Survivalist Forum banner

1 - 20 of 29 Posts

·
The Whole Armor of YAH
Joined
·
311 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I bought some 10"x14" mylar bags with O2 absorbers. My husband had the idea to take a hair straightener and after I fill the bags to seal it in the middle and then on the edge to make smaller bags. Has anyone tried this?
 

·
Capability, not scenarios
Joined
·
11,865 Posts
I've made up a bunch of smaller bags from larger bags.

I do suggest, though, that you do a few at first until you're sure you're getting the seal you need. If you squeeze out enough air, the O2 absorbers should create a partial vacuum, which will draw the mylar onto the food similarly to vacuum-packed bricks of coffee.
 

·
Capability, not scenarios
Joined
·
11,865 Posts
Even better than a hotjaw sealer? If it's better than that, I'm not going to be happy I bought a hotjaw. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
253 Posts
How about a 10 by 14 mylar bag with O2 packet
Vacuuming out most of the air, then
Using an Impulse Sealer
Last using an iron to seal the bag closed.
A lot of steps, I know, but is this a good way ?:confused:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,561 Posts
I just use my vacuum sealers and if i want to pull the air i cut a straw and stick it in the corner of the bag
 

·
Super Moderator and Walking Methane Refinery
Joined
·
67,158 Posts
How about a 10 by 14 mylar bag with O2 packet
Vacuuming out most of the air, then
Using an Impulse Sealer
Last using an iron to seal the bag closed.
A lot of steps, I know, but is this a good way ?:confused:
The food storage companies have much lab testing behind their method. They just drop an O2 absorber in the bag and seal it. The O2 absorber does all the work. Why change that?

Then there's the fact that the mylar bags we use for food is not vacuum rated, so it's more prone to pin holing. Plus the fact that O2 absorbers don't work right in a vacuum. Even if not for these factors, it would be of absolutely no benefit anyway.

When it comes to something as important as food storage, don't improvise. Stick with what is proven to work.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,561 Posts
Then there's the fact that the mylar bags we use for food is not vacuum rated, so it's more prone to pin holing. Plus the fact that O2 absorbers don't work right in a vacuum. Even if not for these factors, it would be of absolutely no benefit anyway.
i don't know where you came up with that but it false info!

while i cannot say all mylar is rated for vacuum sealing sorbet sells "Vacuum sealable/FDA approved" mylar have a look!


http://sorbentsystems.com/promotion3.html
 

·
Super Moderator and Walking Methane Refinery
Joined
·
67,158 Posts
i don't know where you came up with that but it false info!

while i cannot say all mylar is rated for vacuum sealing sorbet sells "Vacuum sealable/FDA approved" mylar have a look!


http://sorbentsystems.com/promotion3.html
Right, but is that what people are buying to put their food up in? Most people are opting for the thinner, less expensive bags. Which, when you consider that vacuum sealing with an O2 absorber offers absolutely no benefits whatsoever, only makes sense.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,561 Posts
All the prep stores I've seen are selling 3.5 and 5 mil bags and the ones on sorbent systems are 2.5 mil and 3.5 mil so i'm going to say yes, point is mylar is approved for vacuum sealing. Regardless pull more air out of all air out and use less or no O2 absorbers point is you aren't hurting anything and there's a benefit..if you don't seal the bag properly or there's a hole you'll know it with vacuum sealing
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,601 Posts
If you look at the specs pages only the PAKDRY1500 and the PAKDRY7500 are listed for vacuum sealing. Even their main page on the Mylar bags mentions pin holing. And none of the specs pages for the bags listed in the promotion page list using a vacuum, including the thicker PAKVF4W.

Always check the specs.


http://sorbentsystems.com/specs/pakvf4w.html
PAKVF4W

This lamination of film foil and polyethylene has a wide range of uses where a high barrier film is needed with a low WVTR. It is ideal for packaging of hygroscopic items and products susceptible to corrosion, and in food or medical device packaging, where very low oxygen levels are required.

Notice no mention of vacuum sealing.

http://sorbentsystems.com/mylar.html
"To compare the properties of MylarFoil, review the specifications for PAKVF4 which has a complete layer ( .00035 ) of aluminum foil with a metallized structure like PAKVF2.5M. An aluminum foil layer actils like a FLEXIBLE can providing the best possible barrier properties. Our PAKVF4PC structure has a .0005 foil layer structure that is 6.0 mils thick. The majority of foil structures use only .00028, a thickness rife with pinhole problems."

http://sorbentsystems.com/specs/pakdry1500.html
PAKDRY1500 features an incredible 38-pound puncture resistance, which not only provides superior drop test performance, but also is the best choice for the vacuum packaging of trays, reels and tubes with sharp edges. Suitable for ANY vacuum sealing system.

http://sorbentsystems.com/specs/pakdry7500.html
PAKDRY7500 is a 7.5 mil thick (minimum) high moisture and gas (oxygen, carbon dioxide et al) barrier film with a dual layer of both 48 gauge polyester and 60 gauge biaxially oriented nylon providing very high tensile strength and resistance to puncture, making this product suitable for vacuum packaging applications



Here's the spec for what we'd normally be purchasing and notice no mention of using a vacuum.



http://sorbentsystems.com/specs/pakvf4.html
PAKVF4

"This lamination of film foil and polyethylene has a wide range of uses where a high barrier film is needed with a low WVTR. It is ideal for packaging of hygroscopic items and products susceptible to corrosion, and in food or medical device packaging, where very low oxygen levels are required."

http://sorbentsystems.com/specs/pakvf35m.html
PAKVF3.5M

"PAKVF3.5M provides protection against moisture and corrosion for packaging of powders and food related products. It is also FDA approved."

http://sorbentsystems.com/specs/pakvf25.html
"PAKVF2.5M provides protection against moisture and corrosion for packaging powders and food related products. It is commonly recognized as the the flexible packaging material used in airline snack packets, prepacked ground coffee, and vitamin packets. It is also FDA approved."


Or as Sorbent themselves say at the bottom of every specs page;

"IMPAK CORPORATION makes no warranty, expressed or implied, as to the suitability of these materials for any specific use. The values shown above were developed from random samples taken from production material. We believe them to be typical for the product. Actual values may vary somewhat from those depicted here. Customers should determine product suitability based upon their own internal criteria. "
 

·
Super Moderator and Walking Methane Refinery
Joined
·
67,158 Posts
All the prep stores I've seen are selling 3.5 and 5 mil bags and the ones on sorbent systems are 2.5 mil and 3.5 mil so i'm going to say yes, point is mylar is approved for vacuum sealing. Regardless pull more air out of all air out and use less or no O2 absorbers point is you aren't hurting anything and there's a benefit..if you don't seal the bag properly or there's a hole you'll know it with vacuum sealing
You don't pull all the air out with vacuum sealing, so an O2 absorber is still required to get the residual O2. The difference is the bag with an O2 absorber and no vacuum sealing is only under a 20% vacuum for it's .1% O2, while the bag that was vacuum sealed with an O2 absorber is under an 80%+ vacuum and still has the same .1% O2.

The higher the vacuum the harder it is trying to suck more air back into the bag. Even mylar isn't completely impervious to O2 because the seams are plastic to plastic, and O2 can slowly migrate through that seal. Which bag do you think will end up with more O2 in it over time?

And yes, you are hurting something. The O2 absorber does not work properly in a vacuum unless they've changed the formula since I talked to the manufacturer about it. So a bag with a vacuum and an O2 absorber in it, actually has more O2 in it than a bag with just an O2 absorber and no vacuum.

It's easy to make mistakes by doing what you think is just common sense. For example, the people who are packing a dessicant in the bag with their O2 absorber. The factory initially told me not to use them together. They have revised that (thanks to Stephpd for the research) and said you can use the dessicant if you put it at the bottom of the bag, then the food, with the O2 absorber on top. But both of them on top causes the O2 absorber not to work. Yet it seems like they should work together just fine.

This is why I keep stressing to do it like the food storage companies are doing it. They have lab tests to verify that they're doing it right. Unless you know for a 100% verified fact that what you're doing is ok, don't do it. It's too easy to screw up, and food storage is too important.
 

·
Left the building
Joined
·
9,363 Posts
If you get the air out of mylar, and have as little headspace as you can get....using o2 absorbers, this is a good pic of what you should have.
I opened a bucket I did last year of elbow-mac. At the time I made some 1 lb bags using 300cc o2 absorbers. I used larger o2 because of all the void space...hollow mac. Nice and hard like a brick.

Note to self...this does not work with spaghetti. I did do it just to see....and the o2 will cause the bag to suck down and puncture. Ya, I know Mike....I like to see how stuff works....or doesn't..... lol


 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,561 Posts
Here's the spec for what we'd normally be purchasing and notice no mention of using a vacuum.
Good points! While some Mylar food bags are not vacuum approved my Mylar bags are.. I 'm using the pacvac3

http://sorbentsystems.com/specs/pakvac3.html

You don't pull all the air out with vacuum sealing, so an O2 absorber is still required to get the residual O2. The difference is the bag with an O2 absorber and no vacuum sealing is only under a 20% vacuum for it's .1% O2, while the bag that was vacuum sealed with an O2 absorber is under an 80%+ vacuum and still has the same .1% O2.

The higher the vacuum the harder it is trying to suck more air back into the bag. Even mylar isn't completely impervious to O2 because the seams are plastic to plastic, and O2 can slowly migrate through that seal. Which bag do you think will end up with more O2 in it over time?.
You get more air out with a vacuum than O2 absorbers hands down! I guess there’s no reason to make vacuum Mylar bags or vacuum sealing cuz it doesn’t work ? Either way if I vac the bags with Mylar and O2 absorbers then when the bags leak air back in them the O2 absorbers will work..a win win! :thumb:
 
1 - 20 of 29 Posts
Top