@nomadgt the provided info is great (and necessary), but in order to have any hope of evaluating what’s going on, we also need the chromatogram (1k word substitute). “no crazy big peaks” just isn’t descriptive enough…
ie: if you’re getting 75% delta 9, a mystery peak only has to be 10% of that size to push you over 80% cannabiniods.
does a peak 1/3 of the delta 9 peak count as crazy big? 'cause that would put you at 100% cannabinoids…
It would also be useful to know how/if your crude yields or potency have changed. Which is one reason for having in house analytics.
Most folks give extraction yields in terms of grams extract per 100g Biomass (% by wt yield), which is worthless if you’re trying to figure out what’s going on. Grams cannibinoids (or cannabinoid of choice) per 100g Biomass is more useful. % cannabinoid extraction efficiency (grams cannabinoid out / 100 grams cannabinoids in) is really the number you want.
Yeah now you understand my frustration at analyzing this. It would of course be useful if test labs were able to test for other things like triglycerides, etc. I will probably pursue some R&D with scrubbing to look for further improvements. BTW, the peak to the far right is delta-8 according to the lab. Again, I am attributing that and the CBN to too slow of a heat rate on the front end and it just stewed too long before hitting the main body. I have corrected that faux pas already so that will help as well I think. The unfortunate part about delta-8 is that the State of CO doesn’t recognize it as a part of official total THC results. Hopefully someday they’ll hire someone that knows better.
Here’s another low potency batch we had recently. The lab didn’t know what the peak to the right of delta9/8 was but I’m suspecting delta-10. What do you think?
couldn’t tell you what it was, wish they’ed put a retention time on it. @QGA is correct about the requirements for actually IDing the compound. best current informed guess is the delta-10 isomer. I’m not an analytical chemist so I’m just quoting a video I saw on the internet…
this chromatogram is certainly more like I expected to see the first time.
mystery “peak” doesn’t look like a single species to me.
Running three grams of that compound through a DCVC cycle using a set up like mine (small personal size) would reveal likely the different compounds evolving. It is unlikely you can find anyone that does this but I have found DCVC to be quite revealing in cases like this on a micro scale. I can envision the Q&A staff of larger companies adopting DCVC as a very fast tool for quality assurance.
If you ran this style shown in the link but instead just a few grams it is possible that the resolution and separation is even better than TLC.
You would not believe the number of chromatograms I have analyzed over the years. It was double duty running the dual column dual ECD’s for halogenated herbicides, pesticides and pcb’s.
