• Members of the previous forum can retrieve their temporary password here, (login and check your PM).

Multiple pulls vs multiple mixing.

Migrated topic.
Heulas

Heulas

Rising Star
So, i can't really find or think for an answer to this question.

- It is said that multiple small pulls work better than one large one.

But:

- It is said that the proprieties of NPS do not diminish over using.
- It is said also that 50ml of NPS can hold way more DMT than the quantity of spice from 100g MHRB. (e.g: re-x)

So, why do i need to add NPS to every pull?

Couldn't i use only 50ml of NPS and then just mix/let the layers separate as i would do with a multiple pull situation (thus repeating the mixing/separating phase about 16/18 times) but only pulling at the end of various mixing phases?

I feel like there could be something wrong in this line of thinking, but i really can't get why.
 
Sort by date Sort by votes
I've did my research on the topic and there are only information about how using more NPS actually does not yield better results than multiple, smaller, pulls.

My question is different.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Endlessness did a nice analogy that i think explain quite well :
Endlessness said:
Or think of when washing clothes (the example given in the FAQ), or very dirty dishes, where one will do one wash to get rid of most stuff, but then rinse and wash it again (or the washing machine has many cycles instead of just one long one), because there is always some dirt left behind.
Click to expand...
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Yeah, i was thinking about that analogy too, but it still doesn't answer my theoretical problem, because:

Heulas said:
- It is said that the proprieties of NPS do not diminish over using.
Click to expand...

SeeOn reusing non polar solvents for more infos.

It also doesn't anwer my question because Endlessness is referring to the big one pull vs many smaller ones, which is different from the situation i'm thinking of, where there is one pull after 18 mix/separate phases.

So, following the analogy, this is what i'm actually asking: "letting the dishes in the soapy water for a longer time and then washing, isn't equal to rinse and wash for many times?"
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
mmmm, for me it's the same question.

I gonna try to explain (i'm not very good at it). One pull, even big volume mixed many times, won't take 100% of the dmt molecules.

Big volume (500ml):
1 pull will get 90% of molecule.
There still 10% left in the basic solution and then you have to deal with a big volume of diluted NPS which is bad for crystallization (by freeze or evaporation).

3xsmall volume (3x50ml) :
1rst pull gets 70% and 30% is left
2nd pull gets 70% of 30% left (=21%) and 9% is left
3rd pull gets 70% 9% left (=6.3%) and 2.7% is left
At the end there is only 2.7% left in basic solution and you have 150ml of concentrated NPS which is easier to deal with for crystallization.

About "- It is said that the proprieties of NPS do not diminish over using.", i believe you're getting it wrong. Proprieties won't diminish over using when you're re-using solvent after freeze precipitation so you can use 50ml for the 1rst pull, freeze precipate it and re-use the same 50ml (which doesn't contain dmt anymore) for the 2nd pull and repeat many time before those 50ml become ineffective.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
DansMaTete said:
freeze precipate it and re-use the same 50ml (which doesn't contain dmt anymore) for the 2nd pull and repeat many time before those 50ml become ineffective.
Click to expand...

This is confuted by:

Heulas said:
- It is said also that 50ml of NPS can hold way more DMT than the quantity of spice from 100g MHRB. (e.g: re-x)
Click to expand...

This last info comes from many different topics on the Nexus, also i used re-x as an example because you can actually dissolve 1g of DMT into 40 ml of hot NPS (such as naphtha, hexane, heptane).

DansMaTete said:
i believe you're getting it wrong. Proprieties won't diminish over using when you're re-using solvent after freeze precipitation
Click to expand...

You could be absolutely right.

So, at least for what i understood from your answer, my starting doubts remains :)
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Edit: dansmatete was first 😁

Heulas said:
...SeeOn reusing non polar solvents for more infos....
Click to expand...
This re-using means that the solvent gets freezed or backsalted (acidic water) so after that it is again open to take deems. What you suggest is not taking the deems out of the solvent after each settling. That is different. You could indeed re-use your 50 ml if you took the deems out of the solvent each time after settling.

I think there must be a 'drive' for the deems to hop into the solvent, if there is already deems in the solvent I presume that this 'drive' is compromised. So even if the solvent is not saturated, it's recipiency might differ according to how many deems it already has. So I think in terms of recipiency according to how much deems it already has. I'm not sure but much points to this effect.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Long, slow, patient pulls. You do not need to heat the nps past room temp. Repeat until there's nothing left. Unless you have access to lab equipment you cannot be sure how much % of what you have are "goodies" and you might be surprised how much you can actually squeeze out.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Heulas said:
It also doesn't anwer my question because Endlessness is referring to the big one pull vs many smaller ones, which is different from the situation i'm thinking of, where there is one pull after 18 mix/separate phases.
Click to expand...
There is no "18 mix/separate phases", this counts as one (albeit thorough) mixing of the layers. You are describing doing "one small pull", as opposed to the mentioned "many small pulls" and "one big pull".

Heulas said:
So, following the analogy, this is what i'm actually asking: "letting the dishes in the soapy water for a longer time and then washing, isn't equal to rinse and wash for many times?"
Click to expand...
Washing dishes is not a very good analogy, because dirt is only on the surface of the dishes. Washing clothes, or rinsing paint brushes is a much better analogy.

What endlessness talks about is washing clothes until there is an equilibrium between the dirt in the washing water and the dirt still in the clothes, then putting these clothes (with the dirt remaining in them) into new, clean washing water and washing until again the an equilibrium is reached between dirt in the water and the dirt in the clothes. After a few iterations of discarding the dirty water and adding new fresh washing water, very little dirt will remain in the clothes, because with every change of the washing water, dirt is removed out of the equilibrium.

What you are describing is to keep washing the dirty clothes in the same small amount of dirty washing water over and over again, never removing any dirt out of the equilibrium. Obviously, that is not going to be very effective to clean the clothes. Doing "many washings with little fresh water each time" is more effective. Even "one washing with one lot of fresh water" will be more effective.
 
Upvote 0 Downvote
Back
Top Bottom