Glitterati/pearl/mica And E415?

[Intellidepth]

I keep forgetting to add that an exploration of various science articles regarding xanthan and cross-linking reveals that xanthan doesn't appear to cross-link on its own but requires another chemical. If I get this suspension mix right, I'll attempt to list some of the chemicals here and ask knowledgable FPNers whether any are likely to be in water-based ink formulations. Accidental cross-linking would (to borrow amberlea's apt description) mean certain and dire 'death' for a fp due to solidification. (An every-day example of cross-linking is evident in water-based acrylic paints. At certain concentrations acrylics cross-link on dehydration, creating a different molecular structure that becomes 'waterproof' in a rather solid, three-dimensional way.)

[sansa]

Oh wow that's gorgeous. Love your work as always.

 

Your main problem appears to be the settling of the larger particles-- why not just let them sit? If the finer particles are shimmery enough for you, then you could just decant them off and maintain a more usable xanthan concentration. Suspension as a separation technique, if you will.

 

This is though assuming the usability of xanthan as a whole, in light of the issues you raise.

[Intellidepth]

Hi sansa, instead of tossing out Exp 4, sitting on my bench right now are samples of it on black paper to see if the dehydrated form has enough sparkle in its current iteration. It's very subtle, but present even in fine lines that were drawn very fast at the tail end of the water-luster 'ink' supply on my domestic table fork (my version of a temporary dip nib, lol). Nowhere near enough to satisfy the desires of a glitterati, but anything less also wouldn't satisfy me. So I guess that leaves a couple of options, and I'll definitely explore your idea of decanting if I can't find a sweet balance of larger particles and xanthan.

 

These samples will also be subjected to dry wipe and water dissolution tests sometime in the next day or so as exploratory ventures at this higher xanthan:water ratio. The fork is laying on black paper with large globs of the mixture dehydrating at the juncture of fork tines and paper that started off about 2mm in dia. I'll post photos after I've done those tests.

[Intellidepth]

Most informative patent I've come across yet. Worth a read by anyone adding Luster dust to their inks.

https://www.google.com/patents/US6663704

 

The patent is specific to pearlescent inks in ball pens, however many of the questions we've raised are answered there either directly, or through absence of inclusion in a list where the substance is directly mentioned in another. It also covers things we haven't discussed yet.

 

Includes:

- xanthan in the shear-thinning list but importantly *not* in the film-forming list

- polysaccharides and the necessity for biocides; specifies biocides

- micron sizes of titanium-dioxide surfaced mica as well as iron-oxide surfaced mica and the challenges they faced with size variance within a manufacturer's product

- their ideal size of pigment particles (2-15 microns) and the ideal size of gap the pearlescent ink needed to flow through (25-100 microns) (I mentally related this to cuts on feeds and nib/feed gap rather than gap between a ball and housing)

- lubricity agents to prevent stacking of pearlescent particles when flow is too slow or restrictive

- laydown, skipping, line thickness, line intensity

- different types of pearlescent powders

 

For people like me who have no visual frame of reference for micron sizes, here is a link to imagery of everyday products and their relative micron size ranges.

http://marshallcares.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Particulate-Chart-Human-Hair-Back-to-New-Diversified.jpg

 

Finally, re alcohols, it is only at certain concentrations (high) that xanthan precipitates, and is alcohol-type-dependent. I read the academic journal articles at 1am and revisited the hydrocolloids book linked above earlier this morning. Unfortunately I am too busy over the next week or so to consolidate the info, so will save those details for another post.

[Intellidepth]

Micron size comparison. The Herbin samples arrived today, so I couldn't resist. Left, Luster Color Titanium Dioxide White in Exp 4 Xanthan/water mix with a 'dash' of added Luster dust (imagine a 3mm ball of extra dust in 2mL of Exp 4 mix). Centre, J Herbin Hematite. Right, J Herbin Stormy Grey.

 

Observation, the lack of suspension agent in the Herbins led to lots in one place and none in others. Xanthan does its job. Photo taken with iPhone 4 through 20X loupe (idea derived from an unrecalled FPN member on another thread someplace!).

[TheRealScubaSteve]

Did you check out the other thread? I sent some of the luster cake dust to TheRealScubaSteve when I found some at our dollar store.

 

You did?

[Intellidepth]

Photos of Exp 4 mix dehydrated on fork (1st) and rehydrated (2nd). Crystalline structure evident at dehydration, but when very quickly dipped once into water, immediate hydration occurred into a rounded blob. This is exciting. Meaning that a dismantlable fp should not die a permanent death due to xanthan but may (very likely) be able to be resurrected .

 

The mix that eventually dried between/encompassing the fork tines and paper started off as 2mm dia blobs; dried down on paper and fork to visually flat (no loupe); and the resulting dehydrated junction between paper and fork is evident in the crystallisation photo.

[sansa]

Hi sansa, instead of tossing out Exp 4, sitting on my bench right now are samples of it on black paper to see if the dehydrated form has enough sparkle in its current iteration. It's very subtle, but present even in fine lines that were drawn very fast at the tail end of the water-luster 'ink' supply on my domestic table fork (my version of a temporary dip nib, lol). Nowhere near enough to satisfy the desires of a glitterati, but anything less also wouldn't satisfy me. So I guess that leaves a couple of options, and I'll definitely explore your idea of decanting if I can't find a sweet balance of larger particles and xanthan.

 

Oh, so it's not actually shimmery enough. Fair enough.

 

Which makes me wonder-- is the mass of solids you can suspend directly proportional to the xanthan concentration, or can you suspend a relatively large amount of solids (of the same density) as long as the xanthan is above concentration X? By solids I mean glitter. I'm sure you've mentioned it somewhere but I must have missed it.

 

 

 

Most informative patent I've come across yet. Worth a read by anyone adding Luster dust to their inks.

https://www.google.com/patents/US6663704

 

The patent is specific to pearlescent inks in ball pens, however many of the questions we've raised are answered there either directly, or through absence of inclusion in a list where the substance is directly mentioned in another. It also covers things we haven't discussed yet.

 

At a glance I'm skeptical of the focus on ballpoint pen ink, which contains pigment. If you take the pigment out, leaving only the dyes and glitter "pigment", you'd have to compensate for the large drop in viscosity in some way - maybe with glycerine? Would the viscosity even matter? Apologies if I'm stating the obvious. The ink in the patent is stated to have a viscosity of 200-1000 mPa.s depending on shear rate. For comparison De Atramentis ink has a viscosity of 1.2 mPa.s (source). Water has a viscosity of 1 mPa.s .

 

Experimental observation would probably provide answers faster than number crunching would. I'd join in the experiments myself but I'm still trying to source lustre dust locally.

 

If you'd like a second pair of eyes, I'll go through the patent more closely over the weekend. I'm kind of resisting the urge to print the whole thing and attack it with a highlighter...

 

 

 

Photos of Exp 4 mix dehydrated on fork (1st) and rehydrated (2nd). Crystalline structure evident at dehydration, but when very quickly dipped once into water, immediate hydration occurred into a rounded blob. This is exciting. Meaning that a dismantlable fp should not die a permanent death due to xanthan but may (very likely) be able to be resurrected .

 

The mix that eventually dried between/encompassing the fork tines and paper started off as 2mm dia blobs; dried down on paper and fork to visually flat (no loupe); and the resulting dehydrated junction between paper and fork is evident in the crystallisation photo.image.jpg

image.jpg

 

Great news. Try to remember not to eat with that.

[Intellidepth]

Hi sansa: re "mass of solids", haven't mentioned it but it's been lurking - observational experimentation leads me to think/believe it is not directly proportional at all. I suspect the dust portion can be vastly increased. In support: today's 'dash' in 2mL Exp 4 shows no signs of separation/issues whatsoever.

 

Viscosity: xanthan's probably too viscous at Exp 4 concentration - observational, due to beading behaviour on fork/paper tests. I have no idea how to measure viscosity domestically (oh, for a lab!), so for now I trust my eyes and gut . Exp 5 (on the bench, 1/12th tsp Xanthan per 150mL, 12 hours old) seems to have similar viscosity/cling to Exp 4. Droplet samples on paper of both Exp 4 and 5 and stroked outwards with a skewer showed even and decreasing distribution/width and stayed in place in a connected line whereas a water droplet given the same treatment was uneven and disconnected. Droplet resting height due to surface tension was slightly higher on the Xanthan drops.

 

Re Patent + highlighter: LOL! Go for your life. No pressure from here!

 

Would you like me to mail some xanthan and a few dashes of luster dust? Send me a PM with your address if u like. My family want the kitchen bench back.

 

"Try to remember not to eat with that." ROFL. (Images of disassembled fountain pens placed in dishwashers flash through my brain.)

[kwzi]

There are different grades of Xanthan gum. But in most cases solutions with more than 0,3-0,4% of xantham gum by weight are going to have to high viscosity to be used as FP inks.

And for effective suspending anything in the liquid you would need at least 0,8-0,9% of xantham gum.

 

For measuring viscosity I would suggest large container with known volume with a small hole in the bottom, something similar to Ford viscosity cup - but with much smaller hole in the bottom. By measuring flow time of distilled water and your liquid you will more or less know how viscosity of your liquid corresponds to water.

You should set up everything that flow time of water would be between 60 and 120s and the bottom hole should be as much cylindrical as this is possible with no irregularities as they would significantly alter the comparison between liquids.

Edited January 30, 2015 by kwzi

[Intellidepth]

Thank you KWZI! I was literally in the middle of writing you a PM... went to find this thread link to paste in it, and voila! Will delete it. Thanks for the help.

[kwzi]

Thank you KWZI! I was literally in the middle of writing you a PM... went to find this thread link to paste in it, and voila! Will delete it. Thanks for the help.

 

I do not want to discourage you but without significantly breaking down the size of particles it is going to be very hard for you to suspend particles for long time and this is going to have negative effect on sheen and luster you wish to achieve. Maybe try optimising your goal so the particles are suspended in liquid up to few hours without stirring - this is achievable much easier.

[Intellidepth]

Thanks KWZI. Exp 3 might suit that suggestion.

 

I might need some help with maths and powder weight here (no lab), but here goes. I think a comma in a percent is the same as a decimal isn't it? Just an international variant?

 

I'm assuming for this calc that powdered xanthan has 1mL volume measure = 1 gram (which I think is too high due to air space between particles but someone might be able to help me out - this is all kitchen science). So:

 

Exp 5:

1/12th tsp = 5mL/12 = 0.416g. Dispersed in 150mL water: 0.416g/150mL = 0.00277g/mL x 100 = 0.277%.

 

Exp 4 (bubble-trapping territory):

1/8th tsp = 5mL/8 = 0.625g. Dispersed in 150mL water: 0.625g/150mL = 0.00416g/mL x 100 = 0.416%.

 

Exp 3 (great at 12 hrs, larger particle settlement at 24, more at 36):

1/16th tsp = 0.3125g. Dispersed in 150mL water: 0.3125g/150mL = 0.00208g/mL x 100 = 0.208%.

 

If I understand correctly, Exp 3 and 5 are both in the territory of being 'possible' according to the 0,3% KWZI-suggested max?

 

The particles I'm working with are on the "pearl" powder end of particle sizes rather than chunky "glitter". Accoring to the cake decorating shop linked earlier by sansa (thanks), my powder product is called "shimmer" which I believe from memory was described as being a blend of pearl and larger (but not chunky) glitter particles.

 

I suspect there is hope yet.

 

Exp 5: looking good. Full suspension, increased fluidity compared to Exp 4. Due to ambient dehydration (no cling-wrap over the jar), at 12 hours in I had to stir in another 25mL water to bring the mix up to volume. There are few obvious bubbles trapped at the surface that may be due to this second stirring... Or not.

 

Somewhere between Exp 3 and Exp 5 seems optimal. If I was doing it for a day of writing greeting cards then flushing out the ink, I'd consider Exp 3. Haven't tried upping the glitter ratio in either mix though to see if it still suspends.

Edited January 30, 2015 by Intellidepth

[Intellidepth]

Erratum: Exp 5 is actually 1/12th in 175mL which is 0.238%

(I had looked at the measurements from the back of the jug last night and due to semi-translucency thought it had lost 25mL through dehydration. It hadn't.)

 

Exp 5 with 2 dashes dust in 3mL is behaving like water in that it is beading when skewered on paper. A small bubble was trapped immediately after vigorously shaking the vial, but nothing that would worry me as the rest looks cohesive.

 

Probably the most exciting thing of the morning was that when I rinsed out the vial containing Exp4 + 1 dash, no glitter residue was left on the inner surfaces (a problem noted in the current glitter thread). I rinsed it using 3 fills. The inner surface of Exp 5 vial also appears clear wherever the liquid is not clinging.

 

edit: Noodler's ink in my Lamy Al-star M is also beads on this black coated paper I've been using. Noodlers and Exp5+2dash have similar behaviour on Rhodia - no beading.

 

I've ordered a Lamy Vista for trials/photography, but it'll take a few weeks to get here.

Edited January 30, 2015 by Intellidepth

[TheRealScubaSteve]

Very cool inksperiments. Sounds like you've made some interesting developments.

[Intellidepth]

Domestic Ford viscosity test:

100mL water 1:56.63 (min:sec:hundredths)

100mL Exp 5. 2:46.28

 

Used commercial disposable piping bags, tip cut with scalpel. After experimenting, ended up using same bag for both, water first.

 

Due to xanthan's shear-thinning properties, the speed of the exudation from the tip slowed considerably when there was about 25mL left in the bag, slowing to a very very slow drip towards the end which added a lot of time. Until half-way, it was comparable with water. Exp 5 left slightly more residue in the tip of the bag than water when it stopped dripping (water was about 18mm tall and Exp 5 was about 20mm).

 

Hopefully someone can tell me what these results mean.

[Intellidepth]

Dip nib test, Lamy Fine nib dipped in Exp5 3mL+2dash vial. Black line on black paper is ink. Black paper's surface causes water and ink to bead.

 

Photo 1 natural indoor light

Photo 2 torch light

 

[Intellidepth]

Updates. Exp 5, still sitting on bench, consistent distribution of all shimmer dust particles still suspended. No SITB growing yet. Haven't been precious about it at all either.

 

Exp 6 is Exp 5 minus dust, concentrated at a ratio that allows it to be mixed into ink, then dust added to suit.

 

Exp 6: 5mL tsp Xanthan powder to 210mL water. Xanthan tapped once and tsp levelled off flat. Sheared at high speed using Bamix with mincing blade attachment for 5 minutes. Creates a thick gel with air bubbles. This makes enough concentrate for more than 1.8L ink!

 

For inclusion in ink: 0.5mL concentrate in 4.5mL ink. Eyeball the bubbles in the gel and add a drop or two of concentrate to compensate. Add lustre dust. Shake for 5-10 seconds.

 

Ink samples with concentrate and dust based on the above have been sent to an FPN member to trial while I wait for pens.

 

I've tried 5 inks like this in my Noodler's Konrad and loved the result. Easy to flush out - no more attention than I do for ink. After flushing, under 20x Loupe the feed held very very few flakes which, when flat, were only 1/10th the width of the thinnest fin valley. Pretty microscopic.

 

I've used max 3 dashes shimmer dust in 5mL, equivalent to or greater than Herbin Hematite and Stormy (possibly double), so YMMV if u increase the dust level. IMO performs far better than Herbin's due to consistent delivery of dust, with more dust in wetter ink areas, and consistent dust delivery through normal writing (no flex).

 

Don't have time to crop/resize pics today sorry but will try to get one up next week. I LOVED it in Noodler's Yellow!

 

Bye for now.

Edited February 4, 2015 by Intellidepth

[sansa]

 

Haven't forgotten about this, I swear. I've just been unexpectedly busy with other things.

 

Intellidepth having the most wonderful generosity mailed me some samples to test Pictured: Jinhao X750 atop sample vials of glittery Noodler's CMYK inks + xanthan concentrate + dyeless luster dust suspension. After a few days there is significant settlement but the mica (titanium dioxide?) is remarkably easy to resuspend. The inks themselves are of noticeably higher viscosity than most of my scant collection of inks, but is actually comparable to Waterman Blue-black. In the vial, the glitter inks have strong film-forming tendencies in the absence of detergent. They're incredibly gorgeous to write with. After finishing up my writing samples I'll do my damnedest to clog the pen by, for example, leaving it uncapped for a few hours.

 

Full write-up soon...

[Intellidepth]

Ahhh. Assignment's done, so time for a new CMYK ink colour blend, then xanthan+luster added, and pics! Sansa, thanks for your willingness to test out and give feedback on the ones you received.

 

I was too impatient to let the mix sit for 24 hours which I recommend so most of the mixing bubbles settle out naturally, so this is what things look like with a fresh mix of everything. Picture heavy post. Written with Noodler's Konrad Acrylic, and with Noodler's ink. (Yellow and Shah's Rose custom blend that looks like Apache Sunset pics I've seen online - my phone camera doesn't do it justice).

 

Through the 20X loupe

And again, different angle to see luster distribution in top of the t... Sorry about focus, just not possible with angle...

And finally, through the ink window of the Konrad.

Edited February 9, 2015 by Intellidepth