What kind of recycle system are they running it in?
-
As of today ICMag has his own Discord server. In this Discord server you can chat, talk with eachother, listen to music, share stories and pictures...and much more. Join now and let's grow together! Join ICMag Discord here! More details in this thread here: here.
MZ12X IN USE!
- Thread starter dybert
- Start date
What kind of recycle system are they running it in?
treesniper
Member
Skyhigler - I contacted Terpp Extractors via Email and queried about using Dimethyl Ether in ANY of their extraction systems to which i received a short and simple message in return from a lady named Valerie Fog who stated that their systems are ONLY designed for Butane and Propane.... She didn't bother to explain why and i'm not sure if she even knows what Dimethyl Ether is for that matter, as she didn't mention it directly or explain why or why not. It could have been a run of the mill response for all i know. I hope you have better luck with Austin.
Greywolf - I'm not exactly sure which dispensary is using it. Honestly, I had heard about it down the line from a local dispensary here in Rifle, CO where i was dropping some oil samples off to...I was talking about a new way to extract using Dimethyl Ether for a proper hash oil extraction (compared to other types of Butane & CO2 Hash Oil they had available) & much to my surprise, i was then informed that other dispensaries in Colorado were attempting to use Dimethyl Ether now & had started commercially providing product (Hash Oil & edibles) to their patients. When i get a chance to swing by again, i will ask them the name of the dispensary and i will try to move from there in discovering the apparatus they specifically use to process their batches.
Greywolf - I'm not exactly sure which dispensary is using it. Honestly, I had heard about it down the line from a local dispensary here in Rifle, CO where i was dropping some oil samples off to...I was talking about a new way to extract using Dimethyl Ether for a proper hash oil extraction (compared to other types of Butane & CO2 Hash Oil they had available) & much to my surprise, i was then informed that other dispensaries in Colorado were attempting to use Dimethyl Ether now & had started commercially providing product (Hash Oil & edibles) to their patients. When i get a chance to swing by again, i will ask them the name of the dispensary and i will try to move from there in discovering the apparatus they specifically use to process their batches.
With vapor pressure about 74psi @ 68F/20C, and a Bp about -13F/-25C, could you elaborate on why you're thinking it might not "perform well in a Terpenator," but might be ok in a passive CLS?
As for seal compatibility, no matter what the charts say, I'd soak samples of the materials it's going to encounter in system, and see what happens.
I wish Perm would take this on, as I recall he's got low temp CLS extraction down, and that's where I think DME is going to shine.
I put more faith in the seal charts than you appear to brother Sky. I see nothing but FEP, PTFE, and Nitrile that are rated as resistant.
I think the seals would be a problem, which is why I plan to stick to passive recovery using PTFE seals.
http://www.geotechenv.com/Reference_Pages/chemical_compatibility_table.pdf
From Dupont, as dimethyl ether is one of their highly researched products,
"Valve cup and stem gaskets should also be chosen carefully. For mounting cups, polyethylene sleeve gaskets and laminated polypropylene gaskets generally perform very well. Stem gaskets of neoprene or butyl rubber are recommended."
http://www2.dupont.com/Dymel_Propellants/en_US/assets/downloads/h00250_Dymel_A.pdf
Btw, at the same linked page,
"Dymel® A does not form peroxides under conditions normally encountered in the aerosol industry. Dymel® A in the pure state or in formulations formed no detectable peroxide in six months storage tests at 104°F (40°C). Aerosol packages filled with Dymel® A in the pure state or with Dymel® A and compressed air up to 75 psig (5.2 bar) formed no detectable peroxide."
Dupont requires registration to access their compatibility data bases,
http://www.dupont.com/products-and-...cles/elastomer-chemical-resistance-guide.html
Here's a compatibility chart indicating buna, fluorocarbon, Geolast (buna & polypropylene,) polychloroprene (neoprene,) and PTFE are ok, with no info on many others,
http://www.graco.com/content/dam/gr...mpatibility-guide/Graco_ChemCompGuideEN-B.pdf
To be a smart ass, ;-)) did anyone pull the seals of any of the recovery pumps and do testing for breakdown with butane? Since the exact seal composition is unknown the same doubt exists....
Sorry, but it just seems like everyone's giving DME unnecessary derision without even checking it out.
Betcha' a quarter if someone sent a nicely worded DME compatibility inquiry to either Dupont or Oberon you'd get more info than you'll ever need to know,
http://www.oberonfuels.com/about-us/scientific-advisory-board/
Last edited:
Duponts compatibility chart showing only their Perfluoroelastomer with a 1 rating.
They show some other elastomers by others with a 1 rating, which includes Nitrile, a fluorosilicone, HNBR, and surprisingly silicone rubber. Except for possibly Nitrile, I wouldn't expect to see them commonly used as a pump seal, because of the other refrigerants pumped.
From my perspective, nothing short of a 1 rating is suitable for medical products.
No I didn't pull the seals on my recovery pumps and check them for compatibility with simple fully saturated alkanes, because the seals required for the refrigerants it was rated for, are suitable.
You may be right about my being too conservative in my approach, but that isn't going to change.
There is too much at stake, to shoot from the hip and during my half a century developing processes and equipment, I have witnessed some serious fubars, some involving injury and property damage.
But that is just me, and I most certainly don't have all the answers.
Attachments
That chart was of benefit, thanks for taking the time! According to it viton (FKM) is not recommended and neoprene swells, one step above not recommended.
I've been reading here at ICMAG Forums of you guys just recently doing solvent tests on gaskets and to their surprise and dismay finding release of crap when wiped with a towel, but you guys continue extracting with active CLS's without having a definitive bottom line on what is compatible in real life with butane, so this seems a little hypocritical. So imo actual common sense testing of all materials coming into contact with whatever solvent should be done, before saying one solvent is mother's milk and another's the spit of satan. ;-)
Dump samples of all the seals, gaskets, etc. from a CLS system in solvent and make observations, that to me would be science in the public interest.
Sorry to be a smart ass bro. That you guys aren't up in arms about guys open extracting with solvents of unknown purity (bulk supplies) is making me a little testy so to speak, especially when the answers can be found out so simply by taking a little time to do some personal testing.
I'm really trying to watch what I say, I cringe at the thought that anything I post up could be misconstrued to damn BHO.
I've been reading here at ICMAG Forums of you guys just recently doing solvent tests on gaskets and to their surprise and dismay finding release of crap when wiped with a towel, but you guys continue extracting with active CLS's without having a definitive bottom line on what is compatible in real life with butane, so this seems a little hypocritical. So imo actual common sense testing of all materials coming into contact with whatever solvent should be done, before saying one solvent is mother's milk and another's the spit of satan. ;-)
Dump samples of all the seals, gaskets, etc. from a CLS system in solvent and make observations, that to me would be science in the public interest.
Sorry to be a smart ass bro. That you guys aren't up in arms about guys open extracting with solvents of unknown purity (bulk supplies) is making me a little testy so to speak, especially when the answers can be found out so simply by taking a little time to do some personal testing.
I'm really trying to watch what I say, I cringe at the thought that anything I post up could be misconstrued to damn BHO.
Last edited:
treesniper
Member
Do you still recommend the CPS brand "TR21" as your recovery pump Greywolf? Or do you recommend the TRS21? I was over on skunk pharm researching different pumps and posts you have replied to and many times i see you refer to the TR21... and after researching, it appears that there is both a TR and a TRS version (the TRS is 2x the cost) thought they both are oil less etc. Any information you could give me would be most helpful.
treesniper
Member
Greywolf has been down the vac pump road a lot longer than myself lol. I am more of an open blaster all glass extraction (thats why i'm using DME) and I'm not really keen on using machines and parts that are not rated for what i'm attempting. However, if i was to use a pump, i would want one that is rated for RE170 (dimethyl ether) and i'm having a tough time finding any sources online or manuals from the majority of vac pumps out there that will actually specify RE170 in its ratings.
Do you still recommend the CPS brand "TR21" as your recovery pump Greywolf? Or do you recommend the TRS21? I was over on skunk pharm researching different pumps and posts you have replied to and many times i see you refer to the TR21... and after researching, it appears that there is both a TR and a TRS version (the TRS is 2x the cost) thought they both are oil less etc. Any information you could give me would be most helpful.
We've had good success with the TR-21, but less so with the TRS-21. Joe went through four of them in a couple weeks, and another client just returned their four to Sub Zero, who replaced them.
It was relayed to me, that they were factory assembled with improper seals, which CPS will address.
Brother Sky! To be more direct, anyone, including yourself can "take a little time to do some personal testing."
The supplier could also do diligence, or hire an engineering firm to do so for him, and share that data with us.
I have already committed to assembling a suitable passive system, which I have done save picking up a suitable hose.
I have no intention of taking apart a pump and soaking all of its seals in DME. There is also no way I will run it through a pump that I haven't identified as using seals that currently published engineering data says are suitable for DME.
Unless you have the DME analyzed afterwards, a simple soak test won't tell you what is being leached.
Since you have given it such a high priority, I encourage you to fly to it and share the results. When I fit the passive recovery into our seriously overburdened schedule, I will share those results as well.
For what its worth, you aren't coming across as anti BHO, but are far less conservative than I on this matter and pushing hard to a stone wall in my case.
SquattingBull
Member
I may be coming late to the party but all set aside what is it that folks are hoping to achieve with DME? I am all about new processes but there are reasons that butane has remained king thus far. Those facts circling around the fact that butane is effective at extraction yet removed with relative ease, and that can be deemed safe to our knowledge based on the data we currently have. I am certainly unopposed to changing solvent camps if the data arises but I feel alot of "alternative solvent" pushes are based on fads and not science.... Trying to provide something "different" to the consumer and not (in any scientific sense) actually pushing to create a better/safer product. Just because we dont know a lot about these solvents doesn't mean that they are safe, it just means we dont know. Those are just my thoughts on the matter but would love to hear some actual results of folks that have chosen to test it.
treesniper
Member
The "Push" for alternative solvents isn't new, we should all be looking for the cleanest most efficient way to extract. Butane is illegal to use for extracting, here in CO they are attempting to passing bills as we speak that classify master cases of butane as a precursor to create illegal federally scheduled hash oil, also, there is not a "food grade" butane that im aware of, and butane is known to be toxic and harmful to the brain and CNS...Regarding DME, it isn't just advertisement or fad, its a federally scheduled food grade extraction solvent, its relatively non toxic, and IMO its better than butane at rapidly extracting terpenes and cannabinoids with less hassle to remove... I'll gladly contribute any information i can about it with my experience, and im glad to learn from others who are much wiser in the fields of organic chemistry etc. Thanks for everyones hard work on this sticky subject. lol
treesniper
Member
There are also numerous (now expired) lab tests from analytical 360 that have tested Dimethyl Ether Hash Oil and found it to be VERY clean & also word on the streets that it is being used commercially on the front range in CO as well.
Neither butane or DME is toxic in themselves even when combusted, the health warnings for both of them are due to the danger of asphyxiation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butane#Effects_and_health_issues
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyl_ether#Safety
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Butane#Effects_and_health_issues
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dimethyl_ether#Safety
Do you have information on what recovery system they are using commercially
treesniper
Member
A thousand pardons, You are correct, i was thinking about the "mercaptans". Still, butane is being thrown under the bus right now and becoming more illegal by the day.
GratefulOne
Member
These solvents are used everyday to create food ingredients. Those industries have to follow the proper regulations and safety procedures. It would be helpful if everyone would start treating extracting THC with the same concern and regulations all other extracting industries use. In those industries no one is going crazy with misinformation.
The regulations applied to the non-THC extractors are the only ones we need. Don't let politicians demonize things for their personal gain. Demand that we already have a system in place with all the regulations we need.
Non-commercial production may not fall under the current regulations depending on state. Non-commercial should be allowed if they meet the same safety standards industry is held to. This might be the only "new" regulation we need.
The regulations applied to the non-THC extractors are the only ones we need. Don't let politicians demonize things for their personal gain. Demand that we already have a system in place with all the regulations we need.
Non-commercial production may not fall under the current regulations depending on state. Non-commercial should be allowed if they meet the same safety standards industry is held to. This might be the only "new" regulation we need.
"SCIENTIFIC OPINION
Safety in use of dimethyl ether as an extraction solvent"
http://static1.squarespace.com/stat...2985880/SCIENTIFIC+OPINION+dimethyl+ether.pdf
http://static1.squarespace.com/stat...76e7/1408802214704/Approval+Report+for+DE.pdf
Huge potential market for DME if I'm understanding things correctly.
