220 um, 160 I’m, 120 um, 73 um, 45 um and 25 um all the microns sizes I have at my disposal for dry sift hash. Now, here’s where my mind is at because I like the effects of 45um dry sieved hash but I was thinking to myself what if someone used a shit ton of grade 1, 45 um dry sieved hash to make bho?
Which led me to believe there’s different effects from different microns of the dry sieved hash which led me to believe that would carry over to bho but then I also had a thought that got me to a contradiction: the microns used to filter the bho… Would that contradict the fact that it’s 45 um sieved hash if your hash is ending in a sub micron filter ?
Also, why aren’t we working on fixing clogging and channeling for hash material for extraction? Surely there has to be inert material we can add to the hash to add space in between the hash, just as perlite is used to add space in soil.
2 Likes
The lipid content will be off the charts.
I tried it and the trichs melted into goo and clogged my filtration.
4 Likes
“Surely there has to be inert material we can add to the hash to add space in between the hash, just as perlite is used to add space in soil.”
You can try alumina but it’s not inert. Pyrex wool comes to mind but is a serious inhalation hazard
Rockwool? Maybe hardening pH balanced rockwool into Pellets…
Maybe these
mix ur kief with ur crc powders so you can correct your blast as you blast it…
What about material socks?
You’re talking about something melted in solvent vs trichomes in water….
4 Likes
Ik but there has to be a clever way to make it work without flow issues. We’ve gotten the CRC down to a science, I’m pretty sure we can figure this out.
Edit: Wait no!!! Lol I’m talking dry sifted hash at 45um as starting material no water used at all during what I’m talking about.
Not blasting water/bubble hash blasting dry sieve/sift.
I’m also asking would the sub micron filter on a bho extraction unit be contradictory to the fact that the starting material is at 45um to begin with.
Like basically would it make it pointless because it’s being filtered at a submicron level so why would the sift hash even matter at a certain micron if there’s going to be an absolutely different micron during inline filtration on a closed loop.
no seriously…
and now you’re just being silly…
comparing filtered as a solid vs filtered once it’s a solution.
trichomes are trichomes…
3 Likes
Whoa I didn’t know those existed. That’s pretty neat.
It’s silly because the size of the “starting material” has very little relevance to your a ability to filter those particles once you’ve dissolved the trichomes. At least in this instance.
This question shouldn’t even need to be asked, you should already know that a sub micron filter is going to stop particles that are 45x bigger than the nominal rating on your filter.
1 Like
Shredded starch (NOT plastic) packing peanuts?
1 Like
Marbles fill space pretty well from what Ive heard
I dont believe you’ll get a different result, THCa is THCa. Kief can be a biotch to process effectively tho since its already an extract and is 60% undesirables but there are ways & it really depends on the solvent
For liquid @ room temp solvents such as IPA, EtOH etc, I found soak, settle and pour off or decant instead of filtering is miles easier, especially when you have alot to process. Also this is the one time gravity is not your friend!
For Gases such as butane/propane, I recommend either adding the kief on top of your material inside a 100um sock with a tampon @ the bottom of the tube, this will usually stage the filtration well enough that you wont clog & if it does you can always send some psi back up into the tube to unclog when you put too much kief in
If the kief has a good nose and is fresh & has full melt appeal, just go for rosin, its delicious when done well
2¢
4 Likes
You could try recycling hot butane vapor from the top through the bottom of your material column to percolate and dissolve the trichs and use a higher solvent:trich weight ratio.
