needs to be. The %of beeswax can be as little as a pastille, for example. I often use up to 5% beeswax in coco blends that are too easy to burn, to help tame the flames. 

ECO wicks never charmed me. I tried. I really did. Aside from one or two blends with specific fragrances just never burned right for me. 

htp and cd have been long thought to be the same wick. CDN, though, is slightly different being a cd with a second chemical dip that makes it better able to withstand acidic candle fuel combos. 
 

premier 700 series works well in loads of blends, but not all combos with all fragrances.  If the flames drown during a burn there’s something amiss.  I’m going through that now myself with ceda cerica. 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do testers half full candle so you can see where the candle issue is. Sometimes you have to wick down because the flame is burning salt of wax then drowns the wick. Sometimes wick up. You have to test.

 

You have to do several type wick tests to find out what works in a wax. If CD and HTP work well try CDN’s.

 

Not as fan of that wax. I don’t think its what its advertised as and it has an odor. You should get sample of 464 wax.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the responses. I am taking more notes than I ever have in my school years and I realize maintaining recipes for well burning candles is a constant uphill battle. I will keep in mind the information given to me and also try filling the jar halfway. If this struggle to form a melt pool is occurring without any fragrance in it, I guess it is safe to say that the wick series are simply incompatible with the wax. I'll probably test here and there still but not as frequently as I have been. I have stopped being stubborn and started testing the CDN wicks. LX has been successful in this wax as well.

 

I have tried 464! It is easy to work with and I am able to get really strong throw from it. For some reason I like the smell of BW-917 and when comparing fragrances of just the wax itself I favored this over 464, C55 (which is a coconut tart wax), and another blend. I thought it produced a more full bodied CT and HT over just soy and coconut. I briefly tried the Coconut Apricot wax and I really liked it, and I'm also interested in trying EC-26 and the Coconut Beeswax 84X. I think having an easier wax to work with and a more difficult one like BW-917 will be better for me.

 

 

 

Here's some photos of what the melt pool and flames look like in a 9oz jar with BW-917 wax. No fragrance added. Burn time is about 3 hours now.

PXL_20220429_223512191.MP.jpg

PXL_20220429_223544607.MP.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

I agree with you!  I absolutely adore the BW917.  I would agree that it does lend a bit of sweetness to the candles which to me results in a more pure scent throw.  I had never noticed that GW464 actually has a "beany" kind of scent and also seems to "hold back" certain scents.  But the GW464 does actually enhance certain scents....

 

In our testing with the BW917 it is generally the CDN series that wins out.  But as with all wax/scent/dye combos it can be very precise.  Not sure if it would help you if I posted our some of our results.  Or if you want to message me I could do that?

 

And looking at your candles - it doesn't look like they are too tall so if they are dying out as they burn your wick is clogging.  If you are using dye (I don't think you are) that could be the culprit.  Otherwise it is most likely the scent if the flame was normal sized at the beginning. 

Edited by CandleCocoon
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...