SWIM have found a curious piece of lab glassware and assembled a device shown on the attached picture. To get an idea of the size of the contraption here are some figures:

Test tube volume - 50 ml
The bubbler height - 210 mm
the bubbler diameter - 35 mm

First time SWIM loaded 16 mg of spice - noticeable, but not very deep effect.
Second time - 40 mg. Nice, but far from breakthrough.
Third time - 50 mg. Deeper, but no breakthrough.

To evap the spice SWIM used a powerful propane torch that heated the test tube very thorougly.

She thinks it is strange as some forum members (69ron among them) said that this method should be very efficient. Earlier SWIM had very deep journeys from 35-40 mg with the standard "machine"

Any comments?

was there any residue left after vaporizing it?

cant comment on it as never tried, since found out about the vaporgenie its def the favourite method, super efficient, but whatever more info we have on other smoking methods its always good.. so keep us informed on any updates

Most have trouble with oilers, others are pros. SWIM goes with the machine, and his current methods are incredibly efficient (barring runoff, solely due to the angle of the piece, easily remedied by alterations to bubbler design); however, plenty of other members still use oilers successfully.

Yep. There was some.

SWIM heated the test tube very slowly but in the end to a very high temp, just to be sure that all spice vapped.

The spice taste was very mellow, or maybe there was too little spice.

SWIM suspected that condensation was the culprit, but many people here say that it is not significant.

The spice was extracted using Noman's STB tek and later was cleaned with A/B extraction. It looks like light yellow crystals and has been kept for a month in an air-tight container in a freezer.

Generally condensation isn't a problem, but SWIM supposes that it would depend on the device and manner of use. Is SWIM correct in assuming that device to be an oil/vinegar bottle? That bubbling tube looks quite voluminous and may contribute to premature condensation. Judging from the bubbler and the details of vaporization, SWIM would imagine SWIY's method to be a bit inefficient.

SWIM's just begun planning for a new bubbler to use with his machine. Check it out: http://dmt-nexus.me/forum/defau...&m=103497#post103497

It is a piece of lab glassware. Maybe a gas washing device.

SWIM's got two of them. Volumes are 150 ml and 50 ml. Photos attached. They do not look too big.



SWIM rather suspect the test tube. It has cracked so it would not be used anymore.

SWIM wishes 69ron reads this thread. He said once that a test tube is the most efficient vaporizing method. He probably know the optimal test tube specs.

Meanwhile SWIM will use another pice of lab glassware as a makeshift machine.

Ah, now that SWIM's seen the bubblers, he thinks they hold great promise. It probably is the test tube. Even though an oiler may be the most efficient method of vaporization according to some of the more experienced members, it 's certainly not the easiest, as most people--to include SWIM--have trouble with such methods. SWIM's especially impressed by the second picture with the narrow tube and the the large chamber toward the top, and he's dying to hear how well such a beast would work hand-held, with SWIM's machine design attached to the inlet by a section of latex tubing. Because it's so small, it may not require carbing, but SWIM supposes that otherwise it would be like pull-stem, requiring the machine to be detached.

That third piece is very interesting to SWIM as well. If it could be inserted into a regular or inserted into a stopper for a labware bubbler built with a flask, it could be a wonderful machine. The only problem would be loading it: If it's easily removed from the bubbler, a solid piece of spice could be stuffed down the narrow tube and shaken toward the plug in the larger part and melted in. If it's fixed nigh-permanently to the bubbler, a method for easily removing the plug from the piece could be rigged up to load it, then reinserting it.

SWIY has some fun glass.

That setup is not the same as what SWIM uses. He only uses the test tube part. I think a lot is lost in the second chamber. DMT condenses really fast. The others talking about condensing not being a problem are flat out wrong. Whenever the test tube is used there is always a thin condensed DMT film all over the inside of the test tube.

I recommend removing the second chamber, and using a candle flame. Nothing hotter than a candle or you can burn the spice making it ineffective. The flame should NOT touch the test tube. The flame should be about 1/4 of an inch below the tube. If the heat is right, it will take about 20-30 seconds before the DMT begins to boil. Wait about 10 seconds after it starts to boil, and then inhale.

Also, the tube should be tilted so that the DMT is near the bottom so when the DMT melts it doesn’t move away from the flame point.

This is most likely the main problem. This will burn the DMT I'm sure. Use a candle flame with the top of the flame about 1/4 of an inch below the test tube.

SWIM's said many times that the bubbler addition was merely a proposal made by SWIM to amend a bubbler to SWIY's test-tube oiler, and SWIY had mentioned having the same idea. No one's ever reported on a trial of this idea 'til now, however.

Bubblers work just fine (amazingly, actually) with the machine, ron, and condensation is absolutely not an issue for that method--likely due to rapidity of vaporization. SWIM would use a butane torch for this, by the way.

All of these techniques have the problem of DMT condensing. They have it to a different degree, but they all have it. There is always DMT condensation in all smoking methods used. Clean the pipe and you will see. But the faster you inhale the less there will be.

The “machine” is unpleasant for SWIM. The vapor is too hot because of how the heat is applied to it.

SWIM always waits 10 seconds for the vapor to build up in the tube before inhaling. That causes more condensation but also cools the vapor down enough that it's more pleasant and allows a bigger hit at once. SWIM would never inhale the DMT as soon as it vaporized. While that minimizes loss to condensation, it’s too hot for SWIM’s comfort. With the test tube chamber, the DMT vapor is allowed to cool for 10 seconds prior to inhalation. If the tube insides are large enough, there is little loss because most of the vapor is in the center of the tube as a cloud. If the tube is very small, too much DMT touches the sides and condenses faster.

The test tube SWIM uses is 38x200mm. Anything smaller is not good.

The key-phrase here is "not an issue;" not to say it doesn't happen, but condensation with a bubbler is negligible or not a problem. The pressure between SWIM's piece and the bubbler chamber and the uniform rapidity of heating is such that the chamber can fill in a few seconds, and if it's harsh, you've simply heated it too long or gotten the flame too close or built the vapor too thick--otherwise, it's practically air, it's so smooth. SWIM's never cleaned either of his bubblers apart from changing the water, as he's never had to, even after grams upon grams of vapor. He does clean the bubbler tube once in a blue moon, but even less so with his new methods. Anything left in his piece after smoking is immediately retrievable and is only there because of the angle; SWIM can vaporize almost the entire contents of the piece apart from a small bit of leftover inactive residue.

SWIM decided to check both methods to see which one is better for herself.

1. The "machine" + bubbler
2. A large test tube alone.

She connected the second bubbler to the third piece of glass (see picture). Then she stuffed some stainless steel mesh into the wider end of it and loaded 40 mg of spice on top of the mesh. Slowly, without vaporizing, the spice was melted into the mesh with a torch. Later the spice was vaporized and inhaled. Due to lack of experience with this new device a mistake was made. She felt no usual harshness of the plain vanilla "machine" vapor, and thought that there is more spice in the mesh. She exhaled rather prematurely and tried to get another hit from the "machine". There was almost no spice left there. Nevertheless the journey was quite deep.

A bit shaken by the flight she fumbled clumsily with the bubbler and has broken it. That is why there is another, bigger bubbler on this photo.

SWIM said that next time she will experiment with a large test tube with no bubbler.

She already has some negative experience with somewhat similar device. Once she tried to use a round separatory funnel as a vaporizing device. The idea was to vaporize the spice with only the lower, thinner end of the funnel opened, then open the upper end and inhale the vapor. She held the funnel horizontally while heating the bottom with a torch. It did not work because the spice kept running up and away from the torch flame.

SWIM hopes the method will work with the test tube as they have vertical walls.

SWIM thanks all for useful suggestions.

SWIM would imagine that a cumbersome device like that pictured would work best mounted on a lab-stand to prevent accidents like that mentioned. It may also be a good idea to use a mouthpiece by connecting a glass tube to the outlet the way the machine is connected to the inlet, so it's somewhat flexible and makes it easier to position comfortably.

SWIM's sorry for SWIY's loss of such a beautiful device.

It is not that cumbersome. Same as the "machine'/



Yes, a lab stand would be a good idea. But the accident has happened well after the journey (+15 min). SWIM's hands were still a bit shakey after the powerfull experience. At the launch she just passed the contraption to a friend.



That is OK. You can't imagine how many interesting pieces of glassware could be found at flea markets in the country where SWIM lives.

Thanks for your suggestions. Cooling the vapor from the "machine" is great idea.

Ah, SWIM's jealous. Glad it's working well for SWIY!

SWIM just let me know that after some calculations she's found out that the test tube volume should be 0.3l. Is that so?

It is difficult to find a test tube that big where SWIM lives.

A good alternative could be a 300 ml RBF. Combined with an inexpensive RBF Heater (around $200) it could be the mother of all vaporisers. As the flask temp is regulated it may also help to close the question of optimal vaporization temp once and for all.

What do you think?

Thanks Ron,

SWIM kept dreaming of a device where the spice is vaporised in a closed volume under minimal possible temperature. SWIM tested the following simple smoking setup. The idea was to make a device where one can vaporise spice in a closed vessel with walls hot enough to prevent condensation and the bottom not too hot to burn the spice.

A 450 ml flat bottom flask was closed with a 2 holes plug. One hole is for a glass tube going inside the flask. The other hole is for inhalation tube. For a trial run 15 mg of spice were loaded into the flask and placed on the bottom. To ensure there is no local overheating the flask was put on a regulated lab hotplate (450C max). The hotplate temp was gradually raised to the point when spice started to melt and then to evaporate. The air inside the flask became slightly misty and that was it. The vapor did not thicken. However SWIM tried to generate more vapor she was not successful. Finally the spice residue on the bottom burned and the spice that was already vaporised condensed on the flask walls. It seems that heat conductivity of glass is too low and SWIM's doubtful that a candle flame will do any better.

SWIM's conclusion so far. A closed volume vaporisation device is less efficient than an open-ended one (e.g. "The Machine". Of course, the set up is not perfect, so next time SWIM will try a thin-walled RBF with a heating mantle to ensure that there is no great temp gradient over the flask surface.