BHO + ethanol Solvent "Glass" Concentrate
- Thread starter mrcryce
- Start date
mrcryce
Well-Known Member
Thanks for the advice. I have read from other sources also that the more (non THC) plant matter gets into your concentrate, the gooier it gets. I tried making a batch with ground up weed and it was not glassy at room temperature at all.
By the way, welcome to RIU.
mrcryce
Well-Known Member
first flattened out with some heat, and then once it returned to room temperature, smashed it into pieces.
then put all the pieces together.
holding the mass up to the light.
just sitting on some wax paper. Made quite a bit of progress with the extraction. This is some first run concentrate. Real glass. Mission accomplished!
For anybody trying to make solvent extract that actually shatters, I believe the trick is not to pulverize your starting material too finely.
I have run some pulverized extract through my process several times and the result still comes out gooey. Of course this also means that the extraction rate on this type of process will be relatively low.
Fadedawg
Well-Known Member
The trichomes are on the outside of the plant, so grinding doesn't improve yield, it improves packing density.
The carboxylic acid forms of the cannabinoids will produce a hard firm oil, even with the waxes present. Decarboxylation reduces the viscosity and turns it from a hard resin to a sticky oil. It also darkens it.
The carboxylic acid forms of the cannabinoids will produce a hard firm oil, even with the waxes present. Decarboxylation reduces the viscosity and turns it from a hard resin to a sticky oil. It also darkens it.
drbrownstain
Member
This isn't true dude...by breaking up a bud you are able to expose more surfaces to solvent and also effect boundary layer mixing.
Fadedawg
Well-Known Member
Where do you think the cannabinoids reside in the plant? I have been led to believe that the cannabinoids that we seek are produced in the Trichomes, which grow on the outside of the leaves, flowers, and stems. Those surfaces are already exposed without grinding.
In my experience, all that is exposed by grinding, is broken leaf boundaries, which expose more water solubles and chlorophyll. It improves packing density and helps even out the flow, but exposes no new cannabinoids, and increases our vulnerability to non actives and chlorophyll pickup.
We do it for non polar solvents, but not for polar solvents.
In my experience, all that is exposed by grinding, is broken leaf boundaries, which expose more water solubles and chlorophyll. It improves packing density and helps even out the flow, but exposes no new cannabinoids, and increases our vulnerability to non actives and chlorophyll pickup.
We do it for non polar solvents, but not for polar solvents.
drbrownstain
Member
Think of it like a filo dough pastry where the dough layers are the leaves. If you take the whole pastry and dunk it in a glass of milk, only the outside is wetted, but if you crack it open and then dunk it, the outside pastry layer AND the interior layers are easily soaked. If I have a dense nug, the resins on an interior stem, or leaf, are not going to be effectively extracted with a bunch of other material overlaying it...it's just common sense.
Packing density is a non-issue using the thermos and soak method.
Vincent VonBlown
New Member
Looks can fool yah.
When I run solvent over some plastic bags with trichomes stuck in them.
Like in this video I made http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLIRLYLIqMI
You get that breaking bad, breaking glass effect. But it's really not a better product IMO.
And a couple pics, of full melt, and Wonder Thunder powder, which is a somewhat crude but exceptional freezer extracted hash, that has a flavor that will top anything. It's oddly enough only about a 4 to 1 extraction. Meaning that you get 7 grams of Thunder for every ounce.
When I run solvent over some plastic bags with trichomes stuck in them.
Like in this video I made http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KLIRLYLIqMI
You get that breaking bad, breaking glass effect. But it's really not a better product IMO.
And a couple pics, of full melt, and Wonder Thunder powder, which is a somewhat crude but exceptional freezer extracted hash, that has a flavor that will top anything. It's oddly enough only about a 4 to 1 extraction. Meaning that you get 7 grams of Thunder for every ounce.
Attachments
Vincent VonBlown
New Member
Just another comment on extractions, the safe way to extract a VERY high end honey oil product is the bowl method. (like I"m showing in the video)
I suggest you use a bubble or sift hash to extract with if you want the best. However you must understand, there is very little actual high end honey in an ounce of weed, on most strains.
I suggest you use a bubble or sift hash to extract with if you want the best. However you must understand, there is very little actual high end honey in an ounce of weed, on most strains.
drbrownstain
Member
1/2 can per OZ on the initial soak and between 1/2 and 1 can per OZ for second washes.
Fadedawg
Well-Known Member
Are we speaking semantics? We break up our buds by hand, but don't grind them, when using a polar solvent. Beyond exposing more of the surface, it has no other benefit that I can see.
drbrownstain
Member
These two statements are clearly contradictory...
I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but there's only so much misinformation I can tolerate.
This is the whole point!
So which is it man? Is it your position that the cannabinoid rich surfaces are exposed without grinding, or does grinding expose said surfaces? Experience and common sense tell me the latter...
I'm not trying to give you a hard time, but there's only so much misinformation I can tolerate.
vacpurge
New Member
I find that grinding works way better. more surface area, more access to the trics. end of argument! lol
I tried it with just buds in the extractor and nothing came out after a full can!!!! wasted 6$. chopped it out, and it came out nice and golden
and when I say chopped, I mean like powderized almost. works great. ive tried joint consistancy, and too big for joints.. and I still like grinded the most.
I tried it with just buds in the extractor and nothing came out after a full can!!!! wasted 6$. chopped it out, and it came out nice and golden
and when I say chopped, I mean like powderized almost. works great. ive tried joint consistancy, and too big for joints.. and I still like grinded the most.
Fadedawg
Well-Known Member
We are arguing semantics. I recommend loosely breaking up the flowers, not grinding them.
Grinding provides zero additional access to the trichomes on the surfaces, if the material is loosely broken up, it mostly adds broken leaf margin area.
It is the broken leaf margins thatare weeping evil spirits into the extraction. The leaf surfaces are better protected.
Unless a very controlled grind, it also produces extreme fines, some submicron, which make it through the filters and degrade the quality of the extract.
We routinely scrub material througha 10 mesh screen for best packing density and uniform flow, when using butane extraction, because it is a non polar solvent, but never, ever do so when extracting with a polar solvent like ethanol or Iso.
Our 20%+ yield with QWET (21.6%), is also very close to that with butane soak and recycle, so not a lot is being left behind.
So that this debate doesn't continue, I agree that clearly the solvent needs access to the trichomes, but proffer that you don't have to grind it to make that so. You have only to loosely break them up.
The more you grind them up, the less tolerance you have with other control factors, such as over washing. Even butane will absorb up to 32 ml/liter water, and that water will bring water solubles with it.
In addition, once the WSCP (water soluble chlorophyll binding proteins are washed away, the chlorophyll pickup will turn the BHO extraction a light electric green.
http://skunkpharmresearch.com/chlorophyll-pickup-in-extractions/
Grinding provides zero additional access to the trichomes on the surfaces, if the material is loosely broken up, it mostly adds broken leaf margin area.
It is the broken leaf margins thatare weeping evil spirits into the extraction. The leaf surfaces are better protected.
Unless a very controlled grind, it also produces extreme fines, some submicron, which make it through the filters and degrade the quality of the extract.
We routinely scrub material througha 10 mesh screen for best packing density and uniform flow, when using butane extraction, because it is a non polar solvent, but never, ever do so when extracting with a polar solvent like ethanol or Iso.
Our 20%+ yield with QWET (21.6%), is also very close to that with butane soak and recycle, so not a lot is being left behind.
So that this debate doesn't continue, I agree that clearly the solvent needs access to the trichomes, but proffer that you don't have to grind it to make that so. You have only to loosely break them up.
The more you grind them up, the less tolerance you have with other control factors, such as over washing. Even butane will absorb up to 32 ml/liter water, and that water will bring water solubles with it.
In addition, once the WSCP (water soluble chlorophyll binding proteins are washed away, the chlorophyll pickup will turn the BHO extraction a light electric green.
http://skunkpharmresearch.com/chlorophyll-pickup-in-extractions/
Fadedawg
Well-Known Member
Enough to cover the material plus about an inch or so.
BluJayz
Well-Known Member
So the OP took wet BHO and mixed it with ethanol to purge the butane then evaped the ethanol out?
I don't believe that was the point but this is something I've wondered about; it sounds much easier and safer in the end.
Has anyone else used ethanol to purge butane without winterizing? What results did you get?
I don't believe that was the point but this is something I've wondered about; it sounds much easier and safer in the end.
Has anyone else used ethanol to purge butane without winterizing? What results did you get?
Fadedawg
Well-Known Member
Yes, I've frequently washed out the BHO with the absolute least amount of ethanol possible, filtered it, and then evaporated it away under vacuum.