Your personal information you provide will be transfered and stored as encrypted data.
You have the ability to update and remove your personal information.
You consent to our cookies if you continue to use this website.
Allow cookies for
Necessary Cookies Necessary Cookies cannot be unchecked, because they are necessary for our website to function properly. They store your language, currency, shopping cart and login credentials.
Analytics Cookies We use google.com analytics and bing.com to monitor site usage and page statistics to help us improve our website. You may turn this on or off using the tick boxes above.
Marketing Cookies Marketing Cookies do track personal data. Google and Bing monitor your page views and purchases for use in advertising and re-marketing on other websites. You may turn this on or off using the tick boxes above.
Social Cookies These 3rd Party Cookies do track personal data. This allows Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest integration. eg. shows the Facebook 'LIKE' button. They will however be able to view what you do on our website. You may turn this on or off using the tick boxes above.
Posted:A local performer gave me the BEST idea sunday. Take your interleave cathedral wicks, unbolt them, and then wrap an extra two pieces of kevlar around the outside, kind of like gift wrapping... just a double wrap so that the wicks have a smooth face... like tube wicks... it's almost like combining cathedral and tube. Re-bolt the wicks, They burn twice as long and the "interior" kevlar is not damaged... and they look incredibly neat.. like little boxes...Does this make sense?
Posted:Interesting idea. Do they really burn longer? That seems counter-intuitive to me. You're effectively reducing the surface area by covering over all the convolutions in the interleave wicks, and I believe those promote better wicking action. Of course, you're adding more wicking material in the process...I'll have to make up a set and test that out.
Posted:i haven't tried it yet because i have no kevlar... so i am interested to hear what you learn...i agree that it sounds counter-intuitive....did it make sense though? that the resultant wick lokks like a smooth surfaced little box? i wasn't sure if i was clear Non-Https Image Link
Posted:Twist--Your description was clear to me. One other thing I wonder about with that "box" design is that eventually the outer layer might get pushed over to one side or something. I can imagine stitching the edges to each other with kevlar thread or something to prevent that.
Posted:Adam: The way I picture it is as the "wrapping" wick is actually affixed at the top and bottom of the cathedral fold. I'm fairly certain that this construction method cannot accidentally come undone.However, I agree with your hypothesis on brightness and burn time. I have been experimenting with various folds (I used to be an origami freak) in order to *increase* surface area for a brighter flame.I'm not sure I'll ever be as hardcore as you are in your testing methods -- I just stick to different poi types in either hand and compare as I spin them. Not nearly as scientific, but much more fun. Not that science isn't fun, 'cuz I'm a pretty hardcore science geek, too...-p.
Posted:Poidude--You could do a search on this and find some postings here on the subject. As long as I'm writing, though, and at risk of blatant self-promotion, I've got a writeup athttp://www.crossroads.net/a/writing/firemaking.htmlMy approach is a little different than that used by most other folks, but it works.