• Hi Guest - Come check out all of the new CP Merch Shop! Now you can support CigarPass buy purchasing hats, apparel, and more...
    Click here to visit! here...

PG and Beads

Doh!!! Miscible. Dennis was saying that it does mix.

As far the mechanisms being different Dennis explained that the silica would enhance the hygroscopic properties of the PG and would draw moisture from the PG solution. And since we're only discussing using a one time application of PG to accelerate the initial conditioning of the beads, it seems to me that this is the desired effect.

The other consideration is the indirect application of the solution by means of a wicking device. If the PG solution were applied to the surface of an absorbent material and then the material placed on the beads, wouldn’t the beads draw the water from the material until they’ve set at 70%, while leaving the PG behind?
 
Great research Mike, however, unfortunately this thread has officially reach the point of "over my head". :(
 
preembargo said:
Doh!!! Miscible. Dennis was saying that it does mix.

As far the mechanisms being different Dennis explained that the silica would enhance the hygroscopic properties of the PG and would draw moisture from the PG solution. And since we're only discussing using a one time application of PG to accelerate the initial conditioning of the beads, it seems to me that this is the desired effect.

The other consideration is the indirect application of the solution by means of a wicking device. If the PG solution were applied to the surface of an absorbent material and then the material placed on the beads, wouldn't the beads draw the water from the material until they've set at 70%, while leaving the PG behind?
Click to expand...

For Wade's benefit, hygroscopic means it attracts water vapor. The reason PG "effect" would work better with beads is that it would be able to take advantage of the huge surface area presented by the bead. The net result would be that PG would make the beads work faster, but would reduce the capacity per given volume of beads. I just don't see any advantage in that. PG does eventually evaporate, but I suspect it takes a while.

PG solution is a regulated source. If you're suggesting charging some wicking device, like foam or, a wick :D , and allowing that to charge (condition?) your beads, that would work. I'd put them in proximity, but not touching. Touching would create a bridge that the PG can follow.
 
NullSmurf said:
For Wade's benefit, hygroscopic means it attracts water vapor. The reason PG "effect" would work better with beads is that it would be able to take advantage of the huge surface area presented by the bead. The net result would be that PG would make the beads work faster, but would reduce the capacity per given volume of beads. I just don't see any advantage in that. PG does eventually evaporate, but I suspect it takes a while.

PG solution is a regulated source. If you're suggesting charging some wicking device, like foam or, a wick :D , and allowing that to charge (condition?) your beads, that would work. I'd put them in proximity, but not touching. Touching would create a bridge that the PG can follow.
Click to expand...

That's what I'm going for, creating an environment which would speed up the conditioning process.
 
I don't think that it will "speed up" the process. It will give you a sustained enviroment for the unconditioned beads to draw from but not speed up the process.

I'm still not convinced it doesn't some how negatively impact the working properties of the Silca Gel beads. I don't know.... my head hurts now, maybe tomorrow I'll look at this again.

And yes, this does fall into the "more than you ever wanted to know" column for most. LOL
 
Allofus123 said:
And yes, this does fall into the "more than you ever wanted to know" column for most. LOL
Click to expand...

Umm, more like the "two and half days of brain fart with accompanying nails on the chalkboard" column. :blush:

While having a smoke it donned on me that
Allofus123 said:
It will give you a sustained enviroment for the unconditioned beads to draw from but not speed up the process.
Click to expand...

Doh.gif


Gentlemen, I appreciate the discussion AND INDULGENCE. Kenny, I hope you find the articles I sent useful in your experiment.




I'm headin' out for another smoke.
 
Allofus123 said:
I don't think that it will "speed up" the process. It will give you a sustained enviroment for the unconditioned beads to draw from but not speed up the process.

I'm still not convinced it doesn't some how negatively impact the working properties of the Silca Gel beads. I don't know.... my head hurts now, maybe tomorrow I'll look at this again.

And yes, this does fall into the "more than you ever wanted to know" column for most. LOL
Click to expand...

Kenny, I don't have any evidence of speed. I'm just speculating based on PG's hygroscopic property. It will vigorously attract and absorb water. With the advantage of the bead's surface area, it should be positively magnetic. I don't know if that logic works both ways.
 
I'm glad the answer form DOW cleared things up... :laugh:

This was an interesting discussion and I thank you for bringing it up here. We always hear "don't use beads and PG" but I've never heard why, other than it's not necessary.

I'm going back outside to play with the other jocks. All this thinkin' has hurt my head. :D
 
I guess im confused by what your trying to achieve here. If I understand correctly, what you initially wanted to know is if conditioning kitty litter and/or beads with PG will enhance the conditioning process. To do this you would use an indirect process with the PG solution. So the real question is does pg solution hold the same chemical bounds in a gas state (ie when it evaporates) as it dose in a liquid state since that vapor is what the beads/kitty litter would be absorbing. I also think one would need to figure out just what that hard outer shell on the KL and the beads is composed of.
 
I was looking for a shortcut to conditioning KLH. My thoughts were that one could modify a humi brick by replacing the floral foam with beads and placing a sponge over the beads. So far so good. Then, I thought by applying PG solution to the sponge, the PG would regulate the RH while at the same time conditioning the beads. For some reason I had convinced myself that:

1. It should be safe to use PG solution with beads.
2. That using PG solution with beads would accelerate the conditioning of the beads.

Lessons learned from this discussion:

1. DOW Chemicals, who manufactures PG, confirmed that PG solution will have no negative impact on silica gel beads.
2. PG solution used in this fashion will condition silica beads to 70% but it will NOT accelerate the conditioning process.
3. I over think things.
 
preembargo said:
I was looking for a shortcut to conditioning KLH. My thoughts were that one could modify a humi brick by replacing the floral foam with beads and placing a sponge over the beads. So far so good. Then, I thought by applying PG solution to the sponge, the PG would regulate the RH while at the same time conditioning the beads. For some reason I had convinced myself that:

1. It should be safe to use PG solution with beads.
2. That using PG solution with beads would accelerate the conditioning of the beads.

Lessons learned from this discussion:

1. DOW Chemicals, who manufactures PG, confirmed that PG solution will have no negative impact on silica gel beads.
2. PG solution used in this fashion will condition silica beads to 70% but it will NOT accelerate the conditioning process.
3. I over think things.
Click to expand...

Ah now it all makes since, good stuff.
 
NullSmurf said:
Kenny, I don't have any evidence of speed. I'm just speculating based on PG's hygroscopic property. It will vigorously attract and absorb water. With the advantage of the bead's surface area, it should be positively magnetic. I don't know if that logic works both ways.
Click to expand...

I think I understand what you're saying but I'm not convinced that the beads would absorb the rh in the enviroment any faster just because the rh was produced with PG. The absorbtion rate should be the same or at least so miniscule that the difference really wouldn't be measurable.... at least for the application Michael is testing.

LOL...just when my headache went away I had to come back to this thread. :laugh:

Any yes, thank you Michael for the info. Some of it I have read before (the museum stuff) but taking it all in collectively is what I prefer over one aspect. Usually find the truth is somewhere in the middle.
 
Update:

After the discussion and research in this thread, I...

1. Took my humi bricks apart and discarded the floral foam

2. Filled the bottom 1/2 of each brick with 'Exquisicat Pearl Fresh' KLH beads purchased from PetSmart.

3. I then took some sponge that I had scavenged from a box of La Aurora Preferidos and cut it to fit inside the bricks

4. Placed the 'custom fit' sponge on top of the beads

5. Thoroughly sprayed the entire surface of the sponge with a 50/50 solution of distilled water and propylene glycol (PG) purchased from the smoke shop.

6. Reassembled the bricks and placed them back in the humidor.

My desktop humi is essentially two humidors in one. The upper and lower compartments are completely separate, making it the perfect ‘test subject’. Prior to this endeavor, both compartments were relatively stable at 67%-70%. After placing the modified bricks back into the humi, both compartments were at 68% by morning and have not fluctuated by even one degree since.

For the next phase,

At some point I’ll need to recharge the beads and I’ll use 100%distilled water but as steady as the beads are holding there’s no telling how long it will be before I get to move on to the next phase.
 
Sounds like a man with a plan!

I never heard back from the Art-Sorb folk. Sorry I couldn't be more help.
 
Bump.....

As I mentioned in my KL conditioning experiment thread... this is something worth considering.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top