Recharging Bovedas without removing them from coolidor

[TonyAccardo]

This is something I have been trying to figure out for some time and I think I may have the solution.

I have a 150qt Igloo coolidor that I use for longer term storage. I use Boveda 65% paks as I feel this is the best rh to store at, not too wet and not too dry. Granted this is at around 70ºF, as I used to keep Boveda 62% paks in there and the cigars just seemed to be a bit too hard and a tad dry for my liking when it comes to the longer term.

I like the Bovedas better than beads as I believe that no beads are truly "set" at any level of rh and have found that for most all low density sillicate dessicants, if they have the ability to grab moisture from some source, thst they stabilize at around 68% rh at around 70ºF. As the beads dry out, if they are not given a dose of distilled water to recharge them, then they will pull moisture from another source if it is there, like your boxes or cigars until they have the amount of moisture in them to stabilize once again at 68% rh. Bovedas don't do this and do not really have the propensity to do this either as they have their own free-water source inside of them and as they dry out they have less and less ability to take up ambient moisture as easily as they do when full or near full and squishy.

They're just about as worry free as you can get with the technology we have available to us today. With a couple of fans installed throughout the coolidor and being located in an air conditioned room, I feel it is the best, maintenance-free choice.

Well I wanted to be able to extend the life on them without having to pull them out of the coolidor. I've noticed in the past when throwing in several fresh gotten boxes where the cigars were rather overhumidified, after about 2 maybe 3 weeks, the cigars had reached an equilibrium with the rest of the stock and the Boveda paks had plumped up a bit, taking up the extra moisture, thereby extending their life.

My 150qt is full now and there is no chance in hell that I'll even be able to fit 1 more dress box of PC's in there. So there are no more opportunities to plump up the paks with fresh, overhumidified cigars anymore. So what to do? At first I put in a small shot glass of distilled water and placed it right underneath the fan located on the lid facing downward. I figured I'd let this sit under the fan and every now and then turn the fan on to blow away any humidity that may be sitting directly over the waters surface, letting water vapor transfer from liquid to vapor more readily. This shot my rh to about 69% rh which is more than I wanted. I don't want my environment to go from being a stabilized 65% environment to a 69-70% rh environment and then back down to a 65% environment as I feel that fluctuation, over the long term is not good for the cigars (filler/wrapper expanding-contracting). I realize that at this point, even though it seems like it's a big cooler, in essence, the area I'm really immediately affecting, is a very small area and will respond very quickly and to a much greater degree than if the open area was truly about half of the 150qt area. The "real" area that is being affected immediately is really probably an area less than that of maybe a 50-75 ct humidor space as all the other space is taken up by boxes/wood and tobacco. So I realized that even though the surface area of the water sitting in the shot glass was too much. My want is to create a rise of about 1-2% increase in rh, just enough so that it is greater than the 65% that the Boveda paks are intended to stabilize at so that they will have additional humidity to grab from the air, but not raise the % by so much that the cigars are dramatically affected. So I took 2 small airplane liquor bottles, washed them out, and filled them to absolute top of the neck with distilled water. So the only surface area that is exposed to the atmosphere is just that little circular area of exposed water at the top of the neck. I placed on little bottle in front of one of the CP fans so that the movement of air across the top surface of the water will help disperse any water vapor that is transferring off the top of the surface of the water. Plus, because they are filled to the top, the rate of loss of water from liquid to vapor will be easy to see and get an idea of as the movement down the neck will be very apparent and measurable.

So far so good! The rh is sitting at a steady 66-67% rh which is exactly what I was wanting. I will keep this updated but I think this will work out well and help those who want to use the Boveda paks but not have to deal with buying a **** load of them to have for replacenent while pulling the ones out of your storage unit while you recharge them. It just makes everything a little easier and even less maintenance free. In no way am I trying to shill for Boveda or discourage those using beads, it's just what I've found to work best for my conditions. If you're using an Avallo or one made by a Stabelle then beads are better because your rate of loss of water is going to be greater than someone using a tupperware or any plastic unit that has an airtight seal. For something that is plastic and has that airtight seal AND is located in an air conditioned room keeping temps within 68-72ºF, I don't think it can get much more maintenance free than a coolidor with computer fans installed throughout and Boveda 62-65% paks(whatever is your preference) as your humidity source.

To me, this is just easier than pulling out the paks and recharging them. I would think though that one has to act pre emptively and drop the 2 liquor bottles filled with distilled water in while the paks are somewhat squishy and pliable still, as they absorb vapor much better at that stage. Once they are plumped up, beings that they're in an airtight space with nowhere for the moisture they give off to go unless you open the coolidor regularly, I've seen paks last for 3 years and probably could last for longer if you only open your unit once or twice a year just to do the standard checks on your inventory.

I don't know if some will find this useful but I figured I'd put it up as its something that has had me interested and figured I'd share my findings. If something goes wrong or its not working like I want it to in a few days I will definitely report back here and let everyone know. That would be the right thing to do. Thanks for reading and hopefully some can find use in this post.

[LordAnubis]

Cool!

I personally use about 20 bovedas. My fridge is a bit higher in rH at the top and lower at the bottom, and i just move top to bottom every now and then.

I also have 3 or 4 sitting in a tupperware with a xikar gel humidity stick...

[PigFish]

Well mate, kudos to your creativity.

The Bovida pack is an aquis salt solution in a permeable membrane. It is a beautifully simple solution. The problem with them is in the amount of water that they can hold and how much they cost. They are also slow to react. If you were to test one in a sealed container with a data logger and a substantial air exchange you would find that they are a terrible short term solution, and a wonderful long term one.

What matters here is if it works for you.

You are have been influenced by the internet myth that a beaded desiccant is "set." Someone has sold you (and others) a bill of goods here. Desiccants are a 'buffer' and not well suited to 'supply' water vapor. The Bovida pack on the other hand is a supply solution and a buffer and that is why you like it better. Many people would be better suited with this solution, but with their limited storage of free water, and with their inability to react to rapid changes they are not perfect either.

I would not allow truly free water into your balanced system. Further more, you turn one of the bottles of water on its side and game over... I would simply buy a few more of the packs you like and keep rotating one or two that are charged to the amount that you think is optimum into your system. Set up a rotation. Problem solved.

Me, I use automation and free water. It to has its draw backs, cost and otherwise.

Hats off to the experimenters everywhere. Thanks for sharing your findings.

Cheers! -Piggy

[TonyAccardo]

Well mate, kudos to your creativity.

The Bovida pack is an aquis salt solution in a permeable membrane. It is a beautifully simple solution. The problem with them is in the amount of water that they can hold and how much they cost. They are also slow to react. If you were to test one in a sealed container with a data logger and a substantial air exchange you would find that they are a terrible short term solution, and a wonderful long term one.

What matters here is if it works for you.

You are have been influenced by the internet myth that a beaded desiccant is "set." Someone has sold you (and others) a bill of goods here. Desiccants are a 'buffer' and not well suited to 'supply' water vapor. The Bovida pack on the other hand is a supply solution and a buffer and that is why you like it better. Many people would be better suited with this solution, but with their limited storage of free water, and with their inability to react to rapid changes they are not perfect either.

Piggy, I'm a big fan of your knowledge and posts/willingness to share it. As far as being "sold" the idea that dessicants are "set" , it is the exact opposite. Maybe I was unclear in how I posted my thoughts. I realized quite some time ago that dessicants, dependent upon their makeup (low density/high density) all have an inherent "want" to stabilize at a certain rh. I believe, and I might be wrong, that most all low density dessicants, if given a free water source, will stabilize at around 68% whether or not they are labeled as 60-65-70%. Yes, you can train them to stay at a certain level but all that really entails is only giving them a certain level of moisture. Basically saying, to "set" low density dessicant beads at 60%, you in essence have to "starve" them of the amount of moisture that they truly "want". I don't know if that makes sense but maybe you understand that I understand how these things work, I just have trouble conveying it into written terms sometimes. I guess if it helps you to understand me any better, let me say this.....I DO understand you, Piggy, and have read through almost all your posts, sometimes many times over, and I DO agree with everything you say AND truly understand what it is that you say. Just to simplify things a bit.

I also was going to do something else if this didn't/doesn't work. I have an empty Davidoff Special R robusto SLB that is seasoned to 65% and was going to put like 8 of the small 8 gram 72% Boveda paks in it and close it tight and put that in the cooler. It would essentially act like a fresh box of online cigars that had been stored at 72% and because the SLB lid would be closed tight, the excess moisture would transfer/escape to the outter environment via the outter wood walls. As opposed to letting the 72% bovedas just sit out in the open in the cooler and bring the rh up to 72% before they completely dried out and then the rh would be pulled back down to 65%. I would figure since the 72% bovedas were closed up in the very tight fitting SLB that the 72%rh inside the box would escape via the wooden walls of the box slow enough that the 65% paks on the outside, placed all throughout the cooler would have sufficient "horsepower" to pull in the excess humidity before allowing the rh within the coolidor to reach 72%. It might get to 67% maybe 68% at most. I guess I'll have to try it to find out

I have about 13 60 gram 65% Boveda paks spread throughout the 150qt coolidor which is overkill really, but I did that so that I would have more "horsepower" in ability to recover the 65% rh when the lid is opened and a greater ability to absorb excess moisture when "wet" cigars were put into storage. I've got maybe another 6 60 gram 65% paks in unopened/sealed pouches but just wanted to see if I could recharge this way and not have to utilize my other new ones by tearing them out of their plastic envelopes to replace the paks I pull to recharge.

I would not allow truly free water into your balanced system. Further more, you turn one of the bottles of water on its side and game over... I would simply buy a few more of the packs you like and keep rotating one or two that are charged to the amount that you think is optimum into your system. Set up a rotation. Problem solved.

Me, I use automation and free water. It to has its draw backs, cost and otherwise.

Hats off to the experimenters everywhere. Thanks for sharing your findings.

Cheers! -Piggy

I messed up on responding to your quote. My response is in the middle of your quote.

Edited February 28, 2015 by Ginseng
Italicized the response to make it stand out for easier reading.

[PigFish]

I am going to clarify here some. Mind you, this is not to correct you, it is impossible for me to know if one understands something. I am correcting this because this in not a private conversations and others are certainly going to read it and follow it.

This statement:

dependent upon their makeup (low density/high density) all have an inherent "want" to stabilize at a certain rh. I believe, and I might be wrong, that most all low density dessicants, if given a free water source, will stabilize at around 68% whether or not they are labeled as 60-65-70%. Yes, you can train them to stay at a certain level but all that really entails is only giving them a certain level of moisture. Basically saying, to "set" low density dessicant beads at 60%, you in essence have to "starve" them of the amount of moisture that they truly "want".

Is inherently wrong!

A desiccant is nothing more than a mirror of the dominant environment, given some exclusions based on their make up. The real key to desiccant usage is to make them dominant in the environment.

You see the desiccant will not create an environment above or below the dominant environment beyond the extent of taking or releasing water to the equilibrium level. They will not progress to a certain level, leaving the dominant environment at a different level. They will necessarily be the same, this is how they work, a process called Equilibrium Relative Humidity.

In an example, they will not take an environment to any level that the total water vapor in the system does not already exist. They are only a supply of water vapor to the dryer dominant environment and at the same time a desiccating device removing water from a dominant wetter environment until such time they become equal. There is no 'drive' or 'power' above that of equilibrium.

There are differing desiccants that hold more or less water and ones that have different isothermal curves representing their saturation levels and ability to perform but this is outside the realm of this conversation. A desiccant that does not saturate until 100rH will adsorb up to levels of 100rH and so on.

Here is a chart that I have often posted showing different desiccants and there ability to adsorb water. The keynotes here center around the ability to adsorb and the amounts that can be adsorbed gram/gram or kg/100kg in this case. The important thing to note is that the ability adsorb is noted but no defining of a 'home' is noted, except where a particular desiccant becomes saturated. That is not really a home, but a saturation level, limiting the amount of water a desiccant can hold.

Desiccant density refers to bondable surface area and ultimately the amount of space that is available for bonding of water or other molecules. It is akin to comparing a 12 oz container to a 16 oz one!

Again, I am not here to correct an individual, but I do wish to keep the understanding of desiccants "technically correct" for the readership.

Thanks for the complements.

Cheers! -Piggy

[Firebender]

Double the number of Boveda packs. Keep half charging in separate rubbermaid container, and switch them with ones in the coolidor. That's what I do.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[TonyAccardo]

Ok, how come when using "kitty litter" Exquisicat to be exact, it wants to settle at 68% rh even if the dominant environment is 65% rh?

I have had this happen numerous times and it's why I quit using kitty litter. Here is what happened. My 150qt cooler had been stable at 65% rh for many months with Boveda paks. I took dry litter that was giving a reading of 52% out of the bag. I threw in several "potatoes" (kitty litter in pantyhose) into the cooler, about 2.5lbs. At first they pulled the rh down to about 58% and then slowly krept up to 65% rh and I figured they'd stop there. But what happened is that the rh continued to slowly climb until it got up to 68-69% rh and then went no higher. My theory on what happened is this: upon first throwing the kitty litter in it brought the rh down because the sillica had absorbed so much of the water vapor thus causing the Bovedas to continue to release water vapor. Once the level of 65rh had been reached the Bovedas had done their job but the sillica still had the capacity to absorb moisture, just not at such a drastic degree that it had when thrown in "dry". So the silica continued to slowly absorb moisture that the Bovedas continued to give off because the silica was subtracting it out of the air. This happened until the silica had absorbed moisture to the point that it did not have the capacity or "want" for further moisture and thus settled on 68-69%. This exact same scenario was repeated with the 65% paks AND the 62% Boveda paks as those are what I had originally used. So it doesn't seem to matter whether you use 62% or 65% Boveda paks, as long as the paks have water/moisture available to give off, the store boughten kitty litter will pull from them until 68-69% rh is reached and ten they stop pulling.

Now if you don't have the Bovedas, which are essentially a free water source, and just throw in the dry (53% rh) kitty litter into a coolidor 65% full of boxes and cigars, the rh dips down to about 57-58% rh and stays there, but I want it higher. So I squirt a few sprays of distilled water onto the litter and check it in a day. Now it's at 61%. Unless I add more distilled water, the litter will pull available moisture from another available source which is now your boxes and cigars. Correct? This is what I've found anyways. This is why I feel that unless you really keep up on keeping your kitty litter or beads adequately sustained with moisture from a source other than your boxes of cigars (a spray bottle) it tends to over time dry cigars out, they get hard, and just don't have a good look to them. Now I could care less about what a cigar looks like, I'm a flavor guy, but what are your thoughts on this?

[Ginseng]

I am going to clarify here some...

This is probably the single best, most important post I've read on the internet regarding the function of humidity-moderating materials in cigar storage. It will take some work for the layman to get through but if you want to understand the situation properly, you will start here.

Piggy, if you can find a way to explain sorption isotherms so that it's understandable, I'll award you the Cigarist Nobel.

Wilkey

[TonyAccardo]

@Piggy, I also completely subscribe to your beliefs and statements concerning "aged cigars" and the facade of "brands" amongst the Cuban marques! When I started reading through your threads and posts, I thought to myself, "Finally! Someone gets it and understands! " Not that others don't but the logic behind your thoughts and beliefs are like stupid obvious, yet so many people fail to think this way. And I understand everyone is entitled to their own thoughts and opinions it's just that I feel you are right and correct in what you say and would find it next to impossible to argue against it. Thanks and I'm glad you're still around. Others can call what I say ass kissing and I could really care less. Someone of your logic and understanding and ability at linear thinking and beyond is worthy of praise and recognition in a world full of bullshit and Caligiostro's and snake oil salesmen!

[Ginseng]

Tony,

I wouldn't worry about appearing to kiss up. We all are occasionally teachers as well as students here.

As for your observations in Post #7, they are also completely credible. It's just that end results that sometimes seem to clearly indicate an underlying mechanism may in fact be the result of more than one process. Since none of us really conduct well-controlled studies (aside from the pig himself) close enough can be misleading.

I would like to take a little more time to noodle over your observations.

Wilkey

[TonyAccardo]

Well, one thing that really turned the "light" on for me was how I had read alot of people complaining about how beautiful and supple their cigars were when they recieved them but after months and only months and definitely years, they complained about how their cigars had become as hard as tent pegs, dry looking and just not as well conditioned as they once were. I have noticed the same thing when I was using kitty litter and have noticed upon going back to using Boveda 65's that the condition of my cigars seems to be "fresher" so to speak. Now I have never used Heartfelt or HCM so I cannot speak to them.

The most important question here is what is the adsorption/absorbtion equilibrium point for tobacco, like what does tobacco tend to give off moisture and when does tobacco tend to absorb moisture if it is the dominant influence in the microclimate. If we knew that, then we would have a better idea as to when the beads will tend to start to pull moisture from our cigars if lets say one forgets to recharge his beads as often as he should. Because thre has to be a point that tobacco will "want" to pull moisture if it is there in supply and the same goes for beads.

I know all this may be waay overthinking things but they are things I've always got churning through my head and have led me to my own understanding of the behaviors of humidification mediums and which ones are optimal. For now, Bovedas are my preferred method but the last thing I want to do is turn this into an endorsement thread but it does give some food for thought. Because I do read often that guys complain about their cigars not looking and feeling as lush and supple as they once were and it always seems to happen AFTER the cigarshave come Iinto their possession and not before. And almost invariably, these people are using kitty litter and sometimes beads but never have I witnessed someone who used active humidification such as an Oasis or passive such as Boveda having this problem.

Like I said, I think it would take finding out what the specific isotherms for tobacco, for spanish cedar and for the specific density sillica is/are.

[Ginseng]

I know all this may be waay overthinking things...

Not at all. What some disdain as overthinking, I consider thinking more deeply, in more detail, considering more possibilities than is otherwise easy or comfortable.

I think you've hit upon something of useful practical value. it's only in "overthinking" that we will get at the theoretical. That is, an understanding of the ways in which your observations make explainable sense.

Don't give it up!

Wilkey

[TonyAccardo]

Well I think at some point I could be stepping on some toes with thinking too much too. So with that I think I'll just keep playing around when the inclination strikes here at home and leave well enough alone. Thanks for the conversation back and forth though guys. I respect both of you guys alot as far as your knowledge and your refusal to buy into the bullshit. I gravitate towards people like this.

[Ginseng]

Cheers, Tony. Do let us know how your investigations go.

I'll leave you with this: sometimes the tenderest of toes are the ones most in need of being stepped on.

Wilkey

[PigFish]

There is no such thing as thinking too much. While overthinking, leading to inaction can certainly be a problem; the vetting of a solution is always better than reacting to incorrect assessment. Analysis that supports a correct answer, one that solves a specific issue that causes a specific problem is the best solution. That is just my humble opinion. I am going to attempt to validate that opinion right here and now and on this thread!

Overthinking (when viewed as a pejorative term) refers to the overlooking of the obvious. Simplicity is beautiful, in and of itself. Yet those who look for hard, elitist academic solutions, often miss simplicity and simple solutions. That is poor judgment! I don’t care who does it. None of us are perfect and we all may be guilty now and then of not thinking a problem through and drawing the incorrect conclusion. I prefer the simple solutions, but they don't always satisfy all the situations that we are presented. The hard solutions are only there for situations that the easy ones fail to solve. That is my approach anyway!

Typically my thoughts on cigars bleed over into other issues. So does this one. The mistake of looking for a complex answer to simple problems is systemic throughout the smoking world. I find it is not confined to the smoking world however but runs through the world as a whole. When complexity is the issue, over thinking is not the problem, the elitist academic view is… Poor judgment by the layman or academic is still poor judgment!

Much of what I see as problems with cigars and in cigar myth proliferation can be carried forward as a subset of issues involving entire societies and the proliferation of repetitive urban myths. While this is ancillary I am almost always eager to pass along a lesson and I see this as one worth passing along.

On a separate note and based on some comments above, members honor me by their kinds posts and I must confess that I appreciate the complements. I try to always thank the poster directly for them. They mean that my time spent explaining things is for a purpose greater than the avoidance of mowing the lawn... It means that my fun but sometimes laborious mental exercise and corresponding documentation is of value. People don’t tell the people of value in their lives that they are of value often enough. This is another one of my opinions. If people expressed their value of other people more often then their criticisms of those people, we would live in a better world. That is also my opinion. When I work amongst other people, I look for every reason to praise every employee at any opportunity if it is appropriate. I have been told that I am a great guy to work for. I think it is important to support those that support you. A little gratitude goes a long way in most people’s lives. It does in mine.

People talk differently here about cigar storage these days. They are more careful about what they write in that many now make a deliberate attempt not to carry on and promote a lot of cigar myths and erroneous beliefs. Water content and cigar taste is a commonplace discussion here just to name one topic that I am passionate about and write about prolifically.

When I read what I have written about many times in the posts of others, I take a sense of pride in that I have made an impact (a positive one I think) on the community as a whole. While it may seem silly to the outsider, I am proud of that accomplishment. Acknowledgement and respect amongst peers is something that I cherish. It means that I have a net positive effect on people’s lives. Being a net positive effect on the lives of others makes me feel good!

It is one thing to be read; it is another to be understood, but being appreciated is in fact an honor that I am truly proud of and grateful for. I enjoy this community. I am happy and proud to be considered a contributing member of it. Once more, I say thanks for the complements.

With all that messy sentiment out of the way, lets see if I can get under someone's skin before the thread is over!!! –LOL

Normally Tony I would not directly reply to an “explain this then, “ challenge. That is not really what I am here for. I like to help people solve their storage dilemmas and squelch the many myths that surround cigars and cigar storage. I don’t normally get involved in, or should I say, I don’t normally like to get involved in the “grading of other’s white papers!” I find in the process of grading that I become the elitist snob that I reject. I like to teach but I like to leave a positive impact. Grading people is often akin to ‘degrading’ people. I am not here for that!

Yours I will take on exception because I think that there is a lesson in it if I can get it all on pixels within the time I have allotted myself to explain it… So here goes.

Remember, you asked for it… -LOL This means I will drop the usual prefaced apologies for writing something that might come across as insulting, elitist or offensive. Just assume that I have apologized in advance if I come across as talking down to you. That is not my intention. I just don’t want to waste so much time here not trying to step on toes that I don’t get the point out…

You have made a classic, common mistake in your analysis here (IMO) correlating desiccants and other hygroscopic materials that act like desiccants to an aqueous salt solution. Your lab work is likely pretty shoddy as well. You have come to the wrong conclusion based on ignorance of environmental forces and the complex reactions that take place in nature and in hygroscopic materials.

Your consolation; you are not alone!

An aqueous salt solution is a rather unique medium and it cannot really be related to a hygroscopic desiccant-like substance and I will explain where I think you have gone wrong and why.

My last caveat… I cannot see your ‘laboratory’ from my house! I am therefore just guessing here. I found some fun in this exercise and a lesson or two in it, so I figured I would bring the topic to the floor for discussion.

Your first mistake is shown via the paradox that your question presents. The paradox is formed by the concept that an aqueous salt solution is an rH stable medium. Knowing something about aqueous salt solutions, I presume this is correct. Empirical experimentation and subsequent verification of others has allowed me to call the behavior of the aqueous salt solution an axiom. I will therefore write about it as if it were a fact.

To bring others to a minimum level of understanding, an aqueous salt solution is a unique form of hygroscopic entity that is affected very little by temperature. Its isotherm therefore is one of an almost flat line. Its equilibrium rH is, for all intents and purposes for cigar storage temperatures, a constant. We will therefore consider it a constant and not a variable.

If then you assume that the mixing of these two media in your humidor has caused the other desiccant media to become oversaturated, you have proven that an aqueous salt solution does not work as we have previously defined it as an axiom. This is the paradox. You cannot have a constant that you prove is not constant and get to use it as a constant later. It is, or it is not a constant.

If then, in the presence of the aqueous salt solution you are finding that there is a consistent rH higher than that of the published empirically tested constant for that solution, either your readings are erroneous, or the salt solution and all we have deemed factual about them is wrong. Which is it?

Here begins the lesson. The lesson is that hygroscopic materials are not the same. Their isotherms are not the same. Their percent moisture content at a given rH and temperature are not the same! This does not mean that they won’t come to an equilibrium rH state at some time. It means that the state will result in a different percentage moisture content level for each medium. To lessen the blow here a little let me tell you that this is a commonplace mistake. Cigar smokers are always presenting me with arguments based on the rH condition of space and applying it incorrectly to the condition of tobacco when it is actually inverse to it. I correct people on this fact almost every time I engage in a conversation regarding rH and tobacco. You are not the first, nor will you be the last one that I correct on this relatively hard to grasp concept. Water in space is not the same, as water bonded to tobacco.

Water in an aqueous salt solution does not behave the same as space, other desiccant media, or tobacco.

Along the same line of reasoning, water in the aqueous salt solution is not the same as water bonded to a hygroscopic substrate like tobacco, a desiccant like kitty litter, or water in space. THESE ARE ALL SEPARATE AND DIFFERENT MEDIA FOR WATER TO RESIDE IN. THEY ARE NOT ALL THE SAME.

Some brief facts. The more you heat water vapor, the more of it will fit in open space. This is consistent with higher air temperatures and what we know about rH…. Right?

On the other hand, the higher we heat a desiccant the less water it will hold… Am I right again? Sure I am, because it is consistent with water vapor in space as it relates to heat. See the link? Water vapor in space and water vapor locked in a desiccant are not the same. A hot desiccant holds less water. Hot water is more difficult to store as a liquid. Therefore hot liquid water and a hot desiccant are more alike than hot water vapor. If a desiccant and liquid water are considered as “vessels” to store water vapor, they are similar, but water vapor, while it is still water behaves much differently when it is free of the bonds of other water and of the bonds of the desiccant. Water vapor in space is not the same as water bonded to itself or another media. Liquid water as a vessel, tobacco as a vessel and desiccant as a vessel can all contain water vapor yet they are all different in their bond strength to water vapor.

Now onto your experiment and where I think you failed. Well, to be correct here, you did not fail. What you did was fail to observe…

You have many competing media in your humidor and a source of water, not really free water, but semi-free water in a bound aqueous salt solution. Your experiment is not really controlled, because if it were you would have never seen or witness what you have witnessed unless you changed specific variables. I am sure what you have witnessed really happened, I am not calling you a liar, I am just saying that you misunderstood what you saw; you did not THINK THROUGH what you saw based on knowledge, but projected what believed happened.

I am actually doing the very same thing that you have done in your experiment. I am drawing different conclusion based on my knowledge of the subject. I too am drawing a conclusion on what you saw. I could be very well wrong as well!

Without further drama what you noticed was a temperature change!

I’ll bet you never saw that coming!

An aqueous salt solution is relatively stable with regards to temperature. This is a problem with aqueous salt solutions and cigar storage where the temperature is uncontrolled. This problem illustrates the weakness of the use of aqueous salt solutions in an ambient temperature driven humidor. The problem is not with the kitty litter; it is a problem with your aqueous salt solution and your humidor design!!!

Here is what I think happened and with it you will learn some important lessons about storing with an aqueous salt solution.

Since the aqueous salt solution (ASS for short) is not temperature dependent it will deliver a consistent equilibrium rH at a range of temperatures. Does this sound like it behaves like the desiccant that we previously described? No it does not, does it? This means that it will pump water into an environment at a rH level (if it is the dominant source of water) regardless of the temperature of the environment. It may in fact increase in rate as the temperature increases. I would have to do some research on that to see if the rate of water transfer changes with a temperature differential. That is a different topic.

Speculating now I see the ASS pack supplying the dominant ERH for a stable environment. As that environment changes temperature the ASS pack does its job as understood by the axiom we have previously established.

Now lets back away from the ASS pack for a moment and look at the psychrometrics of your humidor space. What is going on in there in reality… real time with rH.

You see you are building on a problem here. You have a hygrometer that works in psychrometric space, in psychrometric terms, based on psychrometric theories and calculations, not in the world of constants the ASS pack is built around. You see, in the psychrometric world, the world that your instrument is built to measure, rH is dependent on temperature and it is not a constant!!!

I have just spilled it if you caught it. Do you get it now?

I am too lazy to pull out a psychometric calculator and make actual examples here so just follow along with the spirit of it and assume I am right (the numbers are random and certainly not correct).

At a certain temperature the rH in the humidor is say 70/70 (70˚F and 70rH). In the ASS pack world the temperature could be 80 and the rH would be 70, or it could be 60˚F and the rH would be 70. Do you see the problem now?

When you measure the space, a constant space with one sample you see just what you are supposed to see. You see a space where 80˚F is 70rH. But what happens when it cools? Did the producer of the ASS pack tell you that it is instantaneous and immediate corrector of a given space? No they don’t. They don’t because their product does not work that way… While your hygrometer might be instant read, your ASS pack is not instant react! This reaction time, or lag time is referred to as hysteresis.

You see when your ASS pack adjusted the 80˚F space to 70rH it loaded it with water. Lets make up a number for that water content (actual water content), or absolute humidity aH, verses rH. Lets call the aH number 5x for the sake of argument. 5x water at 80˚F reads 70rH on your hygrometer. What happens when you lower the temperature? What happens then in your confined humidor space, and what do you see?

In reality if you drop the temp fast enough, the 5x water remaining in space will be reflected in the measurements that you see on your hygrometer. If the 5x water is constant for a while (based on the reverse hysteresis of you mixed media), you will actually read an increase in rH on your hygrometer. You see your hygrometer reads rH, not aH… aH is a constant in every state as long as water is not added or removed. The ASS pack makes rH it a constant over a long period of time. The instant read hygrometer reads changes in rH, humidity relative to temperature, temperature that you apparently have no means to control.

Your ASS pack therefore works in the constant rH world only at the rate allowed by its hysteresis, where your other hygroscopic materials and your hygrometer live and work in the rH world at different rates controlled by their hysteresis.

When there is too much water in your space, your 5x aH water in our example, where do you think it goes when the temperature drops. Well in a perfect world it goes back into your ASS pack. But you don’t live in a perfect world. Your humidor represents an rH world of competing hygroscopic materials all bidding for that free water and adsorbing it at different rates based on their individual hysteresis. Guess who gets it first? Well, the dominant desiccant gets it first. And it appears in this case that the dominant receptor is either the kitty litter or your cigars! Which would you prefer it to be? Your experiment has proven at least one thing. It has proven that your ASS pack is not the dominant receptor to free water in a condition where the temperature changes.

Obviously the ASS pack is not real time and it is not the dominant receptor or this problem would not exist. Perhaps the KL is doing you a favor and you just hung it with a bum rap…!

There are infinite variations to this theme and how it could have played out. The real problem here is the aH aspect of your ASS pack and the variable rH world you are attempting to control with it. This is why I use automation… I thought I would toss that in and laugh a little…

Last time I checked there was a big difference in cigars stored at 60/70, 70/70 and 80/70… You see temperature matters to hygroscopic materials and how they handle water. This makes mixing rH fixed water supply devices (such as your ASS pack) imperfect for cigars kept in varying temperature conditions. I am not deriding them as a device. I am simply pointing to the fact that they are imperfect…

My suggestion is not to throw out the ASS packs. My suggestion is to try and keep your temperature more stable and hang the problem on the variable or in this case the constant that is responsible.

Who knows, that KL might have saved you ASS packs and your cigars…! A little food for thought.. (Pun intended!)

Cheers! -Ray

[Colt45]

Here begins the lesson.

I had to read this a couple of times (and will read through again) -

If it were ever possible, some day, to explain these principles in layman's terms, so that these principles could be applied simply by the less scientifically minded (me), I for one would be grateful

[PigFish]

I had to read this a couple of times (and will read through again) -

If it were ever possible, some day, to explain these principles in layman's terms, so that these principles could be applied simply by the less scientifically minded (me), I for one would be grateful

Thanks mate.

In layman's terms, don't argue with the Pig... -LOL

(just kidding, just kidding...)

If you only know the enormity of mistakes that I have made in my life, not just with cigar storage, you would never listen to me again!!!! -LOL

-Ray

[free85]

Great discussion. Still trying to pack through it all.

I've been trying to keep up with these kinds of discussions lately and, here's what I've gathered: shoot for whatever stability you need to produce the flavor you're looking for. Keeping things as stable as possible is important. Unfortunately, certainly for someone like me, the reality is my living environment fluctuates anywhere between 5 and 20 degrees throughout the day (depending on the time of year, summer being worst). This is why I know I need to "build" something that will control my temperatures within a narrower band so a humidification system (of some kind) can do it's job.

[Colt45]

In layman's terms, don't argue with the Pig... -LOL

Well, that horse has smashed through the gate, hasn't (s)he?! Cheers mate - it's started snowing here again. Some day, I'll see grass again! (I'm told the skiing is epic, if I could go :-) Stay safe, stay warm, be well!

[TonyAccardo]

Ya know piggy, I came to the same conclusion that you posted in the last long response. I was walking my dog thinking or wondering about my question of "what would be the set point of tobacco, cedar, etc?" And then it went off like a light bulb! There is no set point like with salt solutions or certain, manufactured beads. It is influenced and guided by its dominant environment. You explained it much better though and I really appreciate you taking the time to post that. I didn't think you would for the same reason you stated that you usually don't but believe me, it is nice to have some confirmation from you about my thinking on this.

Anyways, an update on my little recharging experiment: I've actually switched out the 2 airplane liqour bottles filled with distilled water and replaced them with 2 5mL vials filled with distilled water and the results are the same so far. Instead of my rh being at a steady and stable 65% from the 65 boveda paks, the rate of evaporation from the 2 5mL vials and the rate of absorbtion of the boveda paks settles the rh within the cooler at a very steady 67% rh which is completely acceptable to me. It may not fill/plump up my Bovedas as fast as if I took them all out and set them in a small tupperware with a soaked sponge allowing the rh to go into the 80's but it allows for a slow and steady recharging of the Bovedas without having to pull them out, buy more to replace the 10 paks I have taken out for recharging. Now this all works well if I stay out of my cooler, leaving the lid shut and leaving the environment undisturbed. I know the Bovedas will last years and years this way with a minimal disturbing of both my cigars, the environment they are in, and the actual Boveda paks themselves. Because as we all kno what, Boveda paks aren't the most sturdy things made and the more you handle them, shuffle them, allow them to bend and flop and fold, the quicker they get raggedy and worn out. This way they are left alone only to absorb the additional moisture a few percentage points above their set point, once they have absorbed all of the additional moisture that the 2 vials have to give off, they will be charged enough to last at least a few years, if not longer as I very rarely get into my cooler and it is chock full now as it is, with maybe room for 2 more dress boxes of coronas and that's it. Anyhow, thanks for allowing me to share.

[TonyAccardo]

Great discussion. Still trying to pack through it all.

I've been trying to keep up with these kinds of discussions lately and, here's what I've gathered: shoot for whatever stability you need to produce the flavor you're looking for. Keeping things as stable as possible is important. Unfortunately, certainly for someone like me, the reality is my living environment fluctuates anywhere between 5 and 20 degrees throughout the day (depending on the time of year, summer being worst). This is why I know I need to "build" something that will control my temperatures within a narrower band so a humidification system (of some kind) can do it's job.

I live down here in Southern tip of Florida and I see people all the time not using their AC in the summertime. Now I'm not rich at all, in fact there are lots of months where I have a hard time just paying the most basic of bills but I don't know how people can go without AC! It never gets above 73-74ºF in my apartment in the summer and usually I'm at 70-71ºF for most of the year. I'll go without other things before I'll go without AC! To me it is an absolute necessity and even moreso if you're going to attempt to buy and store cigars for years and years.

[free85]

I'm with you on AC. But I'm in the "why not turn it off while I'm not home and save the money" camp. To which I think one good answer is: To keep my cigars at the right temp, haha.

[JohnS]

If you only know the enormity of mistakes that I have made in my life, not just with cigar storage, you would never listen to me again!!!! -LOL

-Ray

I discuss the value of learning acquired from mistakes everyday in my work. I enjoy your posts, Ray. Keep up the great work!