Good opportunity or not so much?

Hash and Stuff Distillation
21

10 l of crude lol

2 Likes
22

Based on ample experience, these are the numbers I use;

13% crude from trim and 8% doubly distilled oil from trim. For 200 lb of trim, this is about 12 and 7 kg, respectively.

OP’s assumptions are not that far off, IMO.

2 Likes
23

You get ~750g of doubly distilled oil per 20lbs of material? That’s pretty good, but not unbelievable either. Must be nice feedstock?

2 Likes
24

Yeah claiming yields doesn’t really mean anything unless you share starting material potency.

It’s could be impressive or it could be awful.

4 Likes
25

Yes, it was typically quite nice and extracted with warm, ca 60 psi, butane. Yielded an extract that could go straight to SPD.

First pass distillate was winterized and redistilled to afford a clear oil.

1 Like
26

Or it might just be an observed average.

27

Okay so what’s your observed average potency of input material?

28

We never checked the input as this was mainly pre-regulation. Typical THC content of the second pass distillate was in the high 80s.

Let’s say 88% and an overall THC molecule recovery of 90%. What does your math tell you about the input?

29

My math would use my yields… not yours which kinda of defeats the purpose.

My input can range from 5% trim up to 20% trim which I account for in my calculator and use to start my equation since I’m testing everything before running.

3 Likes
30

They are starting to do some math over in the smash and grab thread so let’s also try here:

Let’s call the input THC content x%, meaning that 100 kg input contains x kg of THC.

I assumed an overall THC molecule recovery of 90%, meaning that the second pass clear distillate (from 100 kg input) contains 0.9x kg THC. I claimed an 8% (w/w) overall yield, 8 kg in this example, with a THC content of 88%. The second pass distillate obtained from 100 kg thus contains 7.04 kg THC.

0.9x = 7.04 → x = 7.8%

If the assumed molecule recovery was “only” 75%, this would correspond to an input THC content of about 9.4%.

The point I was making was that I didn’t think @Racks was that much off in his initial assumptions.

1 Like