Mod Edit: This thread went a little sideways - I removed a bunch of posts by both myself and @ghettoyellow that had 0 scientific contribution.
The post was deleted by the OP himself. He claims the results are still up on his IG account “thehealingarmchairchemist” - which is private. Please DM him on IG for pricing.
What does your distillate look like before dissolving in heptane? Also, what is the source of your heptane and the purity of the heptane?
EDIT/Update: Also, are you using heptane recycled from your rotovap?
I haven’t sold anything to anyone so you can relax with that pricing BS.
No. Heptanes
Please give me links. I understand what you are annoyed about. Pulling your posts is not the answer.
As for Magsil Column, how does it ruin your extract? I use it primarily for Myclo remediation and removal of some of the red’d and blues (purple). I also add it to my dist tank at 5 grams per kilo. Gets me very clear.
Do you use any Fuller Earths in your distillation tank?
You use carbon and CBleach in your distillation tank? I have not tried that. What do you think it does in there? I have seen positive results from adding Magsil to my distillation tank. I would love to know the effect of adding carbon and CBleach to the distillation tank. How many grams of each per kilo of distillate?
Thanks!
@garhundel Apologies for the length of the reply but I tend to write replies for folks that might stumble onto them nad not know the whole thread.
No Cbleach use for me at all. I honestly do not know what it is. (I only use stuff from American trees. No carbon made from Chinese trees for me. No way. Plus I use only organic food grade carbon. Never the inorganic no food carbon…
)
Let me frame this in a microstate format.
I put carbon powder into my boil because as a general rule of thumb carbon has been used in chemistry for a long time to remove coloring agent by absorption pretty well. The reason I put it into the boil is that carbon also absorbs cannabinoids very well. My reasoning in doing this is that at the final boil for me the only thing left besides cannabinoid are higher boiling compounds which I wish to seperate. I boil my sublimator dry as a rule unlike a regular distillation. So the contamination for me really like most folks comes near the end of the run while the fractions tend to overlap. If both compounds in this scenario are locked into fine ground carbon powder then evaporation should favor greatly the lower boiling compound first. When the THC turns into gas it will remove the heat from that particular carbon partical owing to the fact that heat has been removed from it when the cannabinoid evaporated. Evaporation is an endothermic reaction always taking heat energy with it and store it in the gas. Some folks term this process enthralpy and the gas carries with it the latent heat of evaporation.
This is what heats of course the uptake tube and such in a SPD but in a sublimator the latent heat of evaporation is transfered completely to the cold finger. This can in fact introduce problems itself but that is a different post. In a SPD the latent heat of evaporation is core to the concept of a vertical distillation column. In a cryogenic sublimator that same thing works against the process as I use it and the heat is only a byproduct to be removed for me. With carbon powder though the theory is that the endothermic reaction at the particle will insta-cool the particle enough to prevent the higher boiling compounds also trapped in the carbon matrix from reaching their own evaporation energy potential so stay as a liquid trapped in a carbon matrix.
Now, whether or not all that flowery BS I just typed in is actually the way it goes down? Who is to say, but my lab this month did prove out out at least one fact to me: it did not hurt the process or impede it in any way I could detect and maybe just by coincidence (and maybe not) this month my water clear dab is simply not turning red as it typically does in and out of the vac chamber to dab.
A second side benefit for me is that I boil dry from a flat bottom sublimator. The bottom actually has a concave surface inside that give stir bars grief. A small amount of carbon dust tends to create then a flattened surface as the liquid recedes during the boil, collecting around the outer rim. The stir bar ran noticeable smoother near dry when most of the stir bar problems come into play for me.
I used a metal butter knife to pull out a bit just by estimation. Maybe a teaspoon. It would take a sharp eye but that compound still contains green from even the second pass. My main target was the green with this idea. Who knows what else it absorbs.
As an afterthought to my other response check out the two photos below. The huge molecule is chlorophyll a. The little one is D9 THC. It is easy for me to envision why the THC could evaporate first and even be able to enter and leave a carbon matrix without getting stuck easier than chlorophyll. Larger molecules need more energy to wiggle fast enough to become a gas simply because there is more stuff to wiggle lolz plus the chlorophyll just looks like it gets stuck easy. 
Chlorophyll a
@beaker have you been testing any samples of your product? I would love to see an analysis of purity if you are willing to share. My apologies if I missed that information in a different post.
nothing particularly formal for testing. I am not against it at all but it is not really relevent for me personally except as curiousity. I will likley get around to it. I have gotten a lot of internet offers now lolz from folks with that kind of gear hehe but I simply am not able to work irregardless of the enticement hehe.
(do you growers seriously offer a 60% cut to guys like me on hundreds of pounds just to show you stuff??? No lifting of bales or nothing??? Incredible. how do you profit? - don’t answer lolz)
All that being your truth, get over it. You are missing out on a lot of interesting stuff because some jackass offended you. Keep the power. Let the shit go
That’s a great idea using the carbon for color absorption when distilling. You think this would work in a wiped film system?
Nope
Absolutely do not add carbon into the material for a wiped film. Adding it to the flask was the original @Photon_noir water clear Tek, and it works incredibly well at removing color. However, if the carbon powder was acid activated, or is acidic at all, adding it to the boiling flask will cause ∆9-THC to isomerize to ∆8-THC
I’m aware and ok with some isomerization to ∆8-THC. Any other reason not to try this in a wiped film?
grit and wipers don’t mix well is my take. but my WFE is still just a quote in the bosses inbox…
(so many bosses, so little funding…
)
Hmmm. I understand that it’s expensive to pay for testing on small batches. But it does make me wonder on the actual purity you are achieving. Don’t get me wrong, obviously it is high purity stuff because you are basically doing true molecular distillation. But as we all know, looks aren’t a way to judge purity. Do you use charcoal normally in your distillation method? Can you achieve that level of clarity without it using the sublimator?
I’ve run one sample of Beakers material on my SRI GC w/FID. I didn’t have a 3rd party tested distillate to run against it to firm up my numbers, but it looked very clean and came in over 90% delta9. with no mystery peaks.
The problem with testing this compound for me is not economic. It is a pain in the butt I have found to even get labs to respond to an independent private researcher. Understandable of course because it would mean tracking down my grower and having him submit along with his stuff. It is hassle oriented.
But the problem is that then it would be tempting to start chasing numbers for the sole purpose of bragging rights really. By this I mean that the primary reason as a rule that we lab test is that we do not want to test on a human. I test all my own stuff personally and have developed a very fine sense regarding purity and contamination. @cyclopath has seen how little trace volitiles get wiped off of a second or third pass cold finger run. VERY little but they absolutely can be tasted and immediately identified by me because I run this stuff all the time. I can spot that upon inhalation with ease though it is faint.
I guess in that sense I prefer a common senses sort of approach and not lab numbers. I use all my senses is what I mean and frankly on the farm that is what they mean when they say use common sense. It means smell it, taste it, look at it, touch it and listen and then decided what to do. Common sense.
I always touch the tip of my tongue to the compound for a bit. There is ZERO doubt when otherwise clear compound is tainted. Same with smell. The compound also has a particular feel to it when touched. Sticky yes, but not so much wanting to pull off onto the finger when pure. For testing, as in a lab, I use a flame to vaporize in a tube which in my case is how inhale to test and as a portable rig. I listen and if there is any sort of crackling sputtering or popping at all then contaminate is present.
Flavor is trickier in the vape. What I call absolute purity right off the cold finger leaves no doubt of the potency given the effect but moreso is something I can only describe as a “bite” to the vapor taste not present after about a day of storage. I enjoy the sub orbital potency of the fresh and the kick of it but it is not my favorite.
After about three days no matter how I prepare it a very subtle change takes place to the vapor flavor and effect. Just off the finger is nice to do the same way straight shots of whiskey might be fun. However when it gets to be delightful and makes me want to invite folks to share is when it has aged at least a few days under vacuum because then the compound becomes as a vapor to almost have a sweet flavor so long as temps when vaping are held low. The flavor is so specific and so delightful and the relaxed but super potent high at that point that my goal is met really and not lab numbers. Didn’t Ford Prefect sort of make fun of digital numbers (wrist watches) just before the world was destroyed to make room for a new hyperspace bypass?
Cooking it hard with a lighter turns it tart fast but kissing this sweet and just aged compound with the lighter flame just for a second or two will produce a sensation not matched by any other method I have and I have them all. Even the vaporizer will cook it too hard and turn it tart a bit but just a kiss of flame and it is very hard for my common senses to detect other than a pure sweet compound.
Now for the ducking tomatoes part… I would not easily trust the numbers from a single typical lab test unless the lab had a substantial bit of experience and references to work from with compounds approaching this kind of purity whatever that purity might be. Let us say that the compound is a single compound and is THC. What are the odds of a typical lab returning results indicating 100% THC? Or if the compound does have 1% impurity then what did the 1% taste or smell like so I can then “look” for it in the process that way? I see lab equipment in my lab useful but I see outside lab data as questionable owing to my perception that without enough empirical references of very high potency prior to testing then a sample approaching absolute purity might be outside their reference range and they would simply only be able to indicate a “greater than” potency value instead of an absolute number.
Hey man! That tomato almost hit me dude!..
I appreciate your response. It’s interesting that you notice the flavor improves with it sitting out for a few days. I made a highly refined distillate, mixed with “store bought” terpenes, and put it into some test carts. The flavor wasn’t that great, but after the cart had aged for a while at various temperatures it became SUPER smooth hitting with pretty much zero flavor (it was just a tiny dash of terpenes in the first place).
No comment on the lab testing opinions 
