A different material for Smoke Batting

that is very interesting.  I would contact the company and see if appying heat to the material has any toxic air quality effects using an electric heat element. 

But this sounds promising!  You would think that they would develop something that would not char.  but, mth and lionel probably are like, well.  just replace the parts.  then they make money.   I just had to replace a top from an engine I bought used.  because the top melted from use.  30 bucks.  

Pictures are always a help.

I gather that the thickness is 3 mm?

If so, did you fold it over into the smoke chamber, square upon square to proper height...ect.

I didn't think to take pictures because I didn't know if it was going to work.

I didn't measure the thickness but 3mm is about right. The way I packed it in there was to cut it into the shape I needed for the fluid reservoir and then used some Lionel batting in the bottom to prop it up. My unit is a dual chamber and you fill one side up and it wicks  / flows to the other side. So the batting in the bottom is in both sides and the flame retardant material is on top. I'll have to take a picture the next time I have it opened up. That should be this week sometime. I'm having a fan issue (unrelated to this) and a new one is in the mail, so I'll be back in there once it arrives.

I don't repair smoke units and know only what I read about them. But a thought just occurred to me that a cigarette filter is designed to allow smoke to pass through it and yet not ignite when it gets hot. Has anyone tried to fluff up a cig filter and add smoke fluid to it to see what happens?

I gave up smoking a long time ago, so maybe things have changed. Used to be that If you lit the filter end of a cigarette it would burn or char.

As for using different materials in the smoke units goes:
My first question would be: if this other stuff is better, why aren't the train manufacturers using it?

C W Burfle posted:

I don't repair smoke units and know only what I read about them. But a thought just occurred to me that a cigarette filter is designed to allow smoke to pass through it and yet not ignite when it gets hot. Has anyone tried to fluff up a cig filter and add smoke fluid to it to see what happens?

I gave up smoking a long time ago, so maybe things have changed. Used to be that If you lit the filter end of a cigarette it would burn or char.

As for using different materials in the smoke units goes:
My first question would be: if this other stuff is better, why aren't the train manufacturers using it?

That is a good question. I can't speak for the manufactures on why they choose the batting that they do, I can only speak to the results that I see myself. I'm not saying that what I'm trying is better or not at this point. I've only been running this for a couple of days. I can say that I'm tired of charred batting needing replaced way too often.

I'm all in for keeping an open mind for possible improvements in our hobby.

So as I understand, the new material you used acts like a shield....but transmits enough heat thru it to vapourize the smoke fluid.

I would be interested in hearing about your future test results.

Thanks

Dave

Sounds interesting-keep at it and disregard the nay sayers and skeptics. Let us know what you find. A lot of the people think if the mfrs aren't  using it the stuff won't work.

I find this very interesting and glad I came across it when I did.  I am upgrading an MTH PS1 Big Boy and hope to close it up when I receive some items in the mail to complete.  One step I am doing while it is open is replace the wick material in smoke unit.  I have some of the same material DAVETY refers to.  Now, I intend to also utilize it in the BB smoke unit when I complete repairs and upgrades and see how well it functions for me. 

The flame protector I have is manufactured by Oatley.  The "heat blanket" measures .25"x 9"x 12"; resistant up to 2500 deg. F; is made with Zoltek Pyron fibers.  It is black in color, very soft and felt like in texture.  The package states it is a flame-resistant, non-asbestos carbon based woven material.

As same with DAVETY, I am going to give it a try and will post the results at a later date.

Jesse  TCA  12-68275

Davety posted:

I'm trying out a different material for my smoke batting. I've tried the official Lionel batting and the tiki torch wick materials. Both of which char on me in less then a month if I'm using the smoke a lot. I thought to myself there has got to be something better, so I started searching for a different type of material that could be used. I searched the forms, google (again) and only found the above mentioned and the pink insulation one, which I didn't try. So I went looking for a materiel that didn't burn and could absorb liquid. I found this Flame Protector which is normally used for soldering plumbing in tight spaces so you don't burn the surroundings. It feels like a felt like material and I was skeptical at first. I tired some tests on it before installing it in an engine. I saturated some Lionel batting and tiki torch wick and a small portion of this with some smoke fluid. I then tried to light them on fire, the first two burned right away in a big flame and were then just ashes within seconds. The flame protector just took the heat and didn't burn, it then started creating smoke like it you would expect if it was in an engine and after continued heat didn't char at all. I then installed some in a engine and it was smoking normally. I ran the engine with the smoke on high for over an hour and it smoked correctly and then opened it up to check the batting. There was no charring.

So now I'm asking myself why no one has used or tried this type of material before. The only reasons I can think of are:

It will burst into flames inside my engine at some point.

It will ruin my smoke unit in some manner.

It's toxic.

Since it's a burn proof material I don't see the first one being the case. Since it doesn't char it's not ruining my resistors (like the other ones do). Somehow this is more toxic than just vaporizing mineral oil.

I'm looking to see what everyone here thinks. Thanks!

May I suggest you Google the term "fiberfrax".  This material is used regularly in the industrial combustion field.  It is alumina.  Good to about 2600F.  I have used it in past from steel mill applications to my own wood burning stove.

Lou N

Looked at a few web sites about fiberfrax. Seems to have some characteristics similar to asbestos. 
On the other hand, alumina (Aluminum Oxide) seems to be relatively safe. I use Aluminum Oxide sandpaper.

Oatey 31400 Bagged 9-Inch x 12-Inch Flame Protector

I have a small roll of carbon fiber cloth I bought to reinforce a crack in a fiberglass boat. I think I will give it a try and run down to Lowes and see if they stock the Oatley cloth.  I think Davety is on to something using the high temp. material against the heating element and conventional batting for it's wicking properties to keep fresh smoke fluid flowing to the high temp material.  I normally don't run my smoke units unless I have company. Too much smoke sets off bronchitis in me. However this has the potential of greatly prolonging the time between smoke unit rebuilds.   J

Purchased mine at Lowes and use when doing solder joints in copper pipe with the propane torch.  Works good for that, also.

Jesse

FWIW, the “charring” folks refer to is actually hydrocarbon residue. This is created when the liquid smoke fluid converts to a vapor. For those interested in seeing that batting doesn’t “char” I would encourage you to aim the business end of a propane torch directly at the batting (outside of the loco and/or smoke unit). Expose the batting directly to an open flame and you will not see any “charring”. (Now, those of you who want to try this I strongly encourage you to NOT have the batting soaked in smoke fluid!, don’t laugh, you know someone would have tried it!!!)

I would encourage you to run several locos simultaneously using different brands of smoke fluid. You will find the Lionel Premium Smoke Fluid leaves the least amount of hydrocarbon residue when compared to other brands. (Just stating what my 27 years of experience have shown me). 

Whenever you have liquid smoke fluid being converted to vapor you will have hydrocarbon residue. The alternative; turn the smoke off and close your eyes, imagine in your mind billows of smoke with no hydrocarbon residue!

Curious to know how you make out.

thanks, Mike 

I have in the past given the "match test" to different potential materials I might have thought of using as wicking in a model train smoke generator.  That is, trying to burn it with a lit match. I was surprised to find certain materials, such as a pink colored fibrous construction insulation material, turn hugely black (without yet putting any smoke fluid on it). As a matter of fact, all such materials including white ones that were originally installed in the smoke generators also turned black, although less. Maybe it was unburned hydrocarbons in the flame from the match.  In any event, I would then use the material that turned black the least, but thought there has got to be a better material. I never did buy the latest rope from Lionel. I will try this Flame Protector- Thanks Dave!

By the way, after finding one of my plastic smoke delivery tubes to the whistle on my Legacy M1a melt at the connection to the metal smoke generator housing,  I decided to buy some high temperature plastic tubing at McMaster Carr. They had tubing for up to 500 degrees F service. I didn't use it yet, but did give it the match test. It got soft and gooey after a couple seconds. But then I tried the match on the original installed tube and it degraded and melted much more quickly. 

Rick  

Funny story about smoke batting at the club

Vinny gets dressed up as Santa Claus for our December shows   After I changed some batting he told me it was really the eye brows from the Santa Suit that I used   It worked pretty good  LOL

It's been about a month now and here are my results. The flame protector didn't char at all. The material did begin to breakdown in some manner but didn't harden, it started to get stuck to the resistor but didn't impede the ability for the smoke fluid from be wicked up to it . The smoke output remained a good consistent quality the entire time. There was a small amount of residue on the resistors that I was easily able to clean off. I went ahead and replaced it since I was in there checking it anyway. I'm going to continue to use this material for the time being. I'll post back when I have to replace it because it became ineffective. This is preferable to me than having to replace the batting about once a week. Here's some pictures from the two engines that I was testing it in.

C W Burfle posted:

Looked at a few web sites about fiberfrax. Seems to have some characteristics similar to asbestos. 
On the other hand, alumina (Aluminum Oxide) seems to be relatively safe. I use Aluminum Oxide sandpaper.

I did some reading up on Fiberfrax and this is what I found. OSHA classifies it as a Class 2 carcinogen. It is not the chemical make up it is the fact that breathing the fibers can damage lungs. Much the same situation as breathing asbestos fibers,  and other fiberous materials.  What surprised me was that fiberglass was studied and found it did not migrate deep into the lungs and present a significant risk of lung cancer in typical exposure rates. Though repeated exposure can cause chronic bronchitis and short term irritation to mouth nose and throat

https://www.unifrax.com/wp-con...C-FIBER-PRODUCTS.pdf

JohnActon posted:

C W Burfle posted:

Looked at a few web sites about fiberfrax. Seems to have some characteristics similar to asbestos. 
On the other hand, alumina (Aluminum Oxide) seems to be relatively safe. I use Aluminum Oxide sandpaper.

I did some reading up on Fiberfrax and this is what I found. OSHA classifies it as a Class 2 carcinogen. It is not the chemical make up it is the fact that breathing the fibers can damage lungs. Much the same situation as breathing asbestos fibers,  and other fiberous materials.  What surprised me was that fiberglass was studied and found it did not migrate deep into the lungs and present a significant risk of lung cancer in typical exposure rates. Though repeated exposure can cause chronic bronchitis and short term irritation to mouth nose and throat

https://www.unifrax.com/wp-con...C-FIBER-PRODUCTS.pdf

Good thing I'm not using this material for my testing purposes. The flame-retardant Zoltek Pyron fibers is what Oatey 31400 Bagged 9-Inch x 12-Inch Flame Protector is using. "Pyron is flame resistant fiber used as an effective heat-blocking and fire barrier material. Pyron fibers do not burn, melt, or drip." from Zoltek Wiki most of the way down the page.