Te-175 Tamisium, versus Lil Terp, Mini Terp, and I-502/ASME Terp

leftkidney said:

I use the TE-175 but its the older version, if you search my posts you should be bale to find a really long one that explains how I use it

to be honest for small 50-60 gram runs the Tamisium is great I talk about the sweetleaf in that post so thats why I dont want to just copy it here you said you dont want to mix that into the mess, so when I have a few more minutes I will type up some things in this thread

Click to expand...

Gray Wolf said:

Tamisium makes a TE-175 passive extractor, CNC turned from a single billet. A purdy thang to gaze upon and sturdy enough to drive nails with.

Lil Terp is a design based on sanitary components, which I donated to the free market and has evolved in a number of different directions.

One of those directions is the lowest priced "Lil Terp" I could find on the market, which was the BVV mini extractor, and another is the lowest priced ASME certified Lil Terp I could find, also from BVV.

The Mini is actually based on a 4” X 4” sanitary spool, versus the 6” X 6” used in the original Lil Terp, and is priced under $600.

The I-502/ASME certified unit can be used in licensed extraction locations at around $4K, which is why I chose it.

I’ve run the TE-175, Lil Terp, Mini Terp, and I-502/ASME units, and all do a good job, and under the same circumstances have extracted about the same ratio and quality of extract, regardless of system.

I of course, have my focus scattered to the four winds, but we are now blessed with other folks on this forum, who have not only run some, or all of the systems as well, but some brothers and sisters who’ve also focused on passive extraction, ………….sooooo have experiences to share that can take this conversation to the next level.

If one of the above systems is better than the other, specifically why?

If a system possesses unique charms and skills, what are they and specifically how do they do what the others can’t?

Ostensibly if we can keep the discussion centered on the systems in question, or at least other like systems, as opposed to dragging in Sweetleaf, and similar systems that include inline dewax, this conversation will better stay on track and be more productive.

We can always start a thread comparing them as well, keeping apples and apples together.

I also have no monetary dog in this fight, so if anyone knows of a better price for either of the BVV units I importuned from them for testing, or their generic equals, please trot them out and share that with us.

Focusing on the fish, as opposed to the fish trap, what process have any of ya’ll proud owners personally found works best for yield and quality, as well as why?

Do any of the systems have secret charms making that uniquely possible with only them?

Click to expand...

Tamisium said:

I have witnessed a lot of ASME coded tanks that are no longer ASME coded because of adding nozzles or openings etc or mixed with non asme coded parts. Making a custom tank that is truly ASME coded rather than taking an off the shelf tank and trying to configure it to work is very expensive.
True, which is why I listed only an ASME vessel, made specifically for the purpose, with the manufacturers ASME placcard attached from BVV, as a comparison.

Pharmgold's certified system also has its collection vessel specifically US if A manufactured to ASME standards, by a certified ASME manufacturer, to 3-A food grade standards. It also has a placard.

Of note, is that 6" and smaller, are technically considered piping, rather than a pressure vessel, so different codes apply and it doesn't require a placcard.

It does have to meet 350 psi however and a 6" 13MHP clamp is only rated for 300psi, so on our cyclone filter drier system, we sprung for the SSH 430 psi clamps.

It takes 100s in quantity purchase to get close to the same price but that is what you have to do if you want it to be optimized to work properly and be truly non looping and pump free.
It is more of a question of does the user now how to take advantage of the subtle or extreme differences. It is only then you can see the difference in the apparatus.
If someone cannot see any difference after use between two machines it may not be a clear distinction of a similarity of two machines but more a distinction of the users ability.

Sooo, if Tamisium doesn't come out on top, its the operator?

Lets take several plants or methods from extracting different things from one plant for example. I know this is a cannabis site but pretty soon we all will be extracting from that plant and others even at the same time in one column to create specific proprietary blends. Remember that with some plants butane is used to remove the oils so that the desired compounds are left behind to be extracted later with another co solvent. Defatting process for example such as when extracting estrogen from wheat.
So to keep it simple.
Lets perform a full spectrum extraction with multiple polarity solvents at 120F with full liquid saturation for 2 hours. Raping the plant of all it has in it to see what it is composed of.
Then decrease those 3 parameters by turning them completely off, one at a time while performing another extraction on fresh material to see which one effects the efficiency of each extracted compound visible in the first full spectrum analysis.
Do this 3 times to plot three points that would allow plotting of any other point on the curve. This will show you what will happen as you speculate the plots without actually having to perform an actual extraction.
The data compiled in analysis and extractor settings will guide you in the rest of your extractions on this plant for any variety of compounds in that plant. You repeat this with any new plant you introduce.

I may add this has to be repeated while varying from the solvent combination used in the first example. So as you can see you can do a lot and if you cant then there is no need to compare. The result would be in that case that one extractor can do much more than the other.
Obviously if your curve ended up plotting points that one system cannot achieve, that another system that can achieve there is no need to attempt what cannot be achieved. That would be a waste of time. We are talking about being able to hit a temp mark, liquid saturation soak time or vary the solvent polarity or change the density of the plant material or solvent.
Q D T P T P
Quality of plant matter
Density of solvent and plant matter
Temp
Pressure
Time
Polarity.

Most people achieve what they want by just controlling two things in a Tamisium.
Time and Temp
And they only do one variation. As cold and fast and they can.
As you can see they have not even scratched the surface.

Click to expand...