I’m working on a cool idea, using a “electronic cigarette” making a atomizer to creat water vapor effect for locomotives and buildings etc, vapor won’t oil up the layout, thought it would be a cool effect to have steam engines and buildings / houses chimneys be more realistic!
What is everyone’s thoughts good bad or ugly! ???
This is interesting and something I would want to try doing some time too. How do you plan to supply water for locomotives? Also, the extra steam might make your basement more damp (if that is where the layout is).
Good idea, but i dont think a ‘vaper’ would produce realistic smoke (volumetric ability). Here is a link on Youtube from a guy who is on the right track. It is G scale but it can be adapted for other scales.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhH9HJiBRX4
And here is how you make the smoke unit.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z3_WdSFei2M
Can you imagine what 10 minutes of operating would do to a room with a smoke unit like this one!
Interesting idea. I have some ex-smoker friends who frequent the “Vape shop” (is that what they call it?). Never thought about it for steam effects, but it does seem that real water vapor will look more realistic than the particulates in the artificial smoke. This stuff comes in flavors. Maybe bituminous flavor will be the NEXT BIG THING.
Tom
The great thing is you don’t need water! It pulls the water from air! It puts out vapor with no residue, etc. it dissipates quickly
True i have found different set ups that produce more than others, for instance I think this guys vapor deal would be more than enough
This is way cool! Water vapor for steam would be more prototypical than oil. I’d be interested in trying to make it work.
ot a good idea at all! You’d have to refill your tank every 10 minutes which would cost about $40 bucks a day, plus your visitors will be as high as a kite from the Nicotine.N
The idea is to use the vaporizer with out and water and of course with out nicotine
Stacks produce smoke, not just vapour, don’t they? Not sure that this option is more realistic.
Complete, efficient combustion leaves very little visible smoke to mingle with the steam that comes out of the stack. “Dirty” coal, or inefficient firing, produces the blackest exhaust plume. Sometimes it’s not possible for the fireman to fire in the most efficient way, and black smoke is the result. This is often the case when the engine is worked very hard. At least, that’s the way I’ve always understood it.
If this type of system becomes available for models, I’m sure it would be possible to produce black or gray smoke. But I wouldn’t buy it because I can’t imagine that the black or gray coloring could be produced without introducing some particulate pollution onto the layout. I’d prefer to think my miniature firemen were always operating the locos at peak efficiency.
Of course, this is all speculative. No telling whether the system will be practical at all in the long run, or what further developments may come about.
Tom
Open the windows and doors and turn on the fans, too much of a good thing.
Two factors, just about diametrically opposed:
- By the mid-transition era a lot of municipalities were on a smoke abatement kick. Even water vapor was discouraged from fixed plants. In one photo from the '50s, the locals had forced the mighty Norfolk and Western to try to contain their coal emissions - with over the locomotive smoke hoods that looked like (and may have been) Quonset huts on stilts.
- My prototype hadn’t discovered emission control by 1964. Locomotives were hand fired with low grade coal, and left a grey-black cloud to mark their passage. I don’t even want to be in the same county as a model smoke unit that can duplicate that look!
As for using a vapor generator, I tried that once. My sinuses didn’t like it.
Chuck (Modeling Central Japan in September, 1964)
Why not just try it and report back with the results?
Rich
You probably didn’t use a genuine Vicks Vaporizer then.
This is really interesting!