We would need multiple sets of tests and retain samples if we pulled multiple batches within the lot
Is your post processing in-house? If so, I don’t see any reason why you can’t split and re-combine internally. We do it all the time, and we’re under the same regs you are.
So long as all of the biomass is the same, and it all went through the same equipment, and the same processes, and the same same same same… It’s all the same batch if you want it to be.
We choose to split our batches on a daily basis, because it reduces our risk, even though we could run the same biomass for months.
3 Likes
we seperated by the day, all the way down to daily batch records and daily line clearances. drowning in paperwork. Worked diligently with QA to reduce that, the compromise was weekly batch records within the same lot. at the end of the lot it all gets homogenized, sampled and primary packaged.
1 Like
Our GD1 would take care of large batch homogenization. We frequently put 300-500 or more lbs of bio worth of extract in it before drain with our bigger extraction systems. Is a wiper for maximum efficiency and recovery rate. Canada has some pretty strict rules from what I have seen.
3 Likes
Is precision still not giving you enough solvent?
Ah…. Yeah, on the PX1, there was only one column…they didn’t give you enough solvent to get the job done….in the case of the X40 you do have enough solvent, you just need to runs differently.
Ideally you’re testing your input, output & yield and doing the math (mass balance) to find out where every gram of your cannabinoids are going. That’s why in house analytics should come early not late.
@thesk8nmidget mentions, you can approximate “what did I leave behind” simply by going again…pour, leave the cannabis IN the tube, and extract it again. Was it worth it? Then go again again.
However, with your rig I’d start by throwing all your solvent through a single column. Then compare that to 1,2,3 soaks and a flush…for fresh frozen you can probably run pairs. I really like percolation. Requires bottom fill and on column recovery.
Once you’ve got your extraction efficiency over 80% you can start working on your timings. Instead of looking to gain a four column “run” per shift, you can now optimize to get “one more column” (or pair)…then back to chasing down those cannabinoids…
You’ve certainly got the right of it by looking at extraction efficiency (% total available cannabinoids that ended up in the jar).
At 35% efficient, the hash rosin guys might have you beat…hard to tell, they don’t seem do that math…@ThePhilosopherStoned?
8 Likes
Calculating the efficiency on rosin is for masochists.
6 Likes
I didnt realize OP was running 4 columns, I would absolutely recommend starting with a single column to do your optimization on and then after dialing it in start bringing more columns into the picture…
ALWAYS remove as many variables as you can when building methods and slowly add in variables to figure out what is affecting the process.
11 Likes
Hey hey @cyclopath are you curious about the extraction efficiency of our target cannabinoids/compounds with ice water washing (bio to bubble) and rosin pressing (bubble to rosin)?
1 Like
Yes Sir.
I reckon you can beat 35% easy…just curious by how much.
From bio to jar. curious where the bar should be.
Figure you might actually have data and might even have looked at it.
You don’t have to share with the whole class…
1 Like
Strongly agree with this guy, I am surprised you are getting as high of an efficiency as you are with such a low gas ratio. With a higher ratio soak time is unnecessary.
Another trick if you have an extra collection pot, run 6:1 or 8:1 with cold solvent, then run some warm solvent over into the extra pot, you will get some crude quality oil out and extraction efficiency will near 100%. Plus your solvent recovery % will go up and spent material will come out faster and considerably drier.
4 Likes
I also wanna clarify that the COA you receive could very well not represent the entire batch accurately. A spent biomass test would help clarify this but i’d really take a biomass COA with a grain of salt unless you took the sample and have vetted out the lab that is testing it.
6 Likes
Yes i totally agree. That is why i just took my own samples today and am sending them to the lab that we use all the time. the people we got the biomass from have pulled a couple slightly shady moves already since i started dealing with them (not giving us dry coa’s only wet, because the dry ones popped hot for pesticides) so i don’t trust there COAs at all at this point. I’m fairly certain that the sample i pulled will be quite a bit lower than TAC than what i was told.
I doubled extraction yields on an ETS MeP 30 by double soaking…but only on certain material.
It’s all about what you’re feeding the system, what temps you’re running and how long you’re soaking.
14 Likes
To double soak do you just flood, stall, flush, and stall again before pushing with nitrogen to clear the tubes? Going to have to try this on crude runs.
1 Like
Do you mean the orelap is a joke? Lol
3/8 solvent to biomass ratio is key. If youre running 60/40 B/P youre gonna wanna inject colder than -60c because by the time it reaches your filtration column your solution is probably around -40c and the propane will be gaseous and butane nearly there as well. Your cannabinoids will be left behind if this is the case. 70B/30P works best for filtration at -60c.
That’s assuming atmospheric pressure, which is rarely where people are at. Usually people are above atmospheric pressure.
6 Likes
I didn’t double anything, but I also noticed a significantly increased yield doing another soak on the same machine
I don’t know how Phil did it, but that’s how I double soaked
1 Like
did you pour between soaks?
did you go a third time?
if you don’t have analytics the above is the fastest way to see what you’re leaving behind and figure out where to call it “good enough” and move on to the next tube.
1 Like