Measuring melt pool depth

[naomiheck]

I need input from the pros. I think I've been doing this wrong. I use a popsicle stick that I marked in 1/4 inch increments, and when I blow out the test candle, I stick it in until it stops to measure the depth of melted wax. However, if I look at the candle from the side, the depth of the clear melted wax is less (by a 1/4 inch or more). So which is the correct depth measurement? Thanks.

Naomi

[topofmurrayhill]

Soy wax in particular turns to goo while the candle is burning, so you won't really "hit bottom" until you're below the clear melted wax. The melt pool is measured based on what you can see from the side. However, it's more about judgment than precision. You don't really need a ruler to tell if the candle is overwicked.

Burn your candle for 3 or 4 hours at a time. You can use a shorter time for a smaller candle if you want. During the initial burns, your candle is probably burning too hot if you can easily guage the depth of the melt pool from the side. If you can't see it, it's not deep enough to matter so don't worry about it.

As the candle burns down further, more than one thing will tell you if it's burning too fast. The melt pool might get deep, the candle might get very hot to the touch, and the wick might poof out some smoke.

Edited November 25, 2009 by topofmurrayhill

[soy327]

Top,

On this same forum I started a thread palm wax pics I asked a simular question only the burn seems to fast. can't remember my exact post but it was yesterday I believe. Don't want to Hijack this post. Maybe if you have time you could read it.

I understand the melt pool thing but the melt pool really never gets more than a tad over 1/4" in that particular candle. No soot, no black. Just maybe I think it should burn slower.

Linda

[topofmurrayhill]

I'd love to help but I don't have enough experience with how palm containers burn. The approach could be different from what I'm used to.

[naomiheck]

Thanks for the explanation, Top. That helps me a lot in my decision to wick up, down, or hold for the time being. I am usually in too big a hurry to change the wick after the first burn or 2.

Naomi

[soy327]

Thanks Top, May be Richard will read this post and help. I think he has alot of experience with the palm.

Off the subject, I just got done making a couple of soy/coconut wax testers and the dam mice were in my soy wax bag. Had to get a plastic tub to put it in, If you're not having enough trouble with the soy the mice have to be munching on it too, jeez, Can't a girl get a break.:laugh2:

[topofmurrayhill]

It's food, even for people.

[RichardLOZ]

Palm wax is a temperamental beast to wick I do have to say. Vastly different from soy. Palm does tend to burn down the container and then after a number of burns will start to catch up.

Unless you have a flame from hell which is usually caused by either over wocking or a cavity in the wax, you cant tell how well your wick is going to perform untill you are numerous burn into the candle.

I have just finished a 3rd test burn in a cookie jar and the top on one side is only just starting to melt. I will know more in a few more burns.

Any candle, especially palm must be burnt right to the bottom on the container before you can really tell how well your chosen wick is performing.

Good luck with it, as it is definitely a frustrating thing to get wicked correctly.

We also do soy, and besides the temperamental nature of that wax, with its wet spots and frosting, it is so much easier to wick.

"Generally" if my melt pool in a palm container is deeper than 1/4 inch I may have to wick down, however that is not always the case. Keep testing till the end and you should get a better idea.

Might be good to put some pictures up so that we can see how it is performing and could then maybe advise further.

HTH

[soy327]

Richard I posted on the thread I started the palm wax pics, that will tell you my melt pool never got more than a little than 1'4" deep but I've burned it for 17 hrs and it's burned the top 1/3 of a 16 oz victorian apothacary jar. You saw my 1st pics, is that too fast. I test my candles at work and it's still there so I can't take a pic until Friday.

Linda

PS hope I'm not hijacking this thread, but I think it's a good question not only about the melt pool depth but how fast the candle burns in the end result. I am happy with the depth of the MP but think it might be too fast, am I making sense?

Edited November 26, 2009 by soy327

[topofmurrayhill]

Linda, I read the thread like you asked and I have a few thoughts - understanding that I don't do palm containers.

It really sounds like your instinct is that it's burning too fast, so there is probably something to it. One thing you could do is weigh your containers between burns so you actually know the rate of consumption and it will give you a better idea of whether you're getting a good burn rate in general and in comparison to your other fragrances.

It seems that you are getting a full melt pool pretty quickly, which for a palm container probably means it's burning pretty hot, so I think we have a concern about how it's going to work out further down into the container.

What I'm hearing is that you might normally wick the candle more conservatively but you're having a problem with this particular fragrance drowning your wicks. What I would probably do in your shoes is make a second tester to try the lower wick sizes with half the FO. Even if that is too little, will clearly answer the question of whether lowering the amount of fragrance could help with the wicking. It would also be interesting to see if it smells any better with less fragrance or a smaller wick.

We've been talking about CDN wicks in the other thread and one thing worth noting is that a different wick treatment could possibly help with a specific fragrance. So if your current wicking indeed proves to be too high, and lowering the amount of fragrance doesn't help with the wicking, you could try CDN and see if they hold up better with this FO.

Hope something there helps.

[soy327]

Thanks, Top and Happy Thanksgiving to all!

After reading your post I think I am going to try a CDN7 DBL instead of the CD8, and 5% FO instead of about 7%. It's not just the FO or just the wick it's possible it's both. Can't hurt to try. Hope I didn't hijack the thread but, I think all of us will learn more this way. Isn't that what it's all about?

I do know how to caculate the burn time da, and that's why I had it in my head this was burning too fast da. I had a nice burning one on my last test (with roasted chestnuts) if I would have just been patient.

"Stupid is as stupid does" :laugh2:

Edited November 26, 2009 by soy327

[soy327]

O.K. I have pumkin pie on my face there is no CDN 7. back to the lab(as Stella would say) back to a cd7:laugh2::laugh2:and another cinnamon from Peak.

[topofmurrayhill]

Yeah that's a problem with CDNs that I momentarily forgot about. You can't double wick with the easily available sizes. The smaller sizes exist of course but you have to buy like 1000 at a time.

[Stella1952]

there is no CDN 7

Sure there is and I think someone mentioned that Candle Cocoon has smaller sizes, but you have to call and ask about availability as they are not listed on the site. Lone Star has smaller sized CD wicks sizes 5-8 for sure. CDNs and CDs range from 2-8 then 10-30.

When learning about container palm wax, it's really better to make smaller sized containers and get them down before trying larger sizes. In this thread or another, I said that I had not had good success with multiple wicks in palm wax for many reasons which you'll discover as you learn to work with container palm wax. Palm wax does NOT burn like other waxes! I suggest you try a larger single wick for best results.

[soy327]

I've been working with the GG for a while off and on. And your right it is been a pain. Thanks for the info on the wicks and the jar size. I am now testing the LX series in this jar (16oz square victorian apothacary jar)DBL's and am getting close to what I want, they are burning good but the faster melt pool causes me to want to keep wicking down til I get to the smallest 6" LX wick made, went to 12's then I found Tennesse Candle supply and they have the 10's and 8's in a 6" wick.

I'm wondering what you think of the look of the (this is hard to explain) the sides of the jar having a very little hang up, but enough to make it alluminate. I think it looks cool. That's kind of what I'm going for. I know it will eventually get a complete melt pool but I'm hoping not til it's close the bottom.

Linda

[Stella1952]

My problem with multiple wicking is that melt pools are round. Where the two melt pools meet will tend to be hotter. Maybe I'm just a nitpicker, but I don't like off-balanced looking candles. A rectangle, for example would look good with two wicks, but a square with two doesn't work for me visually. A square would look best to me with 1, 3 or 4; a circle looks best with 1, 3, 4, etc. Besides the subjective cosmetic reasons, I think it is easier to balance the heat that way, too.

As to the illumination through the glass glow, it's ALWAYS an option to wick a container to leave a shell of wax through which the flame can glow! I wick all my pillars deliberately to leave a shell that glows and also can be lit with an electric tea light after the candle has burned out. There's no reason why you could not do this with a container as well. I love the look of candlelight glowing through the palm wax shell, like a hurricane or globe-style lights, or the popular "forever candles.".

I'm wondering what you think of the look of the (this is hard to explain)

A photo would be nice.

[soy327]

I will be making another this week to test and will take a picture, if it does what I want it to do:yay:Thanks for the multiple wicking info.

Linda