I’m not sure who the deleted profile is I think that’s either wc15 or columbo but both deleted profiles have said it in two seperate threads in detail as well. (You can tell difference in their writings & postings)
I know squig does not claim that. But he is one the most highly respected minds in this forum as well. Him & I used to talk almost everyday.
Azeotropes on Purpose
You might think the formation of azeotropes to be an unalloyed nuisance, but they can be useful. Toluene and water form a minimum-boiling azeotrope (20.2%water; 85°C). If you needed very dry toluene for some reason, all you need to do is distill some of it. The water-toluene azeotrope comes off first, and, well, there goes all the water. It gets removed by azeotropic distillation. The technique can also be used in certain reactions, including the preparation of amides from very high boiling acids and amines (they can even be solids.). You dissolve the reagents in toluene, set up a reflux condenser fitted with a Dean—Stark trap, (Fig. 145) and let the mixture reflux. As the amide forms, water is released and the water is constantly removed by azeotropic distillation with the toluene. The azeotrope cools, condenses, and collects in the Dean – Stark trap. At room temperature, the azeotrope is said to “break,” and the water forms a layer at the bottom of the trap. Measure the amount of water and you have an idea of the extent of the reaction.
Formed azeotrope between toluene and water. Boiled the azeotrope off. Water gone.
== “azeotroped”?!?
Meh.
Lol do I get a break now cause it’s literally in your quote?
If the op hasn’t ran a azeotrope during the distillation then he will definitely have it in there. & while doing a azeotrope of oil we trim you typically see azulene, so therefore it would be present by association of moisture/water.
So now they “run” an azeotrope?
Please stop. You may have the right stick this time. You’re not using it correctly. Continuing to wave it about isn’t helping
One quick more nit-picky thing before we go back to the topic at hand
Why do you think that the formation of azulene relates to moisture content? Genuinely curious because I have not heard of this before. In fact the only time azulene + water have been mentioned in the same context in this thread have been posts made by @Cheebachiefextracts
Please do tell (legit being serious)
It’s been quoted by many members like I said.
Go to that quote and read the comments following. He is getting the same reaction from that comment, as you are. You don’t know what humble is do you?
That’s not the only post of it or deleted profile on here.
I’ve already admitted to learning the proper term from others & yourself in here. Are you really going to keep this dragging along now?
Back on topic: @Sativasfied, are you seriously doing fractional distillation and not taking fractions?
No heads? No Tails?
Just that which boils & that which don’t?
Do you use a thermometer in your head? Vapor temps over which you’re collecting?!?
You keep defending you being wrong, just trying to correct you. You getting up in your feels about being wrong, is your problem. No matter how it’s said to you, you think you’re being attacked. Just accept the “L”.
Following comment. Just because someone else has said it, doesn’t mean that it is correct. Seeing as, they were corrected immediately after, just like you were.
Here’s one by photon, it does not use the word in not gonna use anymore as it’s not PC, but it doesn’t explain the same as what I was but more in depth.
Especially since this is a single flask run. @Dred_pirate
See where the dots connect, water soluble compounds meaning terpenes, fats, lipids, ( the last two only to an extent) but while under heat & then going well above azulene fraction of off, if not done through azeotrope distillation of removing the moisture content by forming a azeotrope then it would be in the contents of that flask.
There’s also a difference in correcting someone & calling then a “fucking retard” as you guys want to put it.
OP was replying I’m afraid he’s gone now lol
Yeah @Sativasfied sorry your thread got derailed a bit. Moral of the story, your distillate is gonna look like cloudy ass most of the time if you aren’t fractioning the distillate as it boils.
During distillation, not everything that boils is something you want in your end product, hence people talking about “heads” and “tails”. These are usually fractions that are taken separately from the “mains” (aka your good, usable first pass product) because they contain terpenes and other components that have been, in colloquial terms, fucked up by the high temperature and vacuum of the distillation process. You want to separate these undesirable compounds from your THC, and then combine and rerun similar fractions later to further strip any remaining cannabinoids.
Once you have run a pass on the heads material and tails material, the heads and tails from THOSE runs can usually be tossed, assuming your took your fractions properly as the amount of remaining cannabinoids won’t be worth the time and effort to distill.
If you are running nice fresh frozen live resin, you should consider pouring off your terp fraction ahead of time (or remove it via vacuum oven and cold trap), then distilling the remaining cannabinoids. Take your fresh terps, add to your distillate, and you have a product that is 100x better than distilling an entire live resin run terps and all into one flask. I’m guessing those balls don’t smell good like the live resin does?
Sorry if you knew all this already!
The cherries strain probably came out clearer because the live resin you put into the distillation flask had less terps and non-cannabinoid contaminants than other strains.
Terps are typically stripped from oil before it is distilled.
it was my fault all along
loving it 
btw @Cheebachiefextracts neither does arguing that you are correct make you so.
might a fucking retard have earned the title somehow?
Never argued I was correct. All I did was explain what was meant & for not knowing a word wasn’t a word. I love how I can have all this name calling Happen to me for no reason at all & nothing be done about it.
of course, of course… FOR NO REASON AT ALL
Probably the vaccine.