I have a couple of theories I’d like all of your opinions on. It’s a bit of a read.
I have been deliberating on different methods for re-dissolving extracts for remediation or re-crystallization and have thought up a couple of alternate options that could potentially work, while also preventing the need to use extraction machine time to do so. It’s a bit of a read so buckle up.
The Problem
The largest issue with using extractor evaporation columns to dissolve extract is that once you’ve added the extract and solvent to the column, there is no way to agitate or break apart the extract in order to expose more surface area to the solvent to speed up the dissolution process (Sounds like you guys bubble vapor through the solution to agitate slightly). Having a sphere or pancake of extract in the bottom of the column means you have what is essentially the smallest surface area to volume ratio possible in physics (a sphere) of extract exposed to solvent. If we can break that up into multiple spheres/chunks, you begin to exponentially increase the surface area of extract exposed to the solvent, therefore exponentially decreasing the time it will take to dissolve.
Beyond increasing surface area, the only other way to speed up the dissolution of the extract in the solvent in a static container is to heat up the solvent therefore increasing its solubility, and because we are using Propane/Butane which already have very low evaporation points, that means we would need to reach some pretty high pressures in our columns in order to warm the solvent up enough to positively impact the solubility of the extract. Because we are limited to our blow off valves on the evaporation columns, we would likely not be able to get the solvent above 70 degrees Fahrenheit before we reached the blow off limitations of our columns. This means heating is also not a practical solution to reducing dissolution times within an extractor.
Option 1 - Physical Agitation
This method is purely speculative and I have not tried it but also would be essentially a negligible cost to attempt.
We have a small 5 gallon stainless steel solvent tank with a removable lid and a rounded bottom that is currently not in use. We could purchase an explosion proof Drum Rotator with an adaptor for 5 gallon buckets that would work nicely to safely and continually agitate the tank and vastly increase dissolution speed. Additionally, we could purchase 2-3 stainless steel 3" diameter ball bearings and place them inside the tank with the extract to further increase dissolution speed and agitation.
Once dissolved, we could pass the solvent and extract solution through a CRC column to remediate, and then recover the solvent in our extraction system under normal operating conditions. We could also do the same if the goal is re-crystallization instead of remediation.
Pros:
- Cheap to perform a proof of concept
- Reduce loss of extraction machine time
Cons:
- Relatively expensive to implement on a commercially viable scale
- Need a space for the drum rotator, not sure if it would need to be inside the C1D1
- Would still need to utilize some extraction machine time for the solvent recovery
Option 2 - Alternative Solvent (Pentane)
Pentane is a hydrocarbon like Propane and Butane, however it has a much higher evaporation temperature, and will remain a liquid at room temperature due to that fact. This makes it much easier to heat up in order to increase temperature and therefore solubility, because the pressures required to reach higher temperatures are much lower than would occur with Butane or Propane. This means we could potentially fill a small 5 gallon tank with extract and pentane, then using a 5 Gallon Bucket heating blanket, we could warm the tank to the point where the extract would dissolve much more readily into the pentane (around 100F), and potentially even without any agitation. Then we could pass the pentane and extract solution through a CRC column using nitrogen for head pressure into a second tank. We could then utilize a rotary evaporator to recover most of the solvent, leaving only enough solvent in the solution to perform the super-saturation crystallization process in our vacuum ovens if that is the desired outcome.
Pros
- Also cheap to do a trial run, just need a tank heating jacket and some pentane
- Eliminate any need for extraction machine time
Cons
- Would need to use rotary evaporator to recover solvents
- Would likely result in a higher loss of terpene content versus above method due to higher evaporation temperatures necessary for the solvent recovery process (Not a concern for THCa isolate)
Option 3 - Combine the above two methods
Assuming both methods show positive results, one could ultimately combine the pentane dissolution and heating with a physical agitation to decrease the dissolution time significantly. By heating a pentane and extract filled tank with a tank jacket then removing the jacket and placing the hot tank on a roller, you could potentially see very low dissolution times compared with using either of the above two methods on their own. This would also isolate the process from the extraction machine, maximizing our ability to produce in the meantime.
Also, both methods may be better for one thing or another. For example if keeping terpene content intact is a large concern, it may be best to use Propane/Butane for the process. If large diamonds is the goal and terpenes are not a factor, utilizing pentane may be the best solution. It’s possible that these variables could be only applied to specific products based on the desired end result.
What are your thoughts on these two methods compared to some of the methods you’ve provided? Do you think they have any advantages or disadvantages or just flat out wouldn’t work at all? Looking forward to your replies.
gotta get it hot mane. I don’t ever see over 50 psi