making your own fog juice?

[jeejeedr]

Don't bother Karl. We've tried to make this point already. He's not listening.

Adam, I'm sorry to say, but I usually really respect your statements here on PL, but this time I want to heavily protest
I'm following this thread since it was started. Not for making my own juice. For that I am too lazy but to know what is inside and to 'know how things work'.
It is the same reason as why I read threads about making homemade DPSS lasers and other very dangerous and uneconomical things.

Take for instance the 445nm diode from the famous pj's. They are dangerous. It takes one bad shot at your eyes to harm vision.
Take an average argon laser. Very dangerous currents. Normally should only be serviced by qualified engineers from the manufacturer
...

In short, people SHOULD experiment.
And in relation to this thread not nescecarily for making your own fluid, but to better understand what is in it, how the ingredients interact and why you pay so much for a gallon of fog fluid.

[kecked]

Guess you showed us. Bye Bye.

Really though you should be fine. Have fun. I really can't contribute any more than I did unless someone sends me samples to analyze. ROSCO is the only brand I know of that was health tested. It was the first to be tested and I'm sure there is lots of experience beyond that brand now.

[norty303]

To add to the theme of the thread, I ran my Tour Hazer II for 3 days this last weekend, and it was situated on the stage blowing over a lighting lift. With any other hazer/fazer/fogger, the lift would've had a thick layer of fog gunk on it, but ot my amazement, this leg was pretty much dry.

I can only surmize that it runs very hot, so that the haze itself is very 'dry' - I do know they have a very good heater in them, giving almost instant haze after turn on.

Kecked, do you want to PM me an address, I'll see if I can find the time to drop you a small sample of the Tour Hazer fluid.

[mixedgas]

Cipher 0, JeeJeedr,

I did try USP grade Glycerin in various ratios in a decent Antari and a no-name brand fogger. It does make a burning smell, it produces a weak fog, and it does suck. The room is slippery when you use it. I did that SIX years ago. You new guys are not the first inventors of being cheap, I've been doing it for twenty years now. I've learned along the way to be conservative in what I do, its better for the industry I'm in, long term, if I do that. We live in a age where technology allows techniques to be perfected.

I don't make any money from Fog fluid. Back when I was 21, it had a back breaking cost, and that cost has come down. I had to buy it from a theatrical supply place that marked it up at least 8 times over cost. Now times have changed. Quality has risen, and I can get fog fluid at the local music store, that is better then what was available ten years ago, at 1/3rd the cost. Once upon a time, I was in Zorn's shoes. Why would I lie? I've been exactly where he's at. I spent much effort trying to make a substitute. But it was not cost effective to do so. I learned, but I lost money doing it. The only benefit is my fog looks very fine when I need it. Till the wind takes it away.

What I do make money from, is seeing that my clients get the best from my professional experience. I lose money when they go to a cheaper competitor. I loose even more money when that cheaper competitor takes the profit margin down to zero to make a quick buck. I loose money when they reduce the quality of service to the point that the customer decides they do not need a laser show ever again. I've seen that so many times it is not funny, and it is a common theme in 20 years of working with both scientific and entertainment lasers. So I have standards, and I like to see those standards kept high. I work hard so others can meet those standards, or I would not be posting here. That is called giving back to society.

I believe one day I will meet my Maker, and the last thing I want to here from him is that I promoted the exposure of youth to a unsafe situation while they had no reason to expect to be unsafe. That is called Ethics, and it takes a while to learn.

I know what Buffo works with for his day job, and trust me, he is only trying to be professional and to impart that professionalism to others. He works in a industry that people die and whole communities suffer if you do not follow the checklists. So perhaps his language seems harsh, but he is well meaning.

Laserwizardry, Buffo, and I all go to trade shows and conferences. Buffo, at no profit to himself, hosts what has become a annual conference. We know each other personally, we see each other a few times a year, but the only conspiracy here is pass on knowledge we have worked hard to achieve. Non of us work for Chauvet, and only a tiny, tiny, fraction of Laserwizardry's business is fog fluid. So perhaps we're trying to help out Zorn?

My bet is Zorn got ripped off on diluted or old glycol from a supplier. I can only suggest he buy a hydrometer, but if he can't get fog fluid, I suspect such a low cost glass instrument is out of the question. So if he has access to a accurate scale and a beaker or flask, we can help him calculate the density of what he bought. But at some point the re-inventing of the wheel results in more cost then his importing the correct fluid himself. This is where manufacturing economy of scale comes into the picture.

A point, you have no idea what the three of us do besides laser shows. It might shock you what we have access to, and why we are so safety oriented. When you have buried friends or visited them in a hospital with permanent injuries, it changes your attitude to what you do. People die or get maimed in our lines of work.

I was young once, and I had to learn to learn from my Elders and Peers... Think about it, is that not why you are here on this forum? So guys, where is this so called conspiracy?

Steve

[buffo]

In short, people SHOULD experiment.
And in relation to this thread not nescecarily for making your own fluid, but to better understand what is in it, how the ingredients interact and why you pay so much for a gallon of fog fluid.

Please don't misunderstand my intent. I have nothing against experimenting to learn things. But that is *NOT* why Zorn posted. His stated purpose (from the very beginning) is to make his own fluid to save money. Several people have tried to explain to him that this is not only risky, but not cost-effective. He refuses to listen. THAT is why so many people in this thread (including me) have written him off.

Note that Kecked had it right: he was willing to do the lab work and publish the results, just to share the knowledge. But no one was listening to him, so he decided to pack it up. I can't say I blame him. Now you see that Steve Roberts (who otherwise has the patience of a saint) has also decided that enough is enough. This isn't anything I've done. It's all a result of Zorn's utter refusal to listen to people who are smarter than he is.

Furthermore, if Zorn had expressed any interest in doing the research himself (instead of asking others to do it for him), this thread might have taken a different turn. Instead, he just wanted someone to tell him it was OK to mix glycerin and water and make perfect fog juice. When he didn't get the answer he wanted to hear, he got upset. And now people are sick of his attitude.

If you are interested in the science behind fog solutions (and why they can be so expensive), there is a wealth of information in the posts above. At the very least, it's a good starting point that can guide you through further research on the subject. However, it's a complicated topic.

The short version is that you need something that stays in solution in water without separating, will flash to steam nearly instantly, will not break down under high heat load, and will form small particles without burning. Not to mention the need for other stabalizing agents to prevent clogging the heating element and to stop it from forming a gelatinous solid when stored for long periods.

Adam

[cipher0]

I did try USP grade Glycerin in various ratios in a decent Antari and a no-name brand fogger. It does make a burning smell, it produces a weak fog, and it does suck. The room is slippery when you use it.

Well I've tried several pharma grade glycerin from Turkey, no slippery mess, no residue, very dense fog, it always makes very weak smell like the commercial ones I use now. And I'm not the only one here doing that. I also follow another laser forum and many people there have done that too with same results as me and no results which you mentioned.
Maybe you weren't lucky and your glycerin wasn't pure enough?

I did that SIX years ago.

And I've done it several times during the course of this year alone. The fact that you've done it sooner doesn't change anything. Telling a person to use commercial fluid which has the same thing in it also doesn't make sense.

Quality has risen, and I can get fog fluid at the local music store, that is better then what was available ten years ago, at 1/3rd the cost.

Yes, *you* can. Where *you* live.

I believe one day I will meet my Maker, and the last thing I want to here from him is that I promoted the exposure of youth to a unsafe situation while they had no reason to expect to be unsafe. That is called Ethics, and it takes a while to learn.

This is an appeal to emotion. Again, there's no proof glycerin is harmful as much as there's no proof that glycols are harmful. Both are used in commercial fluids. This is a fact.

He works in a industry that people die and whole communities suffer if you do not follow the checklists. So perhaps his language seems harsh, but he is well meaning.

Again, don't make an appeal to emotion. As I said, there's no proof glycerin is harmful as much as there's no proof that glycols are harmful. Both are used in commercial fluids.

and only a tiny, tiny, fraction of Laserwizardry's business is fog fluid.

Even if so, that doesn't mean he wouldn't care enough to lie to people for profit. And his off-topic nonsense and overall rudeness and lack of evidence for his claims sure don't make me believe him.
I would understand if you people wouldn't want to disclose the formulas of fog juices. It's business. But reaching it to a point of using scare tactics and even telling a person might get cancer or die is horrible.

My bet is Zorn got ripped off on diluted or old glycol from a supplier.

Possibly. Still sounds strange that it worked fine the first day and terrible the next day.

When you have buried friends or visited them in a hospital with permanent injuries, it changes your attitude to what you do. People die or get maimed in our lines of work.

I'm very sorry for all of that. But again, this is an appeal to emotion. I know this industry is dangerous. But when it comes to fog juices specifically, I'll repeat this the third time, there's no proof glycerin is harmful as much as there's no proof that glycols are harmful. Both are used in commercial fluids. There's no logic in you people being okay with newbies using commercial fluids when some of those fluids contain the very same glycerin.

I have nothing against experimenting to learn things. But that is *NOT* why Zorn posted. His stated purpose (from the very beginning) is to make his own fluid to save money. Several people have tried to explain to him that this is not only risky, but not cost-effective.

Actually, several people have said the opposite as well. And it is actually cost effective, for me at least.

Note that Kecked had it right: he was willing to do the lab work and publish the results, just to share the knowledge. But no one was listening to him, so he decided to pack it up. I can't say I blame him.

Actually, he's just waiting for some of you guys to send him a sample fog juice.
I don't know why he's stopped posting results of glycerin though. He has it already, right?

It's all a result of Zorn's utter refusal to listen to people who are smarter than he is.

And this is why I never liked you buffo. You're a complete douchebag sometimes.
Just browse to the very first page of this thread, where innazone says:

We use pharma grade propylene glycol, mixed with de-ionised water, it's the same stuff they use in electronic cigarettes, completely non toxic and not expensive.

Works absolutely fine diluted 3-5:1.

I think you've already been told this, but you can't see that you don't represent everyone, not everyone shares your opinion here.

Furthermore, if Zorn had expressed any interest in doing the research himself (instead of asking others to do it for him), this thread might have taken a different turn. Instead, he just wanted someone to tell him it was OK to mix glycerin and water and make perfect fog juice. When he didn't get the answer he wanted to hear, he got upset.

How can he make the research himself if he isn't a chemist and can't spend 2K on a lab experiment?

And now people are sick of his attitude.

Again, you're not everybody, and one or two of your friends aren't everybody. I think you're the one with the attitude. And this isn't the first thread I see you act like this. And guess what, I'm sick of it.

Guess you showed us. Bye Bye.

Why are you taking it personally? The post was obviously directed to buffo and Laser Wizardry.
Please analyze glycerin is well. So we can end this debate once and for all. Like I've said, I'm not saying glycerin is harmless. But we have enough evidence for glycerin as we do for the glycols. Telling a person to not use the former doesn't make sense.

[mixedgas]

Cipher Zero, Show me more then one Fog Fluid Material Data Safety Sheet, Or the European or Russian Equivalent, showing Glycerin as a active ingredient. Because I downloaded and read more then 30 of them looking for it, and only found one hit. I also hit a scientific search engine looking for studies of pure glycerin as a fog material and could not find it.

USP chemicals are certified pure, and carry a legal framework for their purity in the US. Suppliers take the USP label very seriously. I was using 99.5% Glycerin, without a doubt.

Let me update your understanding of one good rule. " If you cannot find a study showing safe use of a material, its best to assume its unsafe or carries some level of risk " Safety studies have been done for the PG-TEG mixes. I know, but do no not work for nor engage in commerce with one of the engineers who sponsored one of the professional PG Fog studies. The major consumers of fog materials/large machines are the military and airlines, with entertainment coming in a low third. The first two will not expose their personnel to major risks, and also sponsored studies of complex fluids. The first two are his major market, and he does not have a study for Glycerin. I have not found (nor have others) any such a study for Glycerin.

I don't give a damn about what just "works". I'm only going to advocate exposing a audience to Risks that are "ALARA", which stands for "As Low as Reasonably Achievable." That requires some framework of reasonable proof. So far NONE of us posting here have shown a reasonable proof that Glycerin is used as a sole ingredient or has been shown to be reasonably safe. Until then, I will in no way state pure Glycerin Fog is totally safe nor tolerate those who do.

The major problem is particle size, because that determines how the lungs handle the material, and how deep it penetrates into the lungs. After that, the question is "Does the body rapidly and safely metabolize the material where it rests in the lungs?".
.
If you think there is not public confusion over what is pure Glycerin and what is not, read this:

http://www.e-cigarette-forum.com/for...ease-read.html

If there are at least four grades or sources of the material in the US, there are at least that many more elsewhere. Glycerin comes in pig derived, vegetable derived, and synthetic versions. The E-Cigs use the USP grade Vegetable derived version.

If you are a club owner, that is so cheap that you go to your local "Tractor Supply" in the US and pay $22.95 a Gallon (2.2 Litres) for Farm Grade PG (Used in Cattle Food, additive for Udder health problems) and blend it with a five dollar bottle of vegetable grade Glycerin to save a few dollars, I'm not so sure I want to try your various beverages.

So Zorn, if you have a cattle feed place nearby, that might be a source of PG. Just keep your garage door half open so you get some air exchange.

I'm really laughing/saddened that some one would go to this extreme to save say 33-45% on the price of Fog fluid.

Steve

[cipher0]

Cipher Zero, Show me more then one Fog Fluid Material Data Safety Sheet, Or the European or Russian Equivalent, showing Glycerin as a active ingredient. Because I downloaded and read more then 30 of them looking for it, and only found one hit. I also hit a scientific search engine looking for studies of pure glycerin as a fog material and could not find it.

I won't give you more than one. The fact that a giant like AmericanDJ lists it should be enough.

USP chemicals are certified pure, and carry a legal framework for their purity in the US. Suppliers take the USP label very seriously. I was using 99.5% Glycerin, without a doubt.

I don't know what happened in your case. I've tried local and Russian pharma grade glycerol without any side effects you mentioned.
I think some of the guys in other forums are from US.

Let me update your understanding of one good rule. " If you cannot find a study showing safe use of a material, its best to assume its unsafe or carries some level of risk "

Yes. And let me update your understanding of one good rule: read before you respond. I'm not saying we should assume it is safe, never did. All I said is it's also the case with triethylene glycol/other glycols.

Safety studies have been done for the PG-TEG mixes.

And where can I learn more about those studies?

I don't give a damn about what just "works" on the other forum or anywhere else, I'm only going to advocate exposing a audience to Risks that are "ALARA", which stands for "As Low as Reasonably Achievable." That requires some framework of reasonable proof. So far NONE of us posting here have shown a reasonable proof that Glycerin is used as a sole ingredient or has been shown to be reasonably safe.

I don't either. But read carefully. I mentioned other forums when I mentioned how others haven't had residue, bad smell, etc. like me, unlike what you had experienced. I never mentioned experiences in other forums as proof of it being harmless.
So don't make a straw man.

[norty303]

BTW, maybe I missed it, but what do you consider very expensive for fog fluid?
I ask because I'm fairly sure Thomann in Germany will deliver to you and they do some pretty good fluids for not much money. I use their high density fluid and it works out just over £10 gallon when you buy a few gallons.

[mixedgas]

http://www.actorsequity.org/docs/saf...inalreport.pdf


\http://oem.bmj.com/content/58/10/649.full


http://tsp.plasa.org/tsp/documents/docs/E1-5_2009.pdf

Glycerin is one of seven chemicals allowed for water based fluids in US National Standards ANSI: E1-29_2009, E1-5_2003, E1-5_2009 and E1-14_2003. However there is a concentration limit for audience and staff exposure of 40 milligrams per cubic meter in vapor form for the other six. The peak exposure limit is (50 mg/M^3) for Glycerin and Water ONLY mixes. The Time Weighed Exposure Limit (TWA) is 10 mg per cubic meter per eight hour day. Secondary combustion reaction chemicals such as Acrolein, Acetaldehyde and Formaldehyde must not be produced in excess of existing National standards for industrial exposure. There is also a specified test for the release of bacteria possibly carried by the fluid in use. A purity requirement is included. In other words, specific testing of the fluid is required before release to public use for commercial fluids.

I could not download E1.29, which covers the hardware portion, as I do not wish to pay 40$ to do so. The link is here http://webstore.ansi.org/RecordDetai...I+E1.29+-+2009

I'll leave it to Kecked to possibly explain when and where Americans can possibly not comply with ANSI standards, but our OSHA agency and NFPA has a tendency to use them.


It took me hours of work to find that. I'm off this week because of recovering from Surgery, otherwise I'd never have spent the extraordinary time needed to find those standards.

I'd link the whole PDF but the rules for download specifically prohibit posting of the link. The download is currently sponsored by a insurance company, so you have to provide a valid email and fill out a questionnaire form to download the standard. I've seen USITT/PLASA make examples of people for hosting the DMX-512 PDF without buying the rights, so I'll skip trying the educational use exemption of our Copyright law.

Steve