# Destroyed Comb in the Extractor



## ABNRGR (May 16, 2015)

Harvested our first two frames of honey today. However, when I placed them, tangentially, in the extractor I ended up combed destroying the comb. I utilized a uncapping scraper to remove the cappings. Medium wood frames with wax and wire foundation. Did I simply fail to uncap completely enough or did something else go wrong?


----------



## Hops Brewster (Jun 17, 2014)

start out at low speed, then add a little speed as you go, keeping an eye on the frames.
Sometimes it helps to wrap the comb with a few turns of cotton string to help hold it together.


----------



## Phoebee (Jan 29, 2014)

Describe "destroyed", or give a picture.

If you didn't crumble the comb completely to piles in the bottom of the extractor, you might be surprised with what the bees can do to repair it. 

If crumbled to piles in the bottom of the extractor, it isn't destroyed, its just time to learn to make beeswax blocks for the county fair.


----------



## JWChesnut (Jul 31, 2013)

New comb is very fragile. Tangential extractors are hard on comb, since only one side is extracted, and all the honey weight pushes from the inner side. Learning how to speed up slowly is essential, and flipping new comb more than once helps equalize the weight. Knives work better than scrapers. 

Solution -- a piece of wire mesh you can place in front of the comb so that it cannot bend outwards. Ideally, mesh should be stainless (check your hardware supply), as galvanized or copper will flavor the (very) acid honey quickly. You can build a "retainer" using frame wire in a pinch.

Look at the extractor -- can it be modded to be radial.

The second year comb will do much better.


----------



## Phoebee (Jan 29, 2014)

Stainless steel wire mesh: If not available locally, McMaster Carr has the most _amazing _variety, and they are easy to deal with .... http://www.mcmaster.com/#wire-cloth/=ydmril


----------



## mgolden (Oct 26, 2011)

JWChesnut said:


> Tangential extractors are hard on comb, since only one side is extracted, and all the honey weight pushes from the inner side. Learning how to speed up slowly is essential, and flipping new comb more than once helps equalize the weight. Knives work better than scrapers.
> 
> Solution -- a piece of wire mesh you can place in front of the comb so that it cannot bend outwards. Ideally, mesh should be stainless (check your hardware supply), as galvanized or copper will flavor the (very) acid honey quickly. You can build a "retainer" using frame wire in a pinch.
> 
> Look at the extractor -- can it be modded to be radial.


?????????
Tangential is the easiest on comb as less speed is required to get the honey out. My Maxant 3100 also has a grill that supports the comb and foundation. With moderate speed you never blow the comb and foundation.

One does have to stop and reverse the frames.

It's the radial force in radial extraction that compresses the foundation/comb.

For a hobbiest and small scale, I find tangential extraction my preference. I know it is not practical on a commercial scale.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

mgolden said:


> ?????????
> Tangential is the easiest on comb as less speed is required to get the honey out. My Maxant 3100 also has a grill that supports the comb and foundation. With moderate speed you never blow the comb and foundation.


there is a first for everything and you are the first person I have heard say this.
are you sure you don't have the terms confused?


----------



## WWW (Feb 6, 2011)

Expanded metal mesh for comb support is very important in a tangential extractor, I use an old Dadant two frame tangential and the whole surface of the comb is supported by stainless steal expanded metal and I have never blown out a comb. If your extractor doesn't have this support then it should be added to make your extractor work right.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

The impact of centrifugal force acting on comb/foundation is markedly different in tangential vs radial extraction ....








photo credit

How well the comb is supported by the wire/basket in a tangential extractor can make a lot of difference in the potential for comb damage. If existing support is marginal, JWC's suggestion could make a difference.


----------



## mgolden (Oct 26, 2011)

clyderoad said:


> there is a first for everything and you are the first person I have heard say this.
> are you sure you don't have the terms confused?


Nothing wrong with learning something new today. I do not have the terms confused.

I own a Dadant 6/12 radial extractor and blown a few deep frames with plastic foundation. Also it has been used with wax foundation and it is difficult to not compress the wax foundation with the radial force.

I also own a Maxant 3100P and it extracts 3 deeps tangentially or 6 mediums radially. One can obviously use 3 mediums in tangential mode as well. I have not blown a frame with it when use in tangential mode. This is deeps with plastic foundation and wired wax foundation mediums. It has a good grillage that supports the foundation/comb when used in tangential mode. Grill is made of stainless rod and a grid with squares of 1 inch wide by 4 inches tall.

I suspect it is so gentle on comb that it could be used for foundationless frames. Have a friend that started with mediums and foundationless and we are going to try to extract and save the comb. 

I wholly endorse the Maxant 3100P for any one with less than ?ten hives. I almost always use the tangential mode and it's hard to believe how clean the comb is of honey and how little honey remains on the wood frames.


----------



## D Coates (Jan 6, 2006)

mgolden said:


> Nothing wrong with learning something new today. I do not have the terms confused.
> 
> I own a Dadant 6/12 radial extractor and blown a few deep frames with plastic foundation. Also it has been used with wax foundation and it is difficult to not compress the wax foundation with the radial force.


Wholly schnykies. Blown deep frames on plastic foundation in a radial extractor? I'm trying to envision that. Getting the plastic foundation in the frame when it's new is a challenge. Tearing it out once drawn when the frame has failed for whatever reason is never easy. How fast are you spinning it? I'm using a Dadant 20 radial and I've never had anything remotely like that unless some wood has cracked or something wasn't nailed together correctly.

I had a 2 frame Kelly tangential when I started and then went to the Dadant 20 radial. I've found radial faster and easier on the comb. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying I had totally different experience.


----------



## schmism (Feb 7, 2009)

ABNRGR said:


> Did I simply fail to uncap completely enough or did something else go wrong?


not opening the cells completely will add a lot of stress to the comb as the honey has to push its way pas the remaining capping. I always recomend cutting the cappings off or useing a heat gun to melt the thin cappings.

The process we use at our house 

-useing an electric hot knife, cut cappings from both sides. (use scraper to get an cells "below the surface" in the corner etc.
- place frame in tangential extractor - spin at 25% speed
- flip frames spin up to 25% then to 50% then to 75% speed.
- flip frames to side one spin to 75%

I have a dadant little wonder extractor that does 4 frames tangentially but has full SS expanded lath side supports to the baskets.


----------



## beedeetee (Nov 27, 2004)

My four frame tangential extractor also has a cage that holds the comb. It is very gentle with comb. I also have an 18 frame radial. The radial is motorized so I use that most of the time, but tangential seem to spin the honey out a lot faster. But I have to flip the frames over and hand crank it, so I don't. If I had a hand crank extractor that I could use in either tangential or radial mode I would use tangential.


----------



## MJuric (Jul 12, 2010)

* It has a good grillage that supports the foundation/comb when used in tangential mode. Grill is made of stainless rod and a grid with squares of 1 inch wide by 4 inches tall.*

Not run the numbers but a couple comments. 

First, radial extraction exerts the force in the direction of the strongest portion of the comb. It transfers the energy through the hexagonal shape which is factors stronger then perpendicular to those shapes. The fact that you HAVE to have a grill to support the comb is evidence of this, no such grill is necessary with a radial version. Remove the grill and you'll blow out the comb on the first side, probably every time while extracting tangentially. The problem becomes worse and worse the larger the frame is. You could add the same grills to a radial extractor if you wanted to, but it's not needed because there's not enough force on the comb to blow it out....well unless you don't uncap one side or there's some other abnormality. 

Second, having something that prevents a blow out does not mean it's "Easier on the comb" or that there is somehow less force on the comb during extracting. Again if you wrapped both sides of the frames in a radial with a similar grate you would never have a blow out either. Remove the grate however and you blow out almost all of the tangentially extracted ones and few if any of the radially extracted versions.

Most certainly the radially extracted frames will have to spin at a higher RPM, causing more force, to get the same effect. But in the radial version you're compressing the comb and in the tangential version, sans grill the comb is under compression and tension. Somewhat like cement comb does not do well under tension but does VERY well under compression.

I would agree that wrapping the comb in a grill during extraction is a superior method of extraction as far as safety for the comb. But the risk is lowered to a level where such an action is not necessary in radial extraction in all but very fragile comb. It is necessary for ALL comb tangentially. 

~Matt


----------



## mgolden (Oct 26, 2011)

D Coates said:


> Wholly schnykies. Blown deep frames on plastic foundation in a radial extractor? I'm trying to envision that. Getting the plastic foundation in the frame when it's new is a challenge. Tearing it out once drawn when the frame has failed for whatever reason is never easy. How fast are you spinning it? I'm using a Dadant 20 radial and I've never had anything remotely like that unless some wood has cracked or something wasn't nailed together correctly.
> 
> I had a 2 frame Kelly tangential when I started and then went to the Dadant 20 radial. I've found radial faster and easier on the comb. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying I had totally different experience.


Some of the blown foundation was caused by a crude warmer, an empty super with a 60 watt trouble lamp and a super of full comb above that. As stated earlier, had some wired wax foundation that collapsed somewhat with the radial extractor. I have had no problem with any of my wood frames coming apart as I glue thoroughly and use plenty staples and brad nails.

I take caps off fully with a fork.

The grillage in tangential mode on the Maxant is so good you can put the frames in and run slow for a few minutes and then crank it full speed. Fully empty that side, flip the frames and repeat.

I got beat up earlier this year, saying that I can extract nearly as fast with tangential as radial. And do a better job of completely emptying comb and wood frame is near dry of honey. Having ran both, there is no doubt in my mind that tangential is easier on comb/foundation. 

I called my friend with foundationless and if she has some surplus honey frames, we are going to try tangential extraction, possibly next week. The support grillage is that good and we'll keep the speed slow.
I'm done for now here and will report back if the tangential extraction happens next week.

I fully know all commercials use radial extraction. It would be a horrible pain to flip 120 frames. Would be interested of there comments on how hard radial extraction is on frames/foundation.


----------



## aunt betty (May 4, 2015)

It's real easy to spin the frames too fast. Go slow and let it spin for a while. Swap sides, repeat and then do it again and then you can crank it up a little faster. I had to learn the hard way but got to where I can extract from shallow frames with thin surplus foundations if I have to. It's not a race.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

mgolden said:


> ?????????
> Tangential is the easiest on comb as less speed is required to get the honey out. My Maxant 3100 also has a grill that supports the comb and foundation. With moderate speed you never blow the comb and foundation.


OMG you need a ceiling fan motor on that thing.

Not really. This is a case of "is the machine on the bum or the bum on the machine" Keep in mind that he scratched the comb to uncap it. When you do that it weakens the comb if the back side of the comb was not supported when the tool is pushed into the comb. Secondly, the comb is now uneven so trying to support it in the extractor is less effective. If you use a tangential extractor you can't rush the process. You should run very slow until 50% of the honey is out of the comb and then flip it over and do the other side. Then you have to do it all again.
Honey is a viscous liquid no matter which method you use if you spin faster then the honey can flow then centripetal force will destroy the comb. If you spin slower then the honey flows almost no force is acting on the comb in a radial extractor. However in a tangential extractor the trapped honey on the opposide side of the comb being extracted will always exert a force on the whole comb. Radial is much more gentile on the comb than tangential.


----------



## mgolden (Oct 26, 2011)

Acebird said:


> OMG you need a ceiling fan motor on that thing.
> 
> Not really. This is a case of "is the machine on the bum or the bum on the machine" Keep in mind that he scratched the comb to uncap it. When you do that it weakens the comb if the back side of the comb was not supported when the tool is pushed into the comb. Secondly, the comb is now uneven so trying to support it in the extractor is less effective. If you use a tangential extractor you can't rush the process. You should run very slow until 50% of the honey is out of the comb and then flip it over and do the other side. Then you have to do it all again.
> Honey is a viscous liquid no matter which method you use if you spin faster then the honey can flow then centripetal force will destroy the comb. If you spin slower then the honey flows almost no force is acting on the comb in a radial extractor. However in a tangential extractor the trapped honey on the opposide side of the comb being extracted will always exert a force on the whole comb. Radial is much more gentile on the comb than tangential.


Use an uncapping fork like it was intended. No scratching but rather lift the caps off.

The Maxant 3100P s a variable speed motor.

Doesn't matter that there is honey on the unextracted side. The grill in the basket supports the comb and foundation. Tangential is easier on the foundation. Easier on the comb????? 

Don't think I'd try extracting foundationless comb in a radial extractor but intend to try with foundationless in tangential mode and a good grill. Think the honey can be extracted and the comb preserved. Tangential is going to easier on the comb.

Extract your slimed honey out of the deep freeze with your ceiling fan motor contraption, in November if you wish. And get your replacement packages of bees on order for the spring.?????????????


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

mgolden said:


> Extract your slimed honey out of the deep freeze with your ceiling fan motor contraption, in November if you wish. And get your replacement packages of bees on order for the spring.?????????????


A comment like this is a measure of your intelligence or lack of. I think most beekeepers who don't have an engineering background have figured out which way is more stressful on the comb. But by all means bury your head in the sand and carry on.


----------



## HIVE+ (Jan 4, 2012)

A suggestion for supports: SS cooling racks from the baking section.


----------



## mgolden (Oct 26, 2011)

Acebird said:


> A comment like this is a measure of your intelligence or lack of. I think most beekeepers who don't have an engineering background have figured out which way is more stressful on the comb. But by all means bury your head in the sand and carry on.


Tell us more oh wise one. What experience do you have with a radial extractor or a tangential extractor or have you just used a contraption. When the foundation fails the comb comes with it.

Surprised you make any posts, as you are supposed to stick to topics you know something about.

Does the truth about your beekeeping knowledge/skills/practices smart at bit?


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

Acebird said:


> A comment like this is a measure of your intelligence or lack of. I think most beekeepers who don't have an engineering background have figured out which way is more stressful on the comb. But by all means bury your head in the sand and carry on.


Wow. Low blow from somebody who isn't even an engineer.


----------



## David LaFerney (Jan 14, 2009)

clyderoad said:


> there is a first for everything and you are the first person I have heard say this.
> are you sure you don't have the terms confused?


I have a Maxant 9 frame extractor too - 6 radial, and 3 tangential. I have the same experience as mgolden. The frames are so well supported in tangential (the position where they must be flipped) that they almost never get any damage - even new from this year foundationless. If you crank up the speed too quick - before they are almost empty - the combs in radial positions will sometimes "accordion." Even so, very little comb is damaged during extraction.

Maybe the key is the Maxant extractors - and a little bit of practice.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Nabber86 said:


> Wow. Low blow from somebody who isn't even an engineer.


A low blow is generally something that might be unfair, but is effective (like a sucker punch).

...this is more of a "rubber vs glue" situation.....ace being the glue.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

David LaFerney said:


> Maybe the key is the Maxant extractors - and a little bit of practice.


The key is spinning at a RPM where the honey can flow without causing too much force on the comb no matter what spinning device is used. Maxant did not invent the spinner and the technology is no different then my ceiling fan contraption. And I will add empties a comb in 2.5 minutes and it is not unheard of a 20 minute cycle for a commercial extractor.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Well, I'm pretty sure that Maxant does NOT place the motor on their extractors _inside _the tank, and certainly not _below _the frames being extracted. :lpf:




... but hey, maybe _honey _is a good lubricant for ceiling fan motors. Who knew?!?


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Yeah the first yo-yo that put a motor at the bottom of a well must have been smoking crack. But it is pretty much the only way you can do it if the well is a couple of hundred ft down. Think of the millions of people drinking that greasy water.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Submersible well pump motors are _sealed_!

Pretty unusual to find a sealed ceiling fan motor, I would guess. (No, I haven't looked for one). Considering that the ceiling fan motor in question reportedly came from a dumpster, odds are pretty good that it is _not _a sealed motor.


----------



## deknow (Jul 17, 2006)

Acebird said:


> Yeah the first yo-yo that put a motor at the bottom of a well must have been smoking crack. But it is pretty much the only way you can do it if the well is a couple of hundred ft down. Think of the millions of people drinking that greasy water.


...you have a ceiling fan motor a couple hundred feet down in a well?


----------



## MJuric (Jul 12, 2010)

mgolden said:


> Don't think I'd try extracting foundationless comb in a radial extractor but intend to try with foundationless in tangential mode and a good grill. Think the honey can be extracted and the comb preserved. Tangential is going to easier on the comb.


Foundationless or wireless? All my hives are foundationless short of a small starter strip and extract them in a radial no problems. Both mediums and deeps. I'm not sure I would try wireless in a radial...unless of course I decided to support both sides with a grill like they do in a tangental extractor. In fact I wouldn't even need a grill really just a couple posts to make sure the comb stayed perp to the center axis. 

The only time I've ever had a comb failure in a radial is when I forgot to uncap one side. That's bad. 

Again the forces acting on the comb in a tangental extractor is FAR more dangerous then those that are acting on the comb in a radial. The difference is that in tangental the comb is wearing a seat belt and in a radial the comb is not. Buckle them both up and it's like being barreling down the road at 150 MPH in a Yugo versus driving 40 MPH down the road in an SUV wearing a crash helmet.

The question in not which has the more dangerous forces, clearly this is in the tangental, the question is which is safer, driving 40 MPH in an SUV WITHOUT a seat belt or driving 150 in a YUGO WITH a seat belt?

~Matt 

~Matt


----------



## Phoebee (Jan 29, 2014)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> Submersible well pump motors are _sealed_!


So you would think. I once dissected one to determine the cause of failure. The manufacturer had, without even looking at it, declared it to have failed due to lightning, which is not covered under warranty. I found the motor portion full of water with the rotor locked by rust. My discussion with them went something like this. 

"It was full of water and the rotor was rusted. Electrically it has no shorts, and I could find no indication of arcing."

"It is supposed to be full of water. That is their normal state. It failed due to a lightning strike."

"How can you tell it failed by a lightning strike without an examination?"

"Because it is _always_ due to a lightning strike."

In other words, it is _*policy*_ that they always fail due to lightning. The seals are intentionally bad, as manufactured. Seriously ... straight from a deep well pump manufacturer. Not that I believe a word of it. We checked a national database of lightning strikes (believe it or not, they are all recorded), and found that it had not failed due to a lightning strike.


----------



## ABNRGR (May 16, 2015)

Thanks to all for your insights.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

David LaFerney said:


> I have a Maxant 9 frame extractor too - 6 radial, and 3 tangential. I have the same experience as mgolden. The frames are so well supported in tangential (the position where they must be flipped) that they almost never get any damage - even new from this year foundationless. If you crank up the speed too quick - before they are almost empty - the combs in radial positions will sometimes "accordion." Even so, very little comb is damaged during extraction.
> 
> Maybe the key is the Maxant extractors - and a little bit of practice.


You are the second person.
Will wonders never cease.


----------



## mgolden (Oct 26, 2011)

clyderoad said:


> You are the second person.
> Will wonders never cease.


Please provide some supporting evidence of your claim. 

I can say that I have extracted at full speed after slow speed initially with the Maxant 3100P in tangential mode and never blown a frame or foundation or compressed comb or ripped off comb or damaged comb. This is extracting mediums with wood frames and wax foundation and deeps wood frames with plastic foundation. What is better than that if you don`t mind reversing the frames? I don`t think total extraction time is much different on a hobby level. Extraction is superb with next to no honey left in the comb and wood frames nearly dry.

With the radial extraction I have blown foundation(some my own fault from getting foundation and comb to warm)and , compressed foundation on wax foundation. Tangential is 100% forgiving for incorrect speed, wax foundation, and incorrect warming.


----------



## m1ke05 (Jul 16, 2014)

I have an engineering degree. Radial is certainly *NOT* more stressful on comb. I'm running a 20 frame radial variable speed extractor from Lyson. Never been happier. All of my frames are foundationless, and most of the ones I pulled this spring were new comb. Not one blow out. That being said, I used a 4 frame tangential last year and the basket was very supportive of the frames. I just kept the speeds lower especially when extracting the first side. No blow outs either. 

The point is...... honey tastes good no matter how you get it out. 

Mike.


----------



## clyderoad (Jun 10, 2012)

mgolden said:


> Please provide some supporting evidence of your claim.


have I made a claim?
Must be a canned response as it makes no sense. 

At this point there is little more to say.


----------



## lharder (Mar 21, 2015)

I extracted medium foundationless frames radially for the first time this year. The iffy ones got a rubber band. Had one failure. My failure actually, a failure to decap properly. As usual technique and paying attention is more important. In this case starting slow and not increasing speed when honey is being thrown. Extraction may be a bit slower, but I can o 20 at a time.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

Acebird said:


> Yeah the first yo-yo that put a motor at the bottom of a well must have been smoking crack. But it is pretty much the only way you can do it if the well is a couple of hundred ft down.


Piston pumps were in use hundreds of years ago to dewater deep coal mines in Europe. The concept goes back thousands of years before that. Since pumping/moving water around was one of the first engineering challenges in history, I thought you would have know this since the material is usually covered in Into to Engineering 101, starting with the Archimedes screw. Did you sleep through that class? 

They are still used today to pump oil from thousands of feet below the ground. Also wind driven piston pumps are making a big come back.


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Well Nabber (not meant to be a pun) go back to that engineering class 101 and you have one atmosphere to work with, about 14PSI or 32 ft of head. They are not sucking oil with a thousand ft of head.


----------



## Rader Sidetrack (Nov 30, 2011)

Acebird said:


> ... you have one atmosphere to work with, about 14PSI or 32 ft of head. They are not sucking oil with a thousand ft of head.


Ace, the oil is NOT '_sucked_' to the surface. The oil is PUSHED to the surface by a piston at the bottom of the well. The number of atmospheres is irrelevant. 

A diagram ...









photo credit


With this style of pump, the motor driving the pump remains on the surface and only needs to be protected from rain (not necessarily sealed). Submersible pumps (i.e. submersible water pumps) have sealed motors.

But what your extractor has is a submersed fan motor that is _not _sealed. 


:gh:


----------



## Acebird (Mar 17, 2011)

Rader Sidetrack said:


> But what your extractor has is a submersible fan motor that is _not _sealed.


Incorrect as usual. The fan motor is not submersible and no honey ever touches it so it must be sealed, right? Not really it is shielded. The bottom line is it works every year that I need it.


----------



## Nabber86 (Apr 15, 2009)

Acebird said:


> Well Nabber (not meant to be a pun) go back to that engineering class 101 and you have one atmosphere to work with, about 14PSI or 32 ft of head. They are not sucking oil with a thousand ft of head.



Your ignorance never ceases to amaze me. Have you never seen one of these?: 










As Rader said, it has nothing to do with atmospheric pressure. The lift capacity (head) is virtually unlimited. 

Here is a good tutorial on the design. http://web.mit.edu/2.972/www/reports/sucker_rod_pump/sucker_rod_pump.html

It is actually for a oil filed pumpjack, but uses the exact same components as a farm pump (only on a much larger scale). It even provides the equations that are used for design, but are probably beyond your coomprehension.

Interestingly enough, the vertical rod the drives the piston is called a "Sucker Rod". There has to be a pun in there somewhere.


----------



## D Coates (Jan 6, 2006)

...and yet he can't figure out why no one will hire him.


----------



## Phoebee (Jan 29, 2014)

Well, shucks, Graham beat me to it. Was going to go into a discussion of Newcomen and Watt steam engines designed for pumping water from mines, but see diagram in Rader Sidetrack's previous post.

Which leaves me needing something to say about the antiquity of the design, so I offer that piston water pumps were documented by Hero of Alexandria, more than a millennium prior to the Newcomen engine.


----------

