Tortoise Shell Palm Testing

[topofmurrayhill]

This is the end of burn 5 for RRD 34 NST2, RRD 37 NST2 and RRD 40 NST2.

I'm ending testing for the 34 because the melt pools have been getting very wide and the shell melted through slightly on this burn. There was no spillage, but you can see the holes if you look behind the flame. I'm also ending testing for the 40, even though nothing bad has happened yet. The melt pools have been very wide and the shell is very thin (and perforated in one spot), so it's not burning down in the best way and I'm sure it's too big.

It's interesting that the middle size would burn more moderately than the larger and smaller sizes. I can only speculate that the 37 has the best balance between the burn rate and the rate at which it melts the wax. In any event, I'm confident now that the 37 is burning down well and I will keep burning it for a while to revel in the results.

Little did I know that I was beginning my palm wax experience with the most difficult wax. Its burn qualities can be a little sketchy, especially near the top of the candle, and wick selection is especially critical. I've concluded that Wedo NST2-treated wicks work best. Luckily, RRD is not only the most effective NST2 wick in this wax, but also the most easily obtainable. Identifying the best wick choice is good progress.

I've given up the idea of making low-maintenance candles with tortoise shell palm. The RRD wicks do need to be trimmed down before every burn, and I've also been giving them an occasional nudge to keep the flame more centered. Flat-braided wicks come straight out of the wax and then curl at the tip, but the RRDs develop a lean and can come out of the wax at an angle. On the plus side, they burn super clean in this wax and hardly ever mushroom. They can be notorious for mushrooming in other waxes (including palm waxes), which underscores the importance of matching the wick to the application. I knew my RRD collection would come in handy some day.

I'd still like to explore the best results obtainable with tortoise shell, so I'm going to make RRD testers with one or two other fragrance oils to see how the performance varies.

Edited April 15, 2010 by topofmurrayhill

[topofmurrayhill]

End of burn 6 for RRD 37 NST2. Still looks like it'll work fine.

Before moving on to another fragrance oil, I think I might melt down the other two test candles and make an RRD 29 tester. All the sizes I've tried can sometimes burn pretty fast and melt out wide, and I'm only doing 3 hour burns with this wax in contrast to 4 with starburst and feather. While it never seemed likely that I'd need the smallest RRD, now I'm curious how it would work.

[topofmurrayhill]

RRD 37 NST2 at the end of burn 7.

[topofmurrayhill]

Change of plans! On further reflection, I've decided to focus on wicking with CSN. RRD wicks are strong and they're certainly an option, but I don't love the tall flames and wide melt pools--even with the small sizes. It was worth doing the testing, but my next step is gonna be to move on to a new FO and pour CSN 11 and 12 testers again. I think I can make the wicks work as well as possible by letting them self-trim. I'm going to light them at 1/4" and not cut them after that. I may also switch to 4 hours burns. I don't really like testing these differently from the other pillar waxes, plus the extra hour may also give the wicks some time to recover if they fry in the first hour, as we know they sometimes do.

Edited April 17, 2010 by topofmurrayhill

[topofmurrayhill]

After exploring the most robust wicks, I've decided to focus on CSN as my top choice for this wax. I think it will burn tortoise shell candles down in a way that resembles how starburst and feather pillars burn, and I believe the good self-trimming properties are important. CSN may not burn as consistently in tortoise shell as is does in the other waxes, but the alternatives can also be hit-or-miss.

Hopefully these new CSN 11 and 12 testers will bring me close to wrapping up wick testing for tortoise shell palm. These are made with the Honeysuckle Jasmine FO from CandleScience, which is a pleasant and very strong floral. I originally made these with 5% FO, but the cold throw was so intense that I ended up repouring them with additional wax to bring the FO concentration down to 4%.

Another reason for the remake was that the original testers came out with a very fine-grained surface pattern. I wanted it bolder, so I did the new pour almost 5 degrees cooler. The pattern came out slightly larger but still pretty dense. Part of it may be that things are cooling more slowly in my workshop with the changing weather, but I suspect it's also a variation caused by the FO itself.

The photo is from the end of burn 1.

Edited April 19, 2010 by topofmurrayhill

[topofmurrayhill]

I accidentally erased the photos from burn 2 of the Honeysuckle Jasmine CSN 11 & 12 testers, so I'll have to describe the results. I think they were pretty significant.

In contrast to my experiences over the past several weeks, both wicks performed consistently for the second burn, with no overtrimming or fizzling out. Apparently there's an issue of fragrance selection that should be taken into consideration with tortoise shell palm. Even fragrances that burn fine in other waxes (including other palm waxes), migt contribute to burn quality problems in tortoise shell.

The possibility of that occurred to me weeks ago, at which point I performed an offline test that turns out to have been misleading: I made a tortoise shell tester with an FO that burns exceptionally well for me in two other candles types. That FO substitution didn't solve the problem, so I discounted the contribution of the FO and focused mainly on the wax/wick combo.

Now that I've identified a compatible FO, hopefully I'm pretty close to getting the tortoise shell testing squared away. I do, however, have to make a new tester. CSN 11 and CSN 12 had melt pools that were too wide during the second burn, and I extinguished them both with about 45 minutes left on the clock. I'm guessing a smaller size would be best in this case, so I plan to make a CSN 9 tester.

Edited April 20, 2010 by topofmurrayhill

[debratant]

I am getting ready to pour 2 tortoise shell pillars tonight...thanks to your great testing Top. I'm going to pour Berries & Lillies that I bought from Sockmonkey.

I'm hoping to get the same great results with csn that you have.

Am I right in assuming you are using wick pins? Or are you prewicking your molds? I will be using wick pins. Also...are you wrecking your pillars like I've seen mentioned on here before? I plan to not wreck them this time around.

[lrbd]

Since he is not online at the moment I am pretty sure that I can tell you he is not using wick pins and he is not wrecking them either. I have been following pretty carefully so I am 99% sure I answering accurately. Hop this helps

[debratant]

Thank you! I just poured them in my molds. I don't have

spooled csn wicking so wick pins it is. Oh...and not going

to wreck them.

[topofmurrayhill]

Thanks Laura. You know the deal.

The wrecking thing isn't worth it to me. I'd rather walk away after pouring and forget about the candles if I want to. I can deal with the voids at my convenience rather than having to mess with the candles while they cool.

You do have to deal with them though. Tortoise shell gets a lot of air space at the bottom, so you definitely have to break through and fill it once the candles are at room temp. If I decided to sell palm pillars, I would still have to do that second pour in order to produce standard-size pillars.

Edited April 22, 2010 by topofmurrayhill

[lrbd]

You do have to deal with them though. Tortoise shell gets a lot of air space at the bottom, so you definitely have to break through and fill it once the candles are at room temp

how do you do that and do you do that with the other palm waxes? I have not done any wrecking since we have been testing with the starburst . Wondering if i should be but I haven't had any problems that I know about. Thanks

[debratant]

I would have preferred to wick my molds. I probably should have tried my 30 ply wicking with it just to see. I'll do that another time. My color came out really pretty...hope the pattern develops good. They are cooling in a rubbermaid container that I have filled with rice. I use this because we have an old house that isn't exactly level and I'm able to level them in the rice. Good thing I don't sell. Alot of leveling for 2 freaking pillars.

I didn't wreck them...but will punch thru for the top off pour.

Edited April 22, 2010 by debratant
forgot to reply to top...duh

[topofmurrayhill]

how do you do that and do you do that with the other palm waxes? I have not done any wrecking since we have been testing with the starburst.

I use a small x-acto craft knife to cut a few holes into it, angled a little towards the wick because that's the pattern the voids form in. I also take the opportunity to cut the wick so that it doesn't come all the way to the bottom. Then I pour 190 degree wax to overflow the holes just a little.

I consider feather palm a one-pour, so I don't worry about voids but I still cut the wick and seal the hole with a bit of wax. A lot of the feather candles have no voids at all. There can be a random air pocket sometimes, but nothing to cause a real problem.

When I cut straight startburst open, it seemed to need a second pour. It's not as bad as tortoise, and the air space is mostly near the bottom, but I feel better filling it. I don't know yet how the air pockets differ in the one I added stearic acid to. Just from the way the candle contracted, the stearic seemed to have a significant effect on how the wax set up. I would think the air pockets are different in some way. If you've got a blown out candle lying around that has added stearic, maybe you can split it and see what you find.

Edited April 22, 2010 by topofmurrayhill

[topofmurrayhill]

I probably should have tried my 30 ply wicking with it just to see.

Let me know what happens if you try that. A&P flat braid is one of the types that I found to be partially resistant to frying in palm wax. In other words it works if you use a larger size than you would normally need. I had pretty good results with 36 ply in feather palm. I plan to test it in starburst too, but I'm really pretty sure it will work fine.

30 ply might be a good size for tortoise shell if it worked. In my tests though, tortoise shell has been eating wicks for lunch unless they have a strong chemical treatment. It fried my 36 ply. However, I think it could work better with a different fragrance oil than the one I used.

[lrbd]

I use a small x-acto craft knife to cut a few holes into it, angled a little towards the wick

how far down do you go?

If you've got a blown out candle lying around that has added stearic, maybe you can split it and see what you find.

Thought this is the tortoise shell testing thread, I want to show you this. This photo is the bottom( really the top) 1/2 of a candle(starburst) I made where the wick was too small. is that what you mean ?

[topofmurrayhill]

how far down do you go?

Thought this is the tortoise shell testing thread, I want to show you this. This photo is the bottom( really the top) 1/2 of a candle(starburst) I made where the wick was too small. is that what you mean ?

The best thing is to open a candle like you did and see what you're trying to fill. That way you'll have a sense of what you need to reach with the knife when you poke into the bottom for the second pour.

I split open the straight starburst and the starburst+stearic testers to compare them. The photos are over in the other thread. I also repoured with double the stearic to see what happens.

Edited April 23, 2010 by topofmurrayhill

[topofmurrayhill]

Now that I have a more compatible FO to test tortoise shell with, I decided to go whole hog, so these are testers for CSN 9 through CSN 14.

I'm coming to the conclusion that it may not be feasible to burn these candles 4 hours at a time every time, regardless of the wick size--at least not at the top of the candle. The melt pool just tends to get too wide in 4 hours. Maybe further down it will change, but I'm starting these off with 3 hour burns. The photos are from the middle and end of burn 1.

I don't know what's up with the patterns. Maybe it's the new fragrance, or maybe it's the new weather, but they just tend to set up any way they want to. There is a lot of variation between candles and in the same candle.

[topofmurrayhill]

End of burn 2, three hours.

[topofmurrayhill]

End of burn 3.

[topofmurrayhill]

Here's the end of the 4th 3-hour burn. CSN 14 has put some holes in the side of the candle, but there was no spillage. That one is a fail. CSN 12 has been making a pretty thin shell on one side.

[topofmurrayhill]

End of burn 5.

And then there were two. The CSN 9 tester melted through the side after about 2 hours. I let it keep burning to the end.

[topofmurrayhill]

This is the end of burn 6 and CSN 12 is the latest casualty. Only CSN 11 remains.

[topofmurrayhill]

End of burn 7 and CSN 11 seems to be the ticket. This was with 3 hour test burns. It's possible that none of the wick sizes would have worked out in 4 hour burns even if I turned and tended to the candles. Possibly the burn sessions could be longer as a candle burns down, but needing to be a little careful in the initial burns may just be a fact of life with this wax.

Edited April 25, 2010 by topofmurrayhill

[topofmurrayhill]

Burn 8 for CSN 11, end of 3 hours.

[topofmurrayhill]

CSN 11 end of burn 9. It actually burned for an additional hour after this photo was taken because I forgot to blow it out. There was no ill effect.

Much like feather and starburst, you have to be careful of wide melt pools during the initial burns, but you can burn for longer periods once the shell starts melting down as you see in the photo. However, tortoise shell has a lower melting point and I've found it best to limit those initial burns to 3 hours.