Game changer Emulsifying Vegetable Glycerin and BHO for E-Juice

Whoop, whoop, lu lu lu lu lu lu lu lu lu lu lu lu!!!!!!!!!1  Hee, hee, hee, snicker, snark, snort, don’t you just love it when a plan comes together?

Those of ya’ll who’ve tried to blend BHO and Vegetable Glycerin to make e-juice, know it doesn’t readily happen and you are limited in the potency levels that you can reach extracting with glycerin as the menstruum.

You are limited even adding a surfactant like lethicin, to promote absorption, so that market hasn’t taken off as readily as it might if it delivered a more potent hit.

At the suggestion of CAT Scientific, whom has supplied Skunk Pharm Research with equipment for testing, we tried their X-120 Homogenizer with a T-17 (N) generator shaft assembly, to see if they would not only blend, but stay blended.

For that experiment, we heated 250 ml of VG to 66C/150F in a 500 ml beaker, and added 6 grams of green BHO, which I’ve saved for several years as an example of too many washes using an open tube.  Before investing any amounts of prime oil, best to see what it does with bad example show and tell samples.

250 ml is about the minimum that can be processed with the T-17 (N)  generator in that sized beaker, as it is high precision and relies on the liquid as its lubricant.  CAT S, not only published that caveat in their supplied “destruction manual”, but passed it on to us in an e-mail to make sure we read the manual before firing up the homogenizer.

They also provide the caveat that homogenizers don’t like vortexes, for the same reason, so it can’t be used in the center of the container, only around the center.  That seemed fair enough, so we followed those simple instructions in the test.

Wowza!  It made about one minutes work of fully emulsifying the BHO and VG, producing an light green opaque solution, which hasn’t observably changed in 60 hours of standing, so we will be moving on to seeing just how much BHO we can mix with 250 ml of VG.

We will run it up to 50% BHO, in the next trial, but will start with a fresh sample so that we can field test it on patients afterwards.  At CAT’s suggestion, we will use a T-17 (V) generator shaft assembly, because the viscosity will be much higher.

I’ve also started dialog with an associate who is an e-juice manufacturer, whom has a market for the end product, so can test on a much larger scale.  We donate our meds, but over half a liter of e-juice would far exceed current demand, while demand for the same BHO in cancer meds continues to be strong.

You heard it here folks, this device is a game changer in the e-juice market!!!

While on the spendy side for ma and pa, they could produce more e-juice in about a minute, than they would likely need in a year anyway.  It is however, easily in the price range for small groups, and chump change for someone producing e-juice for the market place.  In fact, for those in the market, CAT makes much larger machines than the hand held unit that we are testing.

Contact information for this sweetheart is http://www.catscientific.com/ and bon appetite!

Here is a picture of the X-120, as well as the T-17 (N) generator, as well as the 250 ml emulsion that we created three days ago:

X-120 Homogenizer-1-1CAT MCS-66 stirring hotplate-1-1Homogenizer in action-1-1

GW

UPDATE 4/16/14

By Joe

We had the opportunity to make a much larger batch of BHO/Glycerin e-juice. We started by winterizing around 270g of raw extract in a dry ice bath for one hour and subsequently filtering to 20 um. We then decarboxylated the extract at 250F until all the small CO2 bubbles were gone. The extract cooled to 150F before continuing. The final volume of extract was just under 250ml and we brought the total volume to 500ml with vegetable glycerin while stirring. It took only a few minutes to completely mix the solution and it stayed mixed for a few weeks. *With this large of a volume you must keep the stir bar on and keep turning the vessel while the homogenizer is running. *Place the head of the homogenizer below the surface but not completely below the interface of the two solutions.

After two weeks the solution started getting a little oily on the surface; which was quickly fixed by the addition of a little glycerin and re-homogenizing. The postulated reasoning for the separation is thus; we calculated the ratio with raw extract and allowed for a 20% loss due to winterizing and decarbing. The final volume of oil was estimated from a beaker, not a graduated cylinder, so the margin of error is greater than +/- 5% especially since the oil was between two graduations. The volume to volume ratio was close to 50/50 and was easily dropped into a wickless e-cig liquid tank.

The reviews coming back from patients are positive and some newer patients have even asked for a more dilute version! The flavor is pleasant as well!

4-20-14

 Answers to two most ask questions

The question, “How ya’ll do that”, keeps arising, so here are some more process details on Joe and my previous experiment blending 24 grams of BHO Absolute into 39 grams of VG.

We started with an ounce of borrowed, raw oleoresin BHO extract, which I redissolved into about 10X warm 190 proof ethanol, and stored in a 0F freezer for 48 hours, before filtering out the plant waxes and cooking off the alcohol in a 250F oil bath, and then decarboxylating the Absolute to about 70%.

Yield was 24 grams of carboxylic acid Absolute, which we decanted it into a 140 ml graduated beaker.

While the Absolute was decarboxylating, we heated up a 100 ml beaker of Kosher Vegetable Glycerin to 65C, using a CAT Scientific stirring hot plate, and set up the CAT Scientific 120 X variable speed drive motor, with T17 Homogenizer and “N” impeller on its stand.

After decanting the 24 grams of Absolute into the 140 ml beaker, we added 24 grams of 150F Vegetable glycerin and set the beaker on the homogenizer stand base and lowered the homogenizer shaft until there was just enough space left between the bottom of the beaker and the rotor, that when the beaker was held firmly against the base, as it was rotated and oscillated in small circles, there was no contact between the two.

That allowed us to process the minimum amount of material, and still keep the rotor fully submerged, in the 140 ml beaker, which was about three rotor diameters wide. Pressing the beaker against the stand base and adjusting rotor speed to about two thirds throttle, Joe moved the beaker in an oscillating motion, working around the bottom, where there was an inhomogeneous mixture.

Once we had reach the process limits, we started slowly adding VG and continuing to oscillate and rotate the beaker, until the oil and VG were fully homogenized. At that point, we had added a total of 39 grams of VG to 24 grams of BHO Absolute.

As we added glycerin, we raised the homogenizer some, so as to keep the rotor just under the surface of the area that we were working. We kept the rotor submerged to keep it lubricated and away from the center of the beaker to avoid generating a vortex.

The second question is, “How long was it stable”, and I note that the first post was 12-6-2013, and the first emulsion has started developing a fine dark hairline around the top of the test tube, so 90 days or so.

The second emulsion was returned to the person loaning us the oil and sat around unchanged for about a week while he shared it with volunteers using an Essential VAAAPP pen. It produced impressive volumes of vapor, produced good medicinal effects, and was rated as couch locking in excess.

It also separated in the VAAAPP pen bottle after heating, but in that application still delivered a potent hit.

After a week, there was no separation ring in the original container, but he stuck it in the freezer to preserve it, which caused the VG and Absolute to separate.

The short answer to the stability question, is that it does eventually separate all on its own at ambient temperatures and you can speed it up with heat or cold. In the middle lies opportunity, which as you note, Joe has already started exploiting with clients on larger scales!

 

 

 

108 responses to this post.

  1. Posted by Simplefool on October 3, 2014 at 10:47 AM

    I’ve been attempting to homogenize about 600ml of decarbed HHO with 200ml of MCT and 400ml VG with very limited success. I’m using the x1000d, so my procedure is a little different, plus it takes greater amounts to even try using it. The x1000d with the V generator only achieves about 28,000 rpm on a consistent basis. Because the x120 has a significantly smaller motor, I seriously doubt it’s achieving the rated 33k rpm. The best rpm’s I’ve achieved is 31,800, and that was only once, it tops out at about 28,000rpm usually. And I’ve had zero success with separation, it readily separates in small quantities, only remaining homogenized in mass (1000+ml). It’s my belief the MCT is a little too viscous and I may have to bump up the quantity of HHO or VG (probably VG). As a separate project I’m going to attempt to homogenize 600ml of decarbed oil and 600ml of VG to see how well it stays together.

    I would recommend NOT getting the x1000d, as its much more expensive and delivers marginal results for the cost. Plus you HAVE to mount it to a stand, it generates too much torque handheld. For large amounts of homogenization its likely more prudent to use the x120 in batches, combining them post processing.

    It’s also my recommendation you look into a stronger entity to acquire the homogenizer from to begin with. Its commendable that CAT was willing to loan out a homogenizer, but they’re focus is and always will be construction equipment, not scientific equipment. I got that straight from the CATs mouth so-to-speak. CAT is also notoriously difficult to work with, I can testify to that directly, they don’t even return calls. Their sales reps might return calls, but very few of the sales reps selling CAT equipment work directly for CAT and their engineers are…..persnickety about calling, mainly due to the time difference and the ridiculous number of holidays they take. Again, I got that from an executive with CAT when I went to Germany (I have German relatives whom I visit annually) and I had a miserable time getting my set up going, it took several weeks for CAT to get back to me directly, having sent me the incorrect crossover clamp for the x1000d, making it useless because you cannot hold it by hand. I’m not recommending anyone in particular, I don’t have remotely enough knowledge of lab environment to make any recommendations, but I wouldn’t use CAT if I had it to do all over again, aside from the $3k investment (I picked up an MCS67 and N generator too), thus far the equipment isn’t worth it. I’m actively looking at another homogenizer that’s less expensive and produces sustainable results as I have 6 shops to outfit. Even IF I were to achieve a stable homogenized HHO-VG-MCT emulsification with the x1000d, the expense associated with it on a large scale outweighs the results, by a wide margin. For individuals performing smaller emulsification projects, the x120 is ideal I’m sure, but it’s more expensive than other homogenizers, so do your homework, I’m betting there’s a $400 solution running around that will work just as well, plus the fact that it doesn’t have a digital readout means you’ll never really know what rpm you’re performing your emulsification at, and take it from me, it’s not likely 33k rpm.

    Reply

    • Skip- Simple Fool,

      We’ve had several email correspondences since you posted a new comment for “Game changer Emulsifying Vegetable Glycerin and BHO for E-Juice”. I’ve tried to ascertain the process you used to emulsify your constituents to see if we could somehow get you on the road to produce a stable product.

      I want you to be aware, you decided to order the devices from Germany because you thought you could get a better price. By ordering directly from Germany you are subject to the culture of the entire country. We know how to deal with the culture, you don’t, and you pay the price. Even CAT has challenges dealing with vendors within Germany. It’s the culture of the Country!

      Of all the folks I’ve spoken with, no one has performed a test run with 600ml of absolute oil. That’s just not prudent, quit foolish indeed! Pfizer, Merck and other drug manufactures always perform several test runs of small volumes before moving up to larger volumes.

      Given that your test run wasn’t successful, and you weren’t able to achieve the RPM’s desired, you decided to lash out by commenting about how CAT is focused on their construction equipment not scientific equipment, among other things. You said you got that information when you visited CAT in Germany, and I quote; “I got that from an executive with CAT when I went to Germany.” What I find interesting is that Ingenieurbüro CAT does not manufacture construction equipment. They manufacture Micro Jet Turbine Engines and scientific laboratory equipment. I conveyed that to you in an email over the weekend. Had you really gone to the factory you would of known that, but instead you decide to post complete fabrications in hopes of damping our sales.

      A person with any integrity would recant some of the fabricated comments you made about Ingenieurbüro CAT, among others!

      Regards,
      Steve Gold

      Reply

    • Sorry you had problems dealing with CAT directly in Germany. We developed our process through their local representative, and as far as I know, the parent company is probably mostly in the dark regarding cannabis processing, given the laws there.

      We used the (N) generator. The (V) rotor you used is for higher viscosity material and was unsatisfactory for our purpose.

      The stand wasn’t to control the torque, it was to allow us to process the absolute minimum material in a 70 ml beaker, for developing a process.

      It is necessary to keep the head submerged to keep it lubricated, so there is a minimum amount of material that can be run in any given diameter container. It is also necessary to avoid the center of the container, so as to not generate a vortex, that will rob the generator of lubrication.

      A 70 ml beaker is three rotor diameters wide, allowing the minimum of material to be homogenized at enough depth to submerge the rotor, and being able to slide the beaker around with its base tight against the stand, instead of moving the generator, kept the generator submerged.

      As to size, we used the X-120 because it was right for our experiment, which was to prove homogenizing, not the CAT Scientific X-120.

      They offer larger sizes, and Skunk Pharm Research’s Joe, has installed larger commercial units for happy customers, so not everyone has shared your poor experience.

      Now that you are dealing directly with Germany, what are you asking their US representative, whom you have gone around and deprived of any profit, to do to make things right?

      Is there anything he can do, or do you just need to vent?

      If you need process development assistance, consider contacting Joe at joeoakes@skunkpharmresearch.com for his thoughts and rates.

      Reply

    • Posted by Larry on October 10, 2014 at 11:56 AM

      I recently ordered equipment from CAT here in the US and had a great experience. Steve was more than pleasant to deal with and offered good guidance in what I’m trying to accomplish. Overall, great communications and great customer service. The equipment received was top-notch and exceeded expectations. My experience was the complete opposite of what was mentioned by Simplefool.

      Reply

  2. You do not need to decarb your oil first, but if you want to it might make it runnier and an easier mix with your glycol. Have you ever thought to use PEG? Pg seems to seperate over time and VG always seperates quickly. PEG works great for our company.

    Reply

  3. Posted by bradly on August 23, 2014 at 10:43 AM

    I’ll give you 50 bucks for it.

    Reply

  4. Posted by Gabo on June 30, 2014 at 3:14 PM

    “We will run it up to 50% BHO, in the next trial, but will start with a fresh sample so that we can field test it on patients afterwards. At CAT’s suggestion, we will use a T-17 (V) generator shaft assembly, because the viscosity will be much higher.”

    Did you use the fine or normal viscosity generator? CATScientific’s website offers four options.

    Thank you.

    Reply

    • Normal viscosity. Call Steve at CAT if you have questions about sizing etcetera.

      Reply

    • Posted by Global on August 19, 2014 at 6:51 AM

      Purchased ,SCILOGEX D160 Homogenizer Package – Drive Motor DS-160/10 10mm dia. generator flat head-open slot 115mm immerse length H-370 stand for solid/liquid media volumes 1- 250ml 110V 60Hz. What do you think of this package for BHO/Co2 and PG mixtures. Never really had an issue with separation using only PG with concentrates while only using a coffee warmer and extreme agitation of mixture. But over time depending on the extraction process used to make concentrate some solutions have begun to separate over time slowly. Looking to make a completely fused mixture which will not separate over time. Thank you for all the information provided in this forum. it’s been terrific help !

      Reply

  5. Posted by Funkmaster Astronaut on March 3, 2014 at 12:28 PM

    Wow! I just received my homogenizer in the mail today and put it to work. After a few temperature and ratio tweaks over the course of 5 runs I came up with:

    1g of BHO (wax consistency)
    1ml of Propylene Glycol
    0.2ml of 100% natural Orange Oil flavoring

    – Melted wax @ 160ºF then turned it down to 150ºF
    – Stirred in .02 Orange Oil, let it sit for about 5 minutes
    – Added 1ml PG, let it sit 1 minute
    – Homogenized @ 35,000 rpm for about 1 minute
    – Lowered hot plate down to where sample was at 100ºF
    Note: Still very low viscosity at 100º
    – Pulled up 2x 1ml syringes.
    – Injected into O.pen style cartomizers
    – Let it still for about an hour

    After one hour of sitting it is still a pretty runny liquid state at room temperature. One hit is comparable to any other hit from any Vape pen on the market I’ve tried. Totally sweet delicious orangey success!!

    Thank you SkunkPharm – I would have never gotten to this point without you!! My patients will truly have you guys to thank!

    Reply

    • Posted by Funkmaster Astronaut on March 3, 2014 at 2:02 PM

      I also want to note that the first run I did were was straight vegetable glycerin. It looked cloudy. Then I went to a 70%VG/30%PG mix and it came out lighter in color (sort of like you’re picture on the hotplate – I also used throw away greenish wax) but it would still separate after about a half hour. I then added more PG to bring it up to 50%/50% and it was making it less cloudy and it it would take longer to separate.

      Then I decided to two run with straight PG and that’s when I achieved success. I wish I could post a picture because this stuff looks more clear/amber because the viscosity of PG is so much lower. The O.Pen Vape guys (Cannalabs in WA) use Polyethalyne Glycol 400 and that has an even lower viscosity.

      Here’s one more run I did.
      -1 gram BHO (wax consistency)
      -1.75 ml PG
      -0.6 ml Strawberry Flavoring

      BHO eCig Emulsion

      Reply

    • Thanks for sharing the info.

      Reply

    • Posted by KevDingo on June 26, 2014 at 12:08 PM

      Which homogenizer did you end up purchasing?

      Reply

    • Posted by Global on August 12, 2014 at 4:35 PM

      Did you use the Scilogex 85010101 Model D160 Handheld Homogenizer Package with DS-160/5 Generator and Stand, 110V, 60Hz and also what hot plate did you use.

      Reply

    • Posted by unclephester on October 14, 2014 at 1:50 PM

      Funkmaster,
      Thank you for sharing. I am curious what homogenizer you used for this run. I noticed Skunk’s original blog stated they needed 250ML of sample for testing…

      “250 ml is about the minimum that can be processed with the T-17 (N) generator in that sized beaker, as it is high precision and relies on the liquid as its lubricant. CAT S, not only published that caveat in their supplied “destruction manual”, but passed it on to us in an e-mail to make sure we read the manual before firing up the homogenizer.”

      I am experimenting with this processing as well but trying to work with small sample sizes, and I am very curious to see what homogenizer you used in your testing and success since your sample size is relative to what volume I am attempting to process as well.

      This is new for me, so I would definitely appreciate any guidance you can offer.

      Thanks.

      Reply

  6. Posted by Stef on February 28, 2014 at 5:19 AM

    GW would you be able to give us any info on how much can be homogenized and how long? I’m getting a strange feeling when this isn’t given much attention, but I would say its one of the things that could be most exciting if it would work as it should.

    I cannot afford to try this on my own, but if the results would be positive and if one could achieve high and stable amounts of saturation, I’m would make this the first thing on my purchase list. I would also assume that this is of interest to more than me.

    Hope to hear from you
    /Stef

    Reply

  7. Posted by Funkmaster Astronaut on February 21, 2014 at 11:30 AM

    People people people. These are not just glorified dremels. A dremel will just powerfully mix your BHO and VG, which may be enough to inject it into your atomizer cartridge on your pen, and if that’s all you need then cool. Have at it.

    These homogenizers will actually break the BHO and VG down to the point where the BHO will bond with the carbon in the VG and result in a stable emulsion. This means it will stay blended for days, weeks and hopefully months/years. This is interesting for those of us doing this commercially.

    O.Pen Vape claims they use Polyethlyene Glycol. I wonder if this is because it emulsifies better/longer with BHO/CO2 Oil? I’ve been experimenting with 70% propylene glycol / 30% VG mixing with dremel for a couple months now with the same results – seperation after 2-3 minutes (just enough time to get it into my pen). I look forward to getting my hand on a homogenizer. I currently have my eye on this package:

    It does solid/liquid and comes with motor, stand, and .01-50ml generator.

    Reply

  8. Posted by korupt on February 1, 2014 at 12:22 PM

    Are you guys planning on running a more serious test like the one you described earlier? Would be very interesting to know how much absolute you could pack into the VG. Would also be interesting to see how a test panel would react to lets say a two week old juice that hasn’t been touched.

    I’ve tried the dremel method and I haven’t come even close to the results your are describing.

    Best regards
    k

    Reply

  9. Posted by Tokeybob on January 25, 2014 at 6:12 PM

    One would wonder what something like this could do for cooking as well. Some nicely decarboxylated, clean extract could create an emulsion in oils, as well as VG used for soda and the like. It seems logical we could get the cannabis flavor to a near non existent level for more delicately flavored foods, or foods that wouldn’t taste good when combined with a light cannabis flavor. I think this because instead of the thc itself being dissolved in the oil, it would be suspended in the oil until it could dissolve, and the flavor may be masked more as the molecules are coated in the substance instead of attached to it…. idk. Or maybe simply speed up the process, and allow oil/butter/whatever to be made and either used or stored, very rapidly.
    One would also wonder if it would be possible to create a stable emulsion into a water based solution, such as syrup, with an edible emulsifying agent. That could revolutionize the soda and drink industry, as well as make things that could be added to existing drinks, such as that mio stuff. I really wish i had all these toys to play with! hahahha.

    Reply

  10. Posted by Nobody on January 21, 2014 at 2:05 PM

    It’s a dremmel….

    Reply

  11. Great find! Going to experiment with this! 👍👍

    http://www.prismalabs.com

    Reply

  12. Posted by Amy on January 17, 2014 at 5:13 AM

    Any updates on this method?

    It was suggested by CAT Scientific that we hold off purchasing the homogenizer until Skunk Pharm has completed testing.

    Cat Scientific had a couple of people purchase the X120 against their advice and they stated that they are sorry they did. Apparently one person purchased a lot of grams of oil that wasn’t winterized, homogenized it with the VG. It didn’t work because of the waxes and other impurities in the oil.

    CAT Scientific stated that once they have a scientific template that has been thoroughly tested, then they will feel comfortable selling the homogenizers.

    Has anyone had any luck with this?

    Reply

  13. Hi, j have had the same similar issues using a proscientific 200 with 7mm tip. Just blemding at 150f doesnt hold up in a more concentrated solution. My goal is to be able to stabilize 1g bho in 6ml of vg pg or vg\pg (250mg per 1.5ml). I have found that 0.4mg soy lecticin makes it more stable but still about 20% of the bho precipitates out. Lecticin seems to make it muddy and degrade the oil look. Going to try the polysorbate 20 (as mentioned here) and also a 5% d-lemonine emulsifier. Will share results. Jared

    Reply

  14. Posted by Matt on January 11, 2014 at 12:11 PM

    Hello hello!

    Ok, so I have been consistently failing in all my efforts to try and blend VG, or PG for that matter with Co2 oil. With the PG I have mixed a 2:1 PG/oil blend while heating over a hotplate stirrer. It blends better than VG but still beads up and has a thin layer of oil on the top after a day or two. I also had the opportunity to demo Pro Scientific’s homogenizer. They sent me their 10mm and 20mm shaft to try. I first ran 150ml VG and 150ml oil to get right to the point…no dice, it separated before my eyes. I switched to the much larger 20ml shaft and it performed worse than the smaller one due to the increased surface area in the thick oil. I then switched back to the 10mm shaft and added 150ml of PG to the solution to try and thin it out. This failed as well. Do you have any updates on the juice you made with CAT scientific’s? Have you increased your ratio of oil with success? If for some reason all the ethanol didn’t evap off do you think this could contribute to my problem with the PG? What about decarbing the oil first as I hear it makes it thinner, do you think this could take care of the mixing problem as well as take off any residual ethanol that may be left in it? Thanks for your help.

    Reply

    • The original emulsion that I made is still stable, without observable change.

      Sorry I haven’t had the opportunity to try blending to the maximum levels that I can get to emulsify, because of waiting for what we thought might be the best rotor tip, given the heavier viscosity once we start adding oil, but another of CAT’s testers tried the higher viscosity V rotor and found it ineffective, mostly because 150F oil and glycerin is still pretty low viscosity.

      I’ve also since gotten the news that even with the N rotor, that there was significant fallout before reaching 50% saturation, which was our goal. What I don’t know is whether it was winterized material or its state of decarboxylation.

      We do now have a stand for our CAT unit, so that we can run smaller volumes without running the rotor dry by operating in the vortex zone. More will be revealed shortly…………

      Reply

      • Posted by Amy on January 20, 2014 at 7:19 PM

        So in your test where you did not get any separation, what were the step you took with your oil and VG or PG? Can you share your formula of Oil to PG (vg) as well as temp, time, mixing, cooling, winterized or decarbed, etc please?

        Reply

  15. Have any of you tried Polysorbate 20 as an emusifier? It’s a non-ionic surfactant derived from coconut fatty acids. It’s food safe:
    “Polysorbate, a substance prepared by the reaction of sorbitan fatty acid ester (a
    nonionic surfactant) with ethylene oxide1), is widely used in many foreign countries,
    including the U.S. and the EU, where it acts as an emulsifier, dispersant or solubilizer in
    many foods, including bread, cake mix, salad dressing, shortening oil and chocolate2) 3)”
    Source: http://www.fsc.go.jp/english/evaluationreports/foodadditive/polysorbate_report.pdf

    It also should be added to the feed/nutrient solution @ 100ppm in ANY growing method.

    Reply

  16. Posted by Dubologist on January 8, 2014 at 4:00 PM

    This is groundbreaking in my world. I cant tell you how much BHO has gone to waste trying to figure out how to blend with VG, PG/VG, VG+iso etc etc without the separation. We have manipulated temps in all different directions seeking a nice product. All i needed the entire time was a fancy beater stick lol? I also have a magnetic stirrer but no luck with that only use is temp control. Right now i’am using a 4 month old tincture blend with flowers from 7 different states and it hits ok but nothing to blog about.

    Question: I would imagine if you sought a more powerful ejuice, you would want to..thin out..the mix of BHO/VG w/ PG since it seems to have a lower viscosity? That would maybe compensate for the higher viscosity of VG and BHO. This could allow a theoretical mix ratio of say 15ml VG/10ml PG/5ml(g)BHO. At this rate, you could spend around $200 at the med store and have a liquid ounce of ejuice. We previously tried to blend about 10ml VG with 1 gram og bho. Im basically thinking of how to make the highest potency ejuice equivalent to a vape pen.

    Reply

  17. What is so game changing about incorporating conventional, dated and potentially harmful products into an e-cigarette cannabis concentrate. Look at what the FDA and the EU are saying about combustion of glycerin and other additives used in the conventional e-juice industry.

    Reply

  18. Posted by mike on December 29, 2013 at 9:57 PM

    do you think it’s possible to winterize and filter in glycerin? or should we still do that first with ethanol if required.

    Reply

  19. I really want to make some bho oil…do I really need all the devices you have like the x-120 and the t-17 or can i just heat the glycerine to temp and stir it together?? Thank you so much…

    Reply

  20. Posted by dan on December 28, 2013 at 1:12 PM

    would that type of hotplate be suitable for decarbing bho or is an oil bath absolutely necessary? and if so, which brand or model do you reccomend?

    Reply

  21. Peg400 is not the pink antifreeze. You might want to do a bit more research. PG simply doesn’t work as you describe. We have all tried it. The hash comes out of the solution on cooling.

    Reply

  22. peg-400 (polyethylene glycol/pink antifreeze) is not pg (propylene glycol).
    pg works perfect for hash oil, organa/tetra labs o-pen carts use this exclusively-no peg-400/vg required. my Preferred ratio: 1g : .7ml hash/pg. heat to 140f and stir, the oil goes right in. no hassles like vg ! Total success using bottom coil atomizers with minimal polyfill wick for thick oil, >60% thc.

    Reply

      • Posted by Artifice on December 29, 2013 at 8:52 PM

        Hey guys,

        I’m hearing this news about PG more and more recently and it seems to replace the water and alcohol that is needed to thin out VG for e-cig vaping.

        It would be cool to hear from you guys regarding this with info such as profiles, solvent status, etc. I’m planning on mixing up some BHO with a premixed 50/50 PG/VG solution and will let you know how it goes.

        Question tho, Should i decarb the oil before mixing with the e-juice? or will that start the process too early? or would the vape possibly heat it up enough to not just vaporize the PG/VG but also decarb the THC and the other good stuff? I plan on warming and mixing it in for a while to try to get good stabilization.

        Keep up the good work guys, you’re an inspiration.

        -Artifice

        Reply

    • Posted by endora on February 19, 2014 at 7:44 PM

      FWIW, I’ve had great results with a much thicker oil blend in cartomizers: 1 part PG stirred into 4 or 5 parts winterized bho pre-warmed to 130 degrees. Much higher concentration and it still flows/vapes very well. No separation issues at all.

      I honestly don’t understand why anyone would use VG instead of PG; what am I missing here? Why go to such lengths to force VG to blend when PG blends just fine?

      Reply

  23. I am definately getting one and a great price for what it offers!!! Have been trying to emulsify BhO for while with little success. I am assuming that this will probably also work well with SCO2 or maybe even work better with co2 extracted honey oil. Any thoughts on the process with homogenizing co2 oil?

    Amazing!!

    Reply

  24. Dear Skunk Pharm Research,

    I was recently contacted by Steve at CAT Scientific regarding your current application for Emulsifying Vegetable Glycerin and BHO for E-Juice utilizing his CAT Scientific Homogenizing Equipment and I I just wanted to take a few moments and introduce myself and my company, PRO Scientific. PRO Scientific Inc. is a global leader in the manufacturing and distribution of high quality homogenizing, mixing, shaking, stirring and centrifuging equipment. Located in Oxford Connecticut, our woman-owned, company was founded and incorporated in 1992 with its initial product line of high-speed homogenizing equipment by leaders who already possessed business, manufacturing and engineering experience with another North American homogenizing company. It was our founders’ dedication to responding to their customer’s demands and providing a higher precision homogenizing product that led to the incorporation of PRO Scientific. From sub-cellular analysis to high volume applications, PRO Scientific homogenizers have been the industry leader for over two decades.

    Steve expressed that there was a significant interest in his equipment being used in this manner, but they are having a hard time supplying orders to customers because they are manufactured overseas. While we are a competitor of his equipment, he reached out to us as fellow mechanical homogenizer company that manufactures in the US in hopes of assisting you and your readers in a more timely manner. While we have worked with larger medical companies in testing and supplying our equipment, we generally do not work with individuals directly in this regard. Our equipment is available on Amazon, and can easily be purchased by you or your readers if need be.

    From reading your blog post and reviewing the CAT equipment, I would recommend the following:

    Either:

    with

    Or these two items are available as a package and should be priced a little less:

    With the rush of many universities and research companies spending end of year money, there is a limited stock at Amazon right now, but we do ship to them daily. And this is part of their Prime program.

    Again, more than happy to help you and your readers, and if you had any questions or concerns regarding our equipment and how it compares to others like it, I am more than happy to address your questions. Or how the ultrasonic technology vs. mechanical technology works comparatively we are happy to help.

    If you were interested in reselling this equipment, not sure if that is something you do, I would be happy to discuss that with you as well.

    I appreciate you reviewing this information and getting back to me if we can be of any assistance.

    Best Regards,

    PRO Scientific Inc.
    99 Willenbrock Road
    Oxford, CT 06478
    P:203 267 4600
    F: 203 267 4606
    http://www.proscientific.com

    Reply

    • Before anyone orders from Amazon, I highly recommend you contact Pro Scientific and thoroughly discuss the application their homogenizer will be used for.

      Their 10mm Generator Shaft in the above image is incorrect for making a BHO & Glycerin emulsion. It is a knife generator and is used for fibrous material.

      I not sure a 10mm shaft will work, at least CAT Scientific’s, because it doesn’t have the force a 17mm shaft does, and 128 grams of oil is quite viscous.

      Reply

    • I purchased the pro200 power unit with I think the 7mm (about the size of a pencil) blending unit. In my tests with both co2 and bho the proscientific unit i used doesnt seem to have some limitations with the force when the liquid becomes more viscous. With the thinner liquids i used 40% vg 40% pg and 20% Distilled water. Found out thinning it with water was a bad idea. It does not remain suspended. Do not use any water. Thinning a little would allow to vape better. The vg only remained suspended (7ml vg with 2g bho) but a more powerful blending unit could improve results. Jared

      Reply

  25. Posted by Paul on December 16, 2013 at 4:25 AM

    These guys have got is all worked out – This EJ Mix is a game changer!

    http://www.liquidizer.com/ejmix.html

    Reply

    • Posted by Aardvark on January 28, 2014 at 2:09 PM

      This product is hardly much better than using a single open-ended turkey basting tube, and the results are no better. Yes, it is a clean package, but this forum is successfully identifying alternate and safe scientific methods to achieve the best results (clean and pure extracts) at the lowest ongoing cost and level of effort (saving/recycling purified N-Butane) without making the environment worse for all life on earth.

      Reply

  26. Posted by Joseph on December 12, 2013 at 10:52 PM

    Has the solution separated at all? I’m interested to know if it will last at least a month? I’m wondering if this will be good enough, or I’m thinking of buying an Ultrasonic Homogenizer.

    Also, would you know of any downside to using an Ultrasonic Homogenizer for making the glycerin tincture, or glycerin ecig fluid? It seems like the best option, however it is a little more expensive. But we want to offer the highest quality.

    This seems like the best option for patents that want some discretion, and easy medication. It also would allow for quick and easy, large Glycerin Tincture I believe? We’ve made large amounts of Glycerin for patents before and it is a long and trying thing to keep up with demand. But glycerin tincture in a dropper bottle is one of our favorite things.

    Reply

    • No change after a week and still watching.

      Reply

      • Posted by Lang on February 14, 2014 at 8:18 PM

        GW,
        I imagine you are watching for the oil to separate, but are you testing it weekly as well?

        I have just started making Glycerin tinctures and for some odd reason, even while using some really nice quality flowers, the potency has diminished greatly after a week or so. what used to be GREAT! no longer does anything for me from the same bottle, could this be the problem with my tincture, is it separating?

        Reply

  27. In addition, the studies I have read suggest the PEG is mostly flushed out of the body through normal um, flushing mechanisms.

    Reply

  28. tried to leave this comment before, so if it appears twice I apologize. What do you think is the benefit of using VG is vs. PEG400? safety, preference or perhaps availability? I have found a much simpler way of emulsifying hash into PEG400 with ethanol.

    Reply

  29. What is the benefit of VG vs. PEG400? Do you feel the VG product is safer or more effective? I have found a much simpler way of emulsifying BHO into PEG400 using only ethanol.

    Reply

    • I think the biggest benefit is not vaporizing PEG 400. I don’t know what effects PEG will have on your lungs now or 20 yrs. From now. The human body has a mechanism in place to metabolize glycerin. I still don’t know about vaporized and inhaled.

      Reply

      • I can appreciate your concern. I have found far more research suggesting the safety of PEG400 and associated low molecular weight PEG as a carrier for pharmaceutical preparations designed for inhalation than I have found for the safety of glycerin inhalation. If you are curious I could link you to long term inhalation studies that documented non toxic results in a 14 week high dose trial. In addition it is listed on the MSDS as not being toxic as an inhalant (LD50 in rats was 30g/kg although the lower the molecular weight, the higher toxicity was measured).

        Reply

        • I don’t think 14 weeks is nearly long term. You probably couldn’t give a rat cancer with cigarettes in that period of time. Its pretty obvious what happens in 20 yrs of chronic exposure. Not just PEG but Glycerin too. I think the risk is lower for glycerin but neither are as good of an option as a pen that can handle decarboxylized oil or wax/shatter without breaking.

          Reply

          • Posted by Artifice on December 29, 2013 at 8:57 PM

            So I should always decarb my oil/wax when using for a pure oil pen? Doesn’t it decarb when it’s vaporized? What is the benefit to starting it earlier in the process?

            Will it solidify again so the pen doesnt have to stay purely upright?

          • Depends on what kind of pen. I prefer a skillet and use oil that is still in carboxylic acid form.

    • The vapor and flavor characteristics are different between the two. Some folks mix PG and VG to get a balance.

      Reply

  30. Posted by Dr. Hunchback on December 10, 2013 at 11:53 PM

    Why not just use a immersion blender?

    Reply

  31. Posted by Dylan on December 9, 2013 at 7:40 PM

    Also – given that the device requires complete submersion to operate; in order to make its use viable for small scale personal use, what options are available. Obviously you could use a taller cylindrical shaped vessel, but in terms of producing less than 5ml at a time, could you increase the volume by diluting with a liquid that could later be boiled off? Cheers

    Reply

    • The (N) homogenizer tool is for normal viscosity, so that part would probably work, but not sure what would happen boiling off. You can mix BHO and ethanol and you can mix that with VG, but when you boil off the alcohol, some of the BHO falls out of solution.

      Reply

  32. Posted by Dylan on December 9, 2013 at 7:21 PM

    Looks like it has been nearly a week now. How is the mix holding together?

    Reply

  33. Posted by Mike-420 on December 8, 2013 at 2:40 PM

    You guys never cease to amaze me… While this is a tad out of price range for the average e-cig user this changes ALOT for those who can afford to venture into this area now :D

    Thank you! Keep up the BHOM work ;)

    Reply

  34. Posted by al-k-mist on December 8, 2013 at 10:36 AM

    super sick gw. i am interested in how well it does work on lg amts. i think someone said the ideal ratio is 1:1? will it emulsify…or homogenize, rather, at that rate? w a winterized absolute?
    awesome as fuck man

    Reply

  35. Hey guys, this is an awesome idea. However, I checked the price of this bad boy: 300+. I was reading badkittysmiles threads the other day, and she suggested using an ultrasonic jewelry cleaner for liposomal microencapsulation. I figured the same can be done here: preheat vg/pg/concentrate mix, add to the cleaner and turn on. Best part: they’re only 28 bucks on amazon :3. Keep up the good work, I love this blog

    Reply

    • I went out and bought an ultrasonic cleaner a while back for making Lipo-C using liquid sunflower lecithin to encapsulate the ascorbic acid. After a while I noticed that I could get the exact same consistency by just using my blend-tec blender on the lowest setting for 3 or 4 cycles. I really wonder if you could do this by heating the mixture up in a 1000ml tall beaker and using a hand held kitchen blender to do the work? Is the point just to mix it w/o introducing air to the mixture? A small ultrasonic may very well hasten the removal of these air bubbles. cuisinart cordless 25 bucks at costco. a decent large size ultrasonic 60 bucks on ebay. I am not sure why you need the glycerin though, decarboxlated bho and acetate work great in my pen in the pure form.

      Reply

  36. Hey guys, I’m curious. Would an ultrasonic cleaner do the same job microencapsulating this? I checked the price of this bad boy: 350 bucks. I was reading some info by badkittysmiles, and she recommended using an ultrasonic jewelry cleaner for making edible oils and such. Seems like the same idea can be applied here. Preheat the vg/pg mix, add your decarbed oil, and start. Best part, they cost 28 bucks on amazon

    Reply

  37. Posted by Kindness on December 6, 2013 at 11:26 AM

    That’s great to see some new interest in the e juice. I gave up a while ago with the vg and the pg because when heated both seemed to separate over time. Does mixing with these tools keep the materials combined?

    Reply

  38. Very awesome!

    Have ya’ll ever tried making e-juice with that magnetic stirrer?

    Reply

  39. Posted by Marcus on December 6, 2013 at 10:14 AM

    What is e-juice?

    Reply

    • Posted by Marcus on December 6, 2013 at 12:56 PM

      o, for e-cigs of course! Looks like a modified dremel tool. Do you think we could make something cheaper that can do the job?

      Reply

      • I haven’t done a market search or experimented with anything cheaper, but I do know there are cheaper counterparts made in other parts of the world. So far none of them have approached us with a unit for us to test.

        What I don’t know is how they perform pari passu, because in some cases it is a little like comparing a Mercedes or BMW to a Scion. Both may get you from point A to point B, but there are differences in the speed and experience.

        We also have other testing planned, on different products, until we see what this puppy is capable of, we don’t know where to set the bar for others to meet or exceed. We also have to give CAT Scientific a coup, for being the first to demonstrate how to to solve the VG/BHO mixing problem, so I suggest that we watch them carefully to see what else they may have up their sleeve.

        Reply

    • A liquid that is used in electronic cigarette type e-pens.

      Reply

  40. Posted by Aardvark on December 6, 2013 at 10:05 AM

    Wonderful findings! In case you need a source for Homogenizers, I have access to surplus auctions where these are available. I just received my Flash Chromatography system from one of these auctions and am trying to figure out whether I can do something with it, or made an expensive mistake because it is too far over my head.

    PM me if you want to procure one of the Homogenizers available in upcoming auctions; there is a Fisher Scientific Power-Gen 500 that has 7 new tips among them.

    Reply

  41. super cool GW !!! Appreciate all the work you and your team are putting in!! thank you. looking forward to the next level!!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 3,296 other followers

%d bloggers like this: