Steam Distilled NETs?

[l337acc]

Wow, I wish i knew about producing NETs a few years ago. I've mainly done the heat maceration method in a crock pot with some success, but holy-gunk-a-molly no matter how many times I filter my concentrate it makes vaping it a real pain. My understanding is that the PGA method is better for atomizers, which I admittedly have yet to try simply because 190 proof everclear has to be ordered out of state. From reading the cold maceration thread, it doesn't appear that its much better on the atties either, which makes me sad. But then again I don't really want to wait 4-6 weeks before I can start vaping and experimenting with flavors. So yeah, I'm impatient too.

One post that caught my eye was from billherbst, where he mentions that some vendors use a steam distillation process for their tobacco flavors and I was hoping that I could get more info. From my understanding, steam distillation creates an essential oil, and vaping essential oils is not only bad for your atties but also bad for your health?

Has anyone tried this? What are the results? Are we stuck with PGA and cold/heat macerations? Is there no salvation?!

Edited to add:

I'm also aware of the thread on steam distillation, however that really didn't answer the questions I have. Hopefully this can be a discussion that produces more idea's on how to make NET flavors than the generally accepted methods. What else can we do? Is it possible to use steam distillation on the PG macerations?

 

[Str8vision]

Both steam distillation and critical CO2 extraction methods produce essential oils from the tobacco. The essential oil is then further processed using some solvent to make it usable/mixable but there wasn't much information available concerning that step, which is of course crucial. I've not extracted tobacco using either of those methods so can't elaborate further than that. I've studied both and can say the steam distillation method would be the least expensive and safest method for home extractors to try. I've sampled NET produced by both methods and found both just as hard on wicks and coils as well filtered NET produced by our simple soak methods. I did like "certain" flavor notes associated with both steam distillation and critical CO2 extraction methods but overall, still prefer the flavor of simple soak NET. Blending extracts made from steam distillation and simple soak methods might yield a flavorful combination.

PGA does produce a cleaner extract but it also renders oil from the tobacco that "should" be dealt with prior to using. After a period of time, the oils will separate and form globules and are then easy to remove. While PGA produces a cleaner extract it does not produce the same flavor profile as PG and or VG extractions. It produces higher, brighter notes but fails to deliver the deeper, darker flavor that PG and VG does. By the same token, PG and VG extractions (cold and or heat assisted), do not produce the higher, brighter flavor notes. Which method(s) are best depends on each individual's flavor preference. I currently employ a hybrid method that uses both PGA and PG solvents in separate steps, one that's processed at room temperature and one that's heat assisted, to produce a single, condensed, broad flavor spectrum extract that's custom tuned to my personal flavor preference.

Filtering is important and has a direct impact on cleanliness and performance. For the final stage of filtering I personally wouldn't use anything less than a 2.5 micron absolute rated filter. I currently use 1 micron glass filters but see only marginal improvement over the MUCH cheaper 2 micron cellulose filters.

 

[l337acc]

Thank you for the reply Str8vision. This information is what I'm looking for, and I was going to bring up CO2 extraction but I guess that just leaves us with the same oils as steam distillation. A week ago I was reading on these forums of someone saying that the main culprit for gunking is because of the sugars in the juice, and removing the sugars (if there's a way to de-sugar the solution) will also remove the flavor. A shame, really.

One thing that I haven't tried yet is a 2.5 micron filter and I've seen you mention it several times, so maybe it's time I do that. Perhaps I can insert it into an Aeropress to speed up the filtering, but something tells me that it will just force particulates through.

What do you think would happen if you tried steam distilling the PG/VG solution after extraction?

 

[Str8vision]

I've only seen shredded tobacco distilled using steam from purified water as the "solvent", not sure if you can distill PG or VG due to their high boiling point. At those temperatures, the extracted tobacco flavor they contain might scorch/burn or be degraded. I'm just guessing out loud, don't really know. No doubt the borosilicate glass equipment/apparatus I've seen used would be inadequate for the task.

We wash casing flavors from the tobacco we extract and I'm certain some sugar (sucrose), is present. We ran experiments some time ago and found that PG, VG nor PGA dissolves/absorbs granulated sucrose (table sugar), so I was "hoping" any sugar particles washed into our extracts could be filtered out. Filtering does help to reduce gunking and increases performance/flavor but only up to a certain point, somewhere around 2 microns. Higher levels of filtration (1 micron), didn't seem to provide much of an improvement over the 2 micron filtering, but I plan on experimenting with sub-micron (0.5 - 0.7), filtration anyway.

You don't have to worry about pushing particulates through as most filter paper is vacuum rated, the absolute filters won't allow anything at or above their retention rating through unless they rupture. Nominally rated filters will. I don't know about using an Aeropress to assist with 2 micron filtering, seems like you would have to maintain the "push" or pressure for some time. Using/attaching a 5lb weight on the plunger might be advantageous.

 

[l337acc]

That last statement made me laugh out loud. Just as you were mentioning maintaining pressure I was picturing in my head resting a Power Block on the plunger with a big fat grin on my face. I didn't even consider that the boiling point of PG is higher, and that should indeed put a monkey wrench into that theory. Perhaps living at higher altitude would be beneficial, but at 3500 ft I don't think I have much of an advantage. Perhaps going into space would work, though I doubt NASA is willing to take a few bottles of tobacco concentrate with them. Seems like I'm running out of options.

 

[Str8vision]

....................Just as you were mentioning maintaining pressure I was picturing in my head resting a Power Block on the plunger with a big fat grin on my face.......................

Now that's what I call "using your head"......

 

[Str8vision]

I didn't even consider that the boiling point of PG is higher, and that should indeed put a monkey wrench into that theory. Perhaps living at higher altitude would be beneficial, but at 3500 ft I don't think I have much of an advantage. Perhaps going into space would work, though I doubt NASA is willing to take a few bottles of tobacco concentrate with them. Seems like I'm running out of options.

Using the physical properties found in space may be a bit beyond our reach but recreating those conditions might not be. What if the distillation process was performed in a vacuum chamber? Even when using purified water, under a low to moderate vacuum the boiling point would be lowered significantly reducing processing temperatures and perhaps enhancing/preserving flavor. The condensing portion of the apparatus/process would likely need normal atmospheric pressure to function properly but I don't think that would be technically difficult to achieve. I wonder if the boiling point of PG would alter under vacuum? Just a thought.

 

[Bunnykiller]

hmmmm need to give the vacuum pump a try on my PGA extracts.... could be interesting

 

[l337acc]

Using the physical properties found in space may be a bit beyond our reach but recreating those conditions might not be. What if the distillation process was performed in a vacuum chamber? Even when using purified water, under a low to moderate vacuum the boiling point would be lowered significantly reducing processing temperatures and perhaps enhancing/preserving flavor. The condensing portion of the apparatus/process would likely need normal atmospheric pressure to function properly but I don't think that would be technically difficult to achieve. I wonder if the boiling point of PG would alter under vacuum? Just a thought.

Now THATS using YOUR head

It's an interesting thought, but unfortunately out of the scope of my knowledge. For those that are capable of trying it out I would love to hear about the results. Maybe there is a better, cleaner way, after all

 

[Str8vision]

hmmmm need to give the vacuum pump a try on my PGA extracts.... could be interesting

If you do, relay your observations, inquiring minds and such......

 

[Bunnykiller]

If you do, relay your observations, inquiring minds and such......

will post results.... planning on picking up either MacClellands 3 cherry or some rum cured light burley cavendish mix ( if I can find it)

 

[dodari]

Both steam distillation and critical CO2 extraction methods produce essential oils from the tobacco. The essential oil is then further processed using some solvent to make it usable/mixable but there wasn't much information available concerning that step, which is of course crucial. I've not extracted tobacco using either of those methods so can't elaborate further than that. I've studied both and can say the steam distillation method would be the least expensive and safest method for home extractors to try. I've sampled NET produced by both methods and found both just as hard on wicks and coils as well filtered NET produced by our simple soak methods. I did like "certain" flavor notes associated with both steam distillation and critical CO2 extraction methods but overall, still prefer the flavor of simple soak NET. Blending extracts made from steam distillation and simple soak methods might yield a flavorful combination.

PGA does produce a cleaner extract but it also renders oil from the tobacco that "should" be dealt with prior to using. After a period of time, the oils will separate and form globules and are then easy to remove. While PGA produces a cleaner extract it does not produce the same flavor profile as PG and or VG extractions. It produces higher, brighter notes but fails to deliver the deeper, darker flavor that PG and VG does. By the same token, PG and VG extractions (cold and or heat assisted), do not produce the higher, brighter flavor notes. Which method(s) are best depends on each individual's flavor preference. I currently employ a hybrid method that uses both PGA and PG solvents in separate steps, one that's processed at room temperature and one that's heat assisted, to produce a single, condensed, broad flavor spectrum extract that's custom tuned to my personal flavor preference.

Filtering is important and has a direct impact on cleanliness and performance. For the final stage of filtering I personally wouldn't use anything less than a 2.5 micron absolute rated filter. I currently use 1 micron glass filters but see only marginal improvement over the MUCH cheaper 2 micron cellulose filters.

Str8vision, would you kindly tell me where get the underlined filter materials from and what diameter you use, please. I am wanting to purchase the properly sized vacuum flask, Buchner Funnel and a vacuum device to filter my first try at extracting pipe tobaccos. I've put them through a coffee filter and they taste and vape very good but they gunk up coils like crazy.

Thank you for your help.

Harry

 

[Str8vision]

Str8vision, would you kindly tell me where get the underlined filter materials from and what diameter you use, please. I am wanting to purchase the properly sized vacuum flask, Buchner Funnel and a vacuum device to filter my first try at extracting pipe tobaccos. I've put them through a coffee filter and they taste and vape very good but they gunk up coils like crazy.

Thank you for your help.

Harry

Yes, coffee filters alone (25+ micron), will yield a coil killing extract. Cotton balls in a syringe are a little better (~15 microns), but not by much. Many people are happy with re-usable 5 micron filter felt, but it's still pretty gunky and being "nominally" rated doesn't actually filter at it's retention rating. 2 - 3 micron filter paper yields a pretty clean extract and while your coil won't load up as fast your wick will still falter after a tank or so.

The proper filter diameter depends on how you will be filtering. If using a funnel (gravity filtering), I would get 11cm or larger diameter and pleat fold the filter into a cone shape. Gravity filtering works for 2.5 micron and higher but takes many hours for the PG to drip through. If you're not in a hurry, gravity filtering is an inexpensive way to get great results. 2 micron and higher levels of filtration are better achieved using vacuum equipment. Buchner funnels come in different sizes with each size requiring a specific diameter filter, you would need to acquire/use the size required for the unit you buy. I custom built a vacuum filter holder to fit (seal), inside the mouth of half pint canning jars, it uses 5.5cm filters. I get all my filters from Amazon, here are links to the filters I currently use; https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B006H8RQYM/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o07_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 (2 micron cellulose 5.5cm)
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00394FBXU/ref=oh_aui_detailpage_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1 (1 micron glass 5.5cm)

Note that the 1 micron glass filters are currently over $1 each when purchased in quantities of 100, I bought them on sale for $ 0.26 each a month ago. I certainly wouldn't pay the current price. The 2 micron 5.5cm cellulose filters are $0.06 each and work just fine. Each time I buy filters I search for the best buy as prices seem to fluctuate on many of them. I'm currently looking for sub-micron glass filters but haven't found them at a price I'd be willing to pay, could take months but I've got the time.

Adequate filtering certainly helps to reduce gunking but only to a point. 1 micron filtration is only marginally cleaner than 2 micron when it comes to reduced gunking. I don't expect sub-micron filtration will prove much better but intend to experiment with it anyway. There are "other" ways to reduce the coil/wick problems associated with vaping NET which involve the extraction process itself, I plan on posting a thread which addresses this sometime in the near future.

 

[l337acc]

So I finally got my 2.5 micron filters and made a batch. Something strange though. After folding it up into a cone and pouring my concentrate in, the filter acts more like a wick. Maybe one drop will pass through per hour, but the rest seems to be absorbed by the filter. This is after filtering through the Aeropress for the initial pass.

 

[Str8vision]

So I finally got my 2.5 micron filters and made a batch. Something strange though. After folding it up into a cone and pouring my concentrate in, the filter acts more like a wick. Maybe one drop will pass through per hour, but the rest seems to be absorbed by the filter. This is after filtering through the Aeropress for the initial pass.

PG solvent? Gravity filtering at room temperature can take many hours, even a day. I've only had a few extractions that gave me trouble when gravity filtering. The first was due to my forgetting the intermediate filtering step, went straight from a coffee filter to the 2 micron filter paper and it loaded/clogged up pretty quick. The second time I had trouble was due to the ambient temperature being too cold (<60F), moving everything to a warmer environment solved the problem, the warmer the better.

I lose extract through each step of the filtering process due to absorption. Coffee filter, filter felt and lab paper all soak up solvent that isn't recovered. I figure the loss at around 5 - 10% of the total volume even with using 5.5cm diameter filters. Folded filters (much like a coffee filter), tend to be larger in diameter and therefore have a greater surface area to soak up solvent, more loss.

I like using mechanically sealed (bound), filtering apparatus because the only way the solvent can enter the catch container is - through - the filter, there's no possible way around it. This is why I don't use a Buchner funnel and chose to build a mechanically sealed filter holder instead. I'm sure the Buchner funnels work fine but feel more confident when the filter is sealed in place. Pouring into a folded (pleated), filter also denies the solvent a path anywhere but through the filter itself.

 

[barjc]

I want to first make a simple tip about filtering with filter paper, "wet with a few drops of propylene glycol just to let damp and so not absorb your statements."