Why We Test to the Bitter End

[rjdaines]

Here is an interesting observation for all the newcomers here. I am testing a dual wick set up in a 4" diameter apothecary jar using 4630 paraffin blend wax. I poured the candle with 2 CD-5 wicks. I have a data sheet for each test candle with a comments section for the first half of the burn and one for the second half.

The first have of the test was a too hot: fast forming melt pool, deep melt pool and a container that was too hot to handle. In my mind I am thinking I should go down to 2 CD-4s next time

Second half: feeble flame, melt pool not reaching edges, wicks drowning; now I am thinking wicks are too small and I should try 2 CD-6s

Now, I can't explain these observations just yet but this demonstrates why a test candle should be burned to the end.

[ksranch]

Amen! Be sure to let us know how the next test goes.. I just got 4630 and have a lot of learning to do!!

[Stella1952]

Yep. Just when it looks like it's gonna be this, it changes to that... I don't mind testing candles all the way to the end - there's so much to learn by doing so!

[EricofAZ]

RJ, one thing to take into consideration is how many times you light the wick and how many times you clean the top of the wick. You mentioned upper and lower but I assume you are burning more than twice start to finish.

I assume you are burning 4 hours at a time or more for a power burn. For example, first time you light it, expect the wick to perform badly. It has to form the pool and draw the wax and saturate itself. That all happens on the first burn and test vary depending on whether the wick is raw, primes on the outer layer only, or primed to the core. The second burn should start to be more stable. Doesn't matter if the wick is primed with the wax in your candle (from a raw wick) or from 200 degree micro wax, it all mixes at the base of the flame.

So you mentioned two sets of notes. Top half and bottom half. I absolutely discard the first burn for the reasons above. All I want to know about the first burn is that is works and doesn't blowtorch or die out or get the glass too hot. That's it.

If the rest of the burns are following the pattern that the lower they get in the glass, the deeper the melt gets, that's to be expected.

Sounds like you had a reversal. So why? What would cause that? Too deep of a glass to get air to the wick? One of those funky shapes that expands diameter at the bottom? Didn't mix the FO well enough (stir a couple of minutes) or did something settle out in your mix that caused the lower portion of the candle to be a different mixture than the upper portion? Lots of variables that can cause this to happen, but they are pretty easy to spot.

Edited November 14, 2011 by EricofAZ

[Stella1952]

Just a question - why use 2 wicks? There are CD sizes which will handle a 4" candle with ease. I don't use paraffin, so I cannot suggest a size, but I feel sure the right one would not be as large as the ones I use for soy & palm waxes...

When you say you set up the testing divided in two parts - first and second half of the candle - I am hoping that you are conducting multiple test periods within those parts, ie. burning 1 hour per inch of candle diameter, simply dividing the data from the individual burns into the first and second halves of the candle. Powerburning should be reserved for a separate test AFTER the individual 1" per hour tests are completed successfully and you think you have found the right type & size wick for your candle. Trying to rush through and do the powerburn first is a waste of time and a shortcut that will yield little data.

I don't discount any parts of candle tests - how the wick burns each time is important data. Learning how candles burn at different points in different containers is part of the craft of candle making. I don't expect a wick to perform "badly" at any time during the burn.

Edited November 14, 2011 by Stella1952

[ChandlerWicks]

"There are CD sizes which will handle a 4" candle with ease" Thanks Stella! I was just looking at 2 of my 4" candles with disgust & asking "WHY" Please excuse the Hi-Jack.

[Stella1952]

What kind of wax? I use a CDN 20-22 in 4" containers of NatureWax C3... CDs go from size 2 - 30, if memory serves...

[rjdaines]

Well, there goes a careful crafted reply, I keep hitting the BIG reply to thread button after type write my messages and promptly lose everything (sigh). So here is an abbreviated reply:

Container is standard 8 ounce apothecary, 4" diameter that narrows to 3" at top.

Wax is 4630 with 7% cinnamon buns (combo used many time is a variety of containers), mixed well, no settling issues, candle begins to harden within 15 to 20 minutes

I can single wick the container with a variety of wicks but to get a reasonable melt pool always end up with a sooty mess at the top, double wicking does not do this.

This drowning seems to be a CD issue but I have yet to test the smaller LX wicks (LX-14) in a double set up.

Container shape is certainly an issue as I can wick similarly sized straight-sided containers and larger with single wicks. I have not tried zincs and have no experience with them but i may need to try them.

Burns are done in the 1" per hour format and are not power burns, may notes are just divided into first half and second half.

I didn't want this thread to become a "help me" thread (tho I do appreciate the suggestions) but wanted to give the newcomers an example of why we need to test our candles to the bitter end.

Sorry for this choppy reply, the first one was better...

[ChandlerWicks]

Its helping a great deal, thanks!

[ChandlerWicks]

4627 The CD22 (highest size I have) is too big, 2" flame with immediate smoke flying up. A CD20 is burning right now. 2 hours so far. Very steady flame, just starting to stretch up a little too high every once in a while. I will go to the bitter end!

What kind of wax? I use a CDN 20-22 in 4" containers of NatureWax C3... CDs go from size 2 - 30, if memory serves...

[jeanie353]

Well, there goes a careful crafted reply, I keep hitting the BIG reply to thread button after type write my messages and promptly lose everything (sigh). So here is an abbreviated reply:

Container is standard 8 ounce apothecary, 4" diameter that narrows to 3" at top.

Wax is 4630 with 7% cinnamon buns (combo used many time is a variety of containers), mixed well, no settling issues, candle begins to harden within 15 to 20 minutes

I can single wick the container with a variety of wicks but to get a reasonable melt pool always end up with a sooty mess at the top, double wicking does not do this.

This drowning seems to be a CD issue but I have yet to test the smaller LX wicks (LX-14) in a double set up.

Container shape is certainly an issue as I can wick similarly sized straight-sided containers and larger with single wicks. I have not tried zincs and have no experience with them but i may need to try them.

Burns are done in the 1" per hour format and are not power burns, may notes are just divided into first half and second half.

I didn't want this thread to become a "help me" thread (tho I do appreciate the suggestions) but wanted to give the newcomers an example of why we need to test our candles to the bitter end.

Sorry for this choppy reply, the first one was better...

I don't have any help to offer...more of an "I feel for ya" post. I was using apothecary jars that had a pretty large open neck. I found out they may actually be Keepsake jars. Anyway, I found I could get apothecary jars from CS for much less than I was paying for the ones I was using. When they arrived, they had quite a chimney on them compared to what I had been using and had successfully wicked. I tried wicking them with several types and got a black soot mess in the chimney with every wick I tried.

I did not try any double wicking. Good luck on your venture. I gave up, put them in storage and went back to my usual jars.

Edited November 14, 2011 by jeanie353

[Stella1952]

I keep hitting the BIG reply to thread button after type write my messages and promptly lose everything (sigh).

I'm so glad to know someone else does that too...

I didn't want this thread to become a "help me" thread (tho I do appreciate the suggestions) but wanted to give the newcomers an example of why we need to test our candles to the bitter end.

I hear ya rj, and it's excellent advice. Sorry I can't offer any suggestions, but I know pretty close to zippo about paraffin wax... Good luck & let us know how it all turns out, ok?

[rjdaines]

I'm so glad to know someone else does that too...

I hear ya rj, and it's excellent advice. Sorry I can't offer any suggestions, but I know pretty close to zippo about paraffin wax... Good luck & let us know how it all turns out, ok?

Will do, I love testing but I am wondering if it is becoming an excuse not to finalize a system and start getting into craft shows. Kind of scary...

[Stella1952]

When you feel confident of your product, you'll do fine. If a show scares you, just start with friends, neighbors, co-workers & relatives. Sometimes just a little booth at a farmer's market is enough to get your feet wet.

[Ravens]

I use 70/30 (4630 and 6006), containers are 3.125", use HTP wicks with great success. Single wick.

[ChandlerWicks]

What type of jar do you use with these waxes, please? I'll give it a whirl when I'm ready to order. Thanks Ravens!

I use 70/30 (4630 and 6006), containers are 3.125", use HTP wicks with great success. Single wick.

[jeanie353]

I use 70/30 (4630 and 6006), containers are 3.125", use HTP wicks with great success. Single wick.

Ravens...do you find most fragrances throw in this combo? I realize it is a generalized question since not all will throw in every wax. I'm just looking for a ballpark on whether you have more success than failure throws with this combo?

[rjdaines]

It seems that the problem is the FO viscosity and it didn't click until I ran into the same problem with another one, (Fresh Ginger). These testers were with Elemental Jars and wax 4630, I can usually wick then with LX-14, HTP-83 or HTP-93. For fresh Ginger I had to go to a LX-20 in order to get a sustainable burn. No problem, now I know but these two FOs are not the norm compared to the rest of the FOs I am using.

So, newcomers, keep this in mind too. Not all FOs are the same in how they will behave in your candle system. Don't assume, TEST.

Now, should I try the Creme Brulee?

[ChandlerWicks]

Yep, Go for it!

[Aimee81]

Just a question - why use 2 wicks? There are CD sizes which will handle a 4" candle with ease. I don't use paraffin, so I cannot suggest a size, but I feel sure the right one would not be as large as the ones I use for soy & palm waxes...

When you say you set up the testing divided in two parts - first and second half of the candle - I am hoping that you are conducting multiple test periods within those parts, ie. burning 1 hour per inch of candle diameter, simply dividing the data from the individual burns into the first and second halves of the candle. Powerburning should be reserved for a separate test AFTER the individual 1" per hour tests are completed successfully and you think you have found the right type & size wick for your candle. Trying to rush through and do the powerburn first is a waste of time and a shortcut that will yield little data.

I don't discount any parts of candle tests - how the wick burns each time is important data. Learning how candles burn at different points in different containers is part of the craft of candle making. I don't expect a wick to perform "badly" at any time during the burn.

Stella, I am apparently testing my jars wrong because I let my first burn last until about 1/4 inch hangup on jar and this usually takes 7 hours. For my 4 inch diameter jars my first test burn should only be 4 hours and every burn after? I have always let my first test burn go until I get almost fmp.....which I have not received yet and now I know why lol.

[Stella1952]

The difference in the HT of a 4" candle at 3½" of MP and FMP will be negligible. It is common and often desirable for large 4" soy & palm wax candles to NOT achieve FMP during the first burn. If they do, chances are that container will become mighty hot by the last half of the candle, where the heat is far more concentrated because it's way down in the container and not near the surface where the heat is uncontained by the walls of the jar.

The test period should be for prescribed lengths of time (1 hour per inch of diameter) so one can compute the RoC and other data points. If you are burning for haphazard lengths of time, your data will not be as reliable. The clock isn't going to stop if you burn for 4 hours in a 3½" diameter candle - rounding off the time is okay, just be sure you conduct each burn for the same period of time. Avoid burning for 5 hours, then 3 hours then 2 hours then 6 hours, etc. That's too much slop in the time spread for reliable data. When you have finished your initial testing (all the way to the end) and have decided on a wick/size that seems to give good burn and FO performance, THEN pour a tester and do a powerburn with some haphazard testing to replicate how the candle will perform if normal burning instructions are ignored. In particular, you are checking to see that if burned continuously, the container doesn't heat up so much as to be uncomfortable to handle, the candle doesn't produce excessive soot or smoke, the wick does not come loose and or wander, the wick self-extinguishes at the top of the wick tab and that the wax doesn't catch on fire near the end of the candle when temps often soar in a container candle. HTH