h a l f b a k e r yAmbivalent? Are you sure?
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
(Skip to the * if you’re not interested as to why it is in a milk jug)
Here, there is an annual, weekend-long celebration that kicks off on a Friday night with an event called Luminaria. This is when the town’s residents light up the entire coastline with candles. For the last 3 years I’ve been
placing candles on a rock out in the water for fun, and to see if I can start a trend, eventually lighting up all the offshore rocks. These candles are noticed and enjoyed, then forgotten.
Next time, so folks remember (from the previous year) that they meant to participate in my rock lighting endeavor, I will light my candles days prior to Luminaria. Since many people only go to the beach on the weekends, even though they live nearby, it will have to burn for a full week prior, then ideally for the entire weekend, because I’m only swimming out there once. Er, make that twice.
The town agrees to clean up after this event because the candleholders (windbreakers) are made from recyclable plastic (mostly milk jugs). They have yet to retrieve the jugs I place on the rock, which is OK, I do. But so as not to undermine the environmental aspect of this event, thus alienating any would be helpers, I must continue using the 1-gallon jug (the largest town-recyclable container suited for this application).
* Someone would have asked. On to the idea…
A narrow candle would burn longer if it were wider, by having more fuel available. A wide candle will burn a hole through the center of the candle leaving unused fuel along the circumference. There is an optimal diameter, say 3 inches, where available fuel is maximized, and no fuel remains unused.
A 6” diameter candle will fit in a milk container to a height of 5”. At 5” it narrows due to a 1.5” indent for the handle on one side, and tapers inwards, but there is another 3” ‘usable’ height. ‘Usable’ because there must be enough space above the candle so the container doesn’t burn. This will be an unusually shaped candle – roughly 6” round x 5” high on the bottom, then a 6”x4.5” base off-centered by 1.5” tapering inwards to a height of 3” on the top.
A single wick will be used, because we’re going for duration here, and that wick must consume all of the fuel. To accomplish this, the wick will be spiraled through the candle. (Spiral wick candles exist, but with the wick on the outside of the candle.) Using the 6” x 5” bottom as an example: First, a stick of wax measuring 3” diameter x 5” high is molded. Wick is spiraled around the stick and held in place by painting melted wax on it. The stick is then centered in a 6” diameter mold. The result is 6” diameter candle with a 3” burn traveling in a 3” circle, thus consuming all 6” of wax.
The top portion uses the same technique, but includes some carving, unless you happen to have a mold that shape. The pieces are, of course, fused together, and the wick is contiguous. Cut a door in the container, insert the candle, seal the door, make a couple small air holes at the bottom and an angled rain deflector at the top. Ready to shine.
Note that this isn’t made of your ordinary paraffin or petroleum based waxes. It’s 100% pure, clean burning, long lasting cappings beeswax. I think it will burn for 3 weeks, but I have yet to find a reference by which to do the calculations.
(?) Beeswax burn rate
http://www.discount....php/products_id/58
4.51 cubic inches = 15 hours [Shz, Aug 24 2005]
(?) Here's one
http://www.cajuncan.../candlewaxpage.html
Cajun's... [Dub, Aug 24 2005]
(?) Another
http://www.chrysali....uk/book/1855859335
the candle maker (forkandles) [Dub, Aug 24 2005]
Ugh, and another
http://www.gelcandlemaking.com/
Did you like the running commentary? [Dub, Aug 24 2005]
(?) [Dogpile.com-> Candle Gel "burn rate"]
http://www.candlesupply.com/gel.html
This is just the first ref to gel "burn rate" I found... You'll have to dig for the rest (mind the dog(pile) poo!) - They seem to be in g/hr for the wicks... [Dub, Aug 24 2005]
(??) The definitive candle work
http://www.grtbooks...4/7/14474/14474.txt
Recommended for the quality of writing alone on such a seemingly simple subject [coprocephalous, May 12 2006]
Hackaday: Reverse Engineering A Real Candle
http://hackaday.com...ring-a-real-candle/
{tangential} [Dub, Jan 06 2016]
More direct link to Michael Faraday's "The Chemical History of a Candle" (two links above)
http://www.gutenber...les/14474/14474.txt
[notexactly, Sep 07 2019]
[link]
|
| |
It'll keep lots of bees buzzy (sorry) filling that little lot. Apparently Gel candals burn longer (ref. a candle book on Amazon ref from Google "cabdle maker" "burn rate" I think) |
|
| |
Found a reference. <link> I estimate the volume of this candle at 206.17 cubic inches. At a burn rate of 15 hours per 4.51 cubic inches, this candle will burn for just over 4 weeks. That’s way longer than I need, and it should draw additional attention / curiosity just by staying lit that long. |
|
| |
Got a link [Dub]? I’m all for trying other materials, provided they are eco-friendly, and I can work with them. |
|
| |
Does having your wick at an angle, at whatever slope your helix would be, mean the flame can access the wick faster (the flame no longer has to descend straight down to reach more wick), and therefore burn faster? If this idea works, start making these right away. + |
|
| |
Amazingly wordy for a fully burning candle with a spiraling wick. But I'll give it a + anyway. |
|
| |
[Dub], there’s a few comparisons on those links, but no burn rates. |
|
| |
As I understand it, [sleeka], the wick is merely a conduit for drawing the wax to the flame, and barely burns itself except in the absence of wax. |
|
| |
//Amazingly wordy// I thought so too, but once it became some sort of geekish engineering challenge, I just couldn’t help myself. |
|
| |
Candle companies will shun you now, since you basically made a perma-candle, making their high consumption-rate candles look foolish. I'm tempted to go build one to test it (using wax, though). Maybe you can get the burn time exact, so that each month can have its own candle (own color and scent), and burn out precisely at the end of that month - the Luminaria Calendar. |
|
| |
this is all very lovely but I cannot help but wondering, doesn't the fecking thing get blown out? |
|
| |
The container serves as a windbreaker. Most people cut a hole in the side and face the hole opposite the wind. Others cut the top off a 2-liter bottle and the flame burns well below the rim. These methods are OK, but out on the rocks the wind is stronger, so I cut a door to insert the candle through, then seal the door. This leaves the 1” spout (chimney, in this case) as the only opening. I think this opening may not allow enough air exchange to sustain the candle, so I make 2 small punctures near the bottom of the container. It’s very well sheltered. I haven’t had one blow out yet. |
|
| |
[shz]Sorry, many of the links mention wick burn rate, and that Gel lasts longer, but you'll have to hunt through. There does seem to be a community though... there's bound to be FAQs and forums... Mostly to do with scented candles though. Trawl, and ask! |
|
| |
If you start at the bottom winding the wick in a helix you could burn the candle from both ends. |
|
| |
Don't worry about the amazing wordiness, I enjoyed it. This is a top-notch idea, one of the best and most carefully formulated ones I've seen. Go for it. I'll buy loads. |
|
| |
I'll let you know how it goes this summer. |
|
| |
Nicely thought out [Shz]. [+] |
|
| |
How did this work? Did your helical wick fabrication process
work well? |
|
| |
I instantly thought of a 10 gallon milk can candle but it doesn't quite fit the nub of the idea. More metal work involved. |
|
| |
I am curious too. This is a slick idea. |
|
| |
Are lots of people putting candles out on the rocks now? |
|
| |
A couple of years back I made my own candle out of Junk. I
used an old beer can, spare wax and a 1 1/4" oil lamp wick.
I named it the "Mandle". Rather than burning for a very long
period, it lasted about 20 minutes with 18" of flame and
enough soot to get me in modest trouble for a week. Overall
a success. |
|
| |
^ yup. Also, what this idea would do, since the wick would be horizontal. |
|
| |
Impregnate the candle with coal dust, turning it black (ie: IR absorbing, ie: more easily melting circumference) and providing (a bit of) a heftier fuel. |
|
| |
There are a number of natural oil-seeps. An asbestos wick
mounted on one of these might work. |
|
| |
The friend I usually mention made something he called a
"mandle" as well. He took an old vacuum-insulated travel
mug whose lid had been lost, and poured bacon fat into it,
with a regular brown string for the wick. The only problem
was that the vacuum insulation kept the bacon fat from
freezing before he went home, so I didn't get to see it in
action. That was about a year ago—actually, I think it was on
Shrove Tuesday, because we did bacon to go with the
pancakes. That's coming up again, so a good reminder to ask
him how it worked out. |
|
| |
There seems to be ways prescribed to soak string to make wicks but is there any serious science on weave pattern, spacing of weave needed for different flow dynamics of different fuels? Or, since candles are centuries old, is the knowledge is done and dusted. 3D printers are available now. |
|
| |
// is there any serious science on weave pattern, spacing of
weave needed for different flow dynamics of different fuels?
// |
|
| |
I don't know about for different fuels, but one thing I
learned from Wikipedia the other day is that twisted wicks
will stay upright and therefore not self-trim, while braided
wicks will curl over and therefore self-trim. That simple
change appears to be why there isn't a wick trimmer in
every (candle-using) household anymore. |
|
| |