Vaporization temperature dependent selection of effects

[LeftBased]

Makes sense. The higher the temp, the quicker the extraction of cannabinoids in vapor, and subsequently a larger dose of THC per hit , draw, or puff. Do you decide how much bud to consume for a sesh and only pack that amount for the sesh? Or do you fill up the bowl for multiple seshes? OR, do you require/prefer more than a bowl in a sesh? How quickly you consume the bud in vapor, and hence, the preferred dose of cannabinoids and terpenes, is largely determined by how high the device’s extraction temp is.

I feel this is a factor. My abv went to a caramel brown at 338 in my roffu on the on demand mode, I stopped vaping after I started to taste toasty popcorn flavor. So it's true higher temps= faster extraction, at the cost of heat. The roffu is so dang smooth though even if I turn up the temps. It must be the cannabinoids that give the dry harsher throat hit at higher temps.

 

[Fesob_31]

... the difference between indica/sativa just terpenes...

The Cannabis sativa Versus Cannabis indica Debate: An Interview with Ethan Russo, MD - PMC

Dr. Ethan Russo, MD, is a board-certified neurologist, psychopharmacology researcher, and Medical Director of PHYTECS, a biotechnology company researching and developing innovative approaches targeting the human endocannabinoid system. Previously, ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

 

[Grass Yes]

The Cannabis sativa Versus Cannabis indica Debate: An Interview with Ethan Russo, MD - PMC

Dr. Ethan Russo, MD, is a board-certified neurologist, psychopharmacology researcher, and Medical Director of PHYTECS, a biotechnology company researching and developing innovative approaches targeting the human endocannabinoid system. Previously, ...

www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

While not exactly correctly stated in the thread. I believe @GoldenBud was getting at the point that Sativa/Indica is not a useful distinction when describing effects:

There are biochemically distinct strains of Cannabis, but the sativa/indica distinction as commonly applied in the lay literature is total nonsense and an exercise in futility.

Since the taxonomists cannot agree, I would strongly encourage the scientific community, the press, and the public to abandon the sativa/indica nomenclature and rather insist that accurate biochemical assays on cannabinoid and terpenoid profiles be available for Cannabis in both the medical and recreational markets.

Like I always say, leaf shape doesn't tell you anything about your high.

 

[GoldenBud]

Dr. Ethan Russo, MD, is a board-certified neurologist, psychopharmacology researcher, and Medical Director of PHYTECS, a biotechnology company researching and developing innovative approaches targeting the human endocannabinoid system. Previously, from ...

yes high Myrcene content will most likely bring sedative high and high content of Limonene will bring energetic high (Super Lemon Haze at Green House coffeeshop by the lake, Amsterdam, very energetic, very lemonish for example)

"Rather, sedation in most common Cannabis strains is attributable to their myrcene content, a monoterpene with a strongly sedative couch-lock effect that resembles a narcotic. In contrast, a high limonene content (common to citrus peels) will be uplifting on mood, while the presence of the relatively rare terpene in Cannabis, alpha-pinene, can effectively reduce or eliminate the short-term memory impairment classically induced by THC.2,8"

Like I always say, leaf shape doesn't tell you anything about your high.

Exactly how I think too.

 

[Fesob_31]

The Sativa/Indica and hybrid % is almost bs. We want/need/deserve better that this.
We should push the market in this direction and prise the companies providing cannabinoids and therpenes profiles.
This whole thread is about “profiling” the extraction… can we accept that there is such variance in the material we are processing? We must deal with it, but that should be the direction.

 

[GoldenBud]

The Sativa/Indica and hybrid % is almost bs. We want/need/deserve better that this.

some seeds sites/breeders sites stopped doing so already as far as I see now. but some may will never do because it helps selling quickly :/

 

[CANtalk]

Sativa / Indica isn't much, but I find it's better than nothing. I keep judgement open & try to be careful with confirmation bias. From that, I enjoy older sativa strains which quickly trace their roots back to early landrace collection & North American breeding in the 60-70's. And so far so good here w/ most all sativas being stimulating & indicas being relaxing (I'm sure it's indicative of terpene content, etc.). Just today, I vaped some Durban Poison & Acapulco Gold, plus Trainwreck yesterday & all highly recommended. The entourage effect is huge (as noted in a recent article linked here on FC).

I look forward to terpene and other cannabinoid content becoming more tested & reported. The Canadian legal market gives some great cannabis content information already along these lines... and it's the way forward as legacy strains & seeds get this treatment as well.

 

[Dankvinci]

I'm sorry for the formatting. This was written on a Mac running at a resolution of 1920x1200 and this seems to screw things up. I don't know how to attach a file (it's currently in a Word 97-03 format), but I will start to explain how I intend to use this chart (or at the least test and qualify it). My rationalization for trying to obtain an MMAR (in Canada this is referred to as a Medical Marijuana Authorization Release form) is that I have osteoarthritis in my hands/fingers and toes/feet and debilitating panic attacks. So if I want to obtain an effect that will hit the arhtritis, but not make me drowsy or give me couchlock, I would select a vaporization temperature of 170C, or perhaps 180C. At these temperatures there would be 9 compounds released that would have an antiinflammatory effect, and 4 compounds that would have an analgesic effect. Pretty good for me. If I select 180C, I also get release of one anti anxiety compound and one anti depressant compound, both potentially with sedative effects; so if I'm going to be out and about, I would take 170C.

If I am at home in the evening, or on the weekend and having a panic attack, I would want a greater anti anxiety type of effect, so I would select a vaporization temperature of 190C, by which point there will have been 4 compounds released that will act as anxiolytics (along with all of the other effects that are attached to such a vaporization temperature).

If it is late in the evening and I want a sedative effect, I would choose a vaporization temperature of 230C (which I know is getting close to combustion and yes the vapor will be harsher), at whicih point 6 compounds will have released that have a sedative effect.

So, 170, 190 and 230C are my set points. But Tom, what if I want the sedative effects wihtout the anti anxiety effects? Vape at 190C until you no longer get the desired effect, set the ABV aside in a marked container 190 (then you know that it has been used at 190 and below). Saving this type of ABV and then gathering it together and hitting it at 230C should give a pretty strong sedative effect without any other effects.

What if I want an anti anxiety effect without sedation? I would set the temperature to 180C, which should avoid most of the sedation.

There's more hypotheses that I could throw out there, but I'll leave you with this; if you vape your herb at a certain temperature, and then set that herb aside for future use (at a higher teperature) then there are a series of effects that you have removed that should no longer have to be considered when vaping the same weed at a future point.

I'm going to test this out pretty thoroughly on Saturday for an anti arthritis effect, since I expect to be out and about all day. Later that day I am going to take the 170C ABV and use it at a temperature of 230C and take notes on what happens.

That's all the energy I have to post now. I hope people can get some use out of this. Ask questions if you want and I'll try to help.

Bottom line; I think that we can separate the effects to an extent.

Tom

Tom, this is really fantastic research done by you. I've never known anyone to present type of research on vaped Cannabis. I'm gonna try this.

 

[LeftBased]

I am so conflicted with vape temperatures because each device (tool) is different, I did use a temp probe in my FURY EDGE and discovered it's 50 degrees in F below the set temperature. so what I learned I could have been using the wrong settings, sure the heater could be at 390F but the bowl itself is 50 degrees lower, however it is conductive because it's at least 340 while drawing even though heater is 390F, however it's hard to say as for the ROFFU I could try to temp probe however I have to be able to draw from device, but I do have an idea, maybe blowing into the air ports on side to see what temps I get in the bowl. I feel like the reason why ROFFU feels hotter, maybe the heater is adjusted to be slightly more hotter and overtime as you draw from device the RADIANT heat with mild conductive properties of the bowl add to the roasting action.

It's like an air fryer when it comes to convection except no FAN, you are the manual fan! heater can be adjusted hotter but there is a drop in temperature as you push in fresh air that gets heated by heater and into the bowl. People complain about V3 PRO and ROFFU not realizing these are CONVECTION styled vapes not HYBRID, the reason why MIGHTY and CRAFTY is praised for vapor production because they are easy to use no long drawn out draws. Even the Fenix Mini and its hybrids (POTV ONE / Fury Edge / ETC) are similar in terms of vapor production (easy to use).

So I learned that people want easy to use vapes but they want the best flavor, the problem its tough to deliver the best flavor while trying to give efficient toasting, that's why having variable temperatures helps we can fine tune our temps to what our flower is, it's not going to be perfect.

For example you could have some dense botanicals and they may require a hotter temp to flash off those resin oils, but they may leave your flower barely toasted, chlorophyll can be vaped off the color of it to make your herb dark, however the main goal of vaping is to safely roast off the cannabis resin without COMBUSTION. Some vapes like conduction style keep roasting your herb thus you get a full cook, but you also get chlorophyll if the heater set too high and if your botanicals are too dry you can get close to combustion, I believe they said combustion starts roughly around 450+ and up? maybe 460F not too sure. I almost had combustion with my flower at 380F in my roffu, when I pulled the herb out I noticed dark toast marks on some flower, not all around but it surprised me. I did taste a slight smokiness to my vapor but it wasn't full on.

So now I am careful, I think I'll stick to lower temps when vaping really dry botanicals to avoid combustion, but I think I had minor combustion there was no flame in the herb. I guess I drew too long on inhale I went for like 18+ seconds after the bowl was heat soaked, didn't think I'd actually have minor combustion, like there was parts that were really dark. however I am sure if there was minor combustion it's not like I inhaled tons of carcinogens it was just maybe a tiny scratch of combustion. I want to avoid combustion because of health reasons, ever since switching to DRY HERB vaping my lungs have been better, my sinuses have been better, my health overall improved.

 

[Maschine]

I`m aware this thread is a little bit old that`s why I want to add this paper published first in 2022. I did a quick search that showed up nothing therefore this post, hopefully you not already discussed it here.

Vapor Pressure, Vaping, and Corrections to Misconceptions Related to Medical Cannabis' Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients' Physical Properties and Compositions

They discuss some common concepts about temps, terps and pressure etc. in vaping and provide data for their findings. I studied something completely different thus not confident enough to interpret the whole paper but in very short: most claims about the actual vaping temperature are not accurate due to many variables like pressure caused by drawing and so on. In addition people mix up boiling and vaping point and forget that terps evaporate real quick etc. thus most claims like full spectrum or lower temps for this and higher for that, are highly doubtable, and like always more research is needed I knew most aspects are around the internet for years and not new but I never saw actual data or a paper about it.

Here is the abstract and sorry once again if you already discussed this or I understood something not correct.:

Spoiler: Abstract

Medical cannabis products contain dozens of active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) derived from the cannabis plant. However, their actual compositions and relative doses significantly change according to the production methods. Product compositions are strongly dependent on processing step conditions and on components' evaporation during those steps. Review of the documentation presented to caregivers and to patients show erroneous data or misinterpretation of data related to the evaporation, for example, cannabinoids' boiling points, as well as confusions between terms, such as boiling, vaporization, and evaporation. Clarifying these aspects is essential for caregivers, for researchers, and for developers of manufacturing processes. Original and literature data were analyzed, comparing composition changes during various processing steps and correlating the extent of change to components' vapor pressures at the corresponding temperature. Evaporation-related composition changes start at temperatures as low as those of drying and curing and become extensive during decarboxylation. The relative rate of components' evaporation is determined by their relative vapor pressure and monoterpenes are lost first. On vaping, terpenes are inhaled before cannabinoids do. Commercial medical cannabis products are deficient in terpenes, mainly monoterpenes, compared with the cannabis plants used to produce them. Terms, such as “whole plant” and “full spectrum,” are misleading since no product actually reflects the original cannabis plant composition. There are important implications for medical cannabis manufacturing and for the ability to make the most out of the terpene API contribution. Medical cannabis products' composition and product delivery are controlled by the relative vapor pressure of the various APIs. Quantitative data provided in this study can be used for improvement to reach better accuracy, reproducibility, and preferred medical cannabis compositions.

 

[GoldenBud]

Vapor Pressure, Vaping, and Corrections to Misconceptions Related to Medical Cannabis' Active Pharmaceutical Ingredients' Physical Properties and Compositions

They discuss some common concepts about temps, terps and pressure etc. in vaping and provide data for their findings. I studied something completely different thus not confident enough to interpret the whole paper but in very short: most claims about the actual vaping temperature are not accurate due to many variables like pressure caused by drawing and so on. In addition people mix up boiling and vaping point and forget that terps evaporate real quick etc. thus most claims like full spectrum or lower temps for this and higher for that, are highly doubtable, and like always more research is needed I knew most aspects are around the internet for years and not new but I never saw actual data or a paper about it.

how sure are we that one of their sources didn't do any mistake? how come THC boiling point is above 400C if we can get plenty of vapor at 220C?

did you click on the publishers name? most of them are from the Bazelet group, it's not an University or a College, it's a company that sells medical weed.
I dunno, sounds very awkward, THC boiling point higher than 400C? so weird

I am not saying 100%, but MAYBE, somebody decided to post something just to show activity around. idk. still trying to figure it out.

IF THC BOILING POINT WAS 400C+, YOU WOUDN'T GET FREAKING HIGH FROM 230C FAST DRAW... and you will get freaking stoned from 230c fast draw with a lot, a lot of vapes.... so weird and idk what's behind it

 

[Maschine]

how sure are we that one of their sources didn't do any mistake? how come THC boiling point is above 400C if we can get plenty of vapor at 220C?

I checked the journal and paper and it appears to be peer-reviewed and I have read some papers they cite otherwise I would never post a paper for discussion!
Regarding your second question, because materials tend to evaporate a way earlier before they boil. This is one of the misconceptions they clarify. Just think of water that produces vapor and even simmers before it full boils. Further they state something like, terps and thus some cannabinoids tend to evaporate even at room temperature and medical weed gets sterilized by heat and so on... But this gets more and more complicated in real life foremost by pressure. There should be another free paper somewhere regarding this topic - will post here if I find it.
But once again, not my native language and not my field of study - I happily hear an interpretation of this paper from someone who has the background and knowledge!

 

[GoldenBud]

Just think of water that produces vapor before it boils.

yeah, maybe water can produce vapor around 85c, and its boiling point is 99c, but the difference between 160C to 430C is HUGE...

real life foremost by pressure

the pressure is the same or almost the same in my country, in your country, as long as you're not like on some very big mountain, it's around 1atm=~1bar and poiling point of THC is around 160C... if you are set in some very tall mountain the boiling point will be maybe around 130C or less.. like water boils there at 70C or so....

the source that gave the information of ~430C is just wrong i think.... somebody tried to say something else maybe.. it doesn't sound right at all....

if THC boiling point is around 430C, you couldn't get vapor around 220C... or 180C... (slow draw)
boiling point is the point where you can see the first vapor.... it doesn't make sense a lot of vapor comes before the substance's boiling point....

somebody did mistakes... and idk how it got published...

 

[Maschine]

yeah, maybe water can produce vapor around 85c,

I appreciate that you engage in this discussion but have you read the paper? This would help our discussion thus the whole thread.
I came up with an example but of course weed is not water you are right. That`s why they did measurers on weed and wrote this paper and it differs in many terms like boiling point and vaporization point.

the pressure is the same or almost the same in my country, in your country

They talk about the pressure that appears in the vape and we change by taking a draw. This alters the actual pressure and temperature and many more that exists while vaping! And once again you right, pressure can vary depending on where you are. Now think how even more complicated it is to get consistent extractions in real life during vaping.

the source that gave the information of ~430C is just wrong i think.... somebody tried to say something else maybe.. it doesn't sound right at all....

Have you read the whole paper? Thats really a solid one! And one thing I learned to love about science is that often the outcomes tend to seem counterintuitive at first and amaze us later

 

[GoldenBud]

I appreciate that you engage in this discussion but have you read the paper? This would help our discussion thus the whole thread.
I came up with an example but of course weed is not water you are right. That`s why they did measurers on weed and wrote this paper and it differs in many terms like boiling point and vaporization point.

I was reading the whole paper , it doesn't give answers. sorry. I double check it and it doesn't give answers...

They talk about the pressure that appears in the vape and we change by taking a draw. This alters the actual pressure and temperature and many more that exists while vaping! And once again you right, pressure can vary depending on where you are. Now think how even more complicated it is to get consistent extractions in real life during vaping.

taking a draw is the VELOCITY of the vapor. not pressure. not vapor pressure. and I agree 100%,it's easy to get confused. i studied chemical engineering so i know the differences

when you take a draw, you reduce the system's temperature. that's why people vape at 220C instead of 165C. their draw REDUCES the temp. so it needs to set higher temp than the boiling point...

Have you read the whole paper? Thats really a solid one! And one thing I learned to love about science is that often the outcomes tend to seem counterintuitive at first and amaze us later

yeah, I was reading it all. they don't give answers, they give sources to their info... but... you know.. i think it's mistaken.
not a chance THC boils around 430C. you get plenty of vapor around 220C. it means the boiling point is below 220C. way below

 

[Maschine]

I`m once again sorry to say that I`m the wrong person to really discuss this in depth but I think this is the explanation they came up with in their paper:

1. "The term vaporization refers to any form of converting liquid to gas, including at temperatures below the boiling point (as in cannabis inflorescence drying at ambient temperature). Such vaporization below the boiling point is termed evaporation. At a given temperature, compounds with different boiling points vaporize at different rates. The relative rate of vaporization depends on the corresponding vapor pressure."

If you read maybe once again with a focus on the part starting under figure 1 you reach the same conclusion? They explain it in more detail in this paragraph and that`s why I guess we get plenty of vapor at 220°C - there is no need to boil the THC to decarb and extract it.
Further, here is another older an also peer reviewed paper, even got cited often and they reach the same conclusion and temperatures. But I have to stop here because this is more math and tec then I can handle ;D And there is enough bro science out there!

Just want to add with all respect that I rather trust our science as a system, when proper made, then my guts or some arguments that may sound smart and easy because of marketing. I just want remind at the sativa / Indica dogma before the market and science came up with terpenes.

 

[GoldenBud]

you read maybe once again with a focus on the part starting under figure 1 you reach the same

How they figured the 430C boiling point?

 

[Bologna]

How they figured the 430C boiling point?

Dude, why hammer the messenger? All they did was post a link to what's perceived to be pertinent information to the topic at hand. They didn't write it. You need to get in contact with the actual authors. Here's one I found for you...:

Address correspondence to: Noa Raz, PhD, Bazelet Medical Cannabis Group, Ha'ilan 35, Or Akiva, 3065101 Israel,
E-mail Address: noa.raz@bazelet-n.com

 

[GoldenBud]

anyway, when I read an article, and they have such a huge mistake like "THC boiling point is 425C" I just lose interest in the article and will never read it, who knows what other mistakes they may have.

 

[Grass Yes]

I feel like you are missing the forest for the trees. Boiling point of THC in a vacuum is almost entirely irrelevant as this thread has shown throughout. Not to mention that the temperature for that is not consistent across data sources.

 

[GoldenBud]

I feel like you are missing the forest for the trees. Boiling point of THC in a vacuum is almost entirely irrelevant as this thread has shown throughout. Not to mention that the temperature for that is not consistent across data sources.

Who was talking about a vacuum?
Without a vacuum boiling point of THC is 160c +-
Inside a vacuum the boiling point will be LESS than 160c
Not more
In this article they say boiling point is 425c

 

[Grass Yes]

Who was talking about a vacuum?
Without a vacuum boiling point of THC is 160c +-
Inside a vacuum the boiling point will be LESS than 160c
Not more
In this article they say boiling point is 425c

If you look at the Lomstead paper you can see that the boiling temperature of THC is measured at above 400c but the collection temperatures are much lower (less than 200c). And again this just confirms to me that talking about boiling points is nonsense. We don't need the THC boiled off to get adequate vapor production to carry it to our lungs to absorb.

 

[GoldenBud]

Lomstead paper

which source is it? number?

 

[Grass Yes]

which source is it? number?

Google Scholar

scholar.google.com

There is no practical direct way of measuring the temperature at which the vapor pressures of THC and CBD reach normal room pressure (about 760 torr), since at such elevated temperatures, these cannabinoids are instable and decompose. The normal boiling points can, however, be estimated by extrapolating vapor pressure at lower temperatures, using the Clausius–Clapeyron equation. For example, the vapor pressures of THC at 155°C and 190°C are about 0.05 torr and 0.3 torr, respectively, leading to boiling points higher than 400°C, in agreement with the results of McClements, Umnahanant et al., and Lovestead and Bruno.38–40

I actually find the shared paper very interesting, especially the section "Terpene and cannabinoid ingestion on using vaporizers at 180°C to 220°C". Once again I feel like you are getting hung up on a piece of information you previously knew that might be more complicated than you thought.

I'm already getting tired of this conversation though. Glad you gave input. Hope you enjoy reading the cited papers.

 

[GoldenBud]

1.
I can't find this "

There is no practical direct way of measuring the temperature at which the vapor pressures of THC and CBD reach normal room pressure (about 760 torr), since at such elevated temperatures, these cannabinoids are instable and decompose. The normal boiling points can, however, be estimated by extrapolating vapor pressure at lower temperatures, using the Clausius–Clapeyron equation. For example, the vapor pressures of THC at 155°C and 190°C are about 0.05 torr and 0.3 torr, respectively, leading to boiling points higher than 400°C, in agreement with the results of McClements, Umnahanant et al., and Lovestead and Bruno.38–40
"

in the sources. tried 38,39,40. nothing found.

2. the most interesting thing of the paper is this: (if it's true)

@Cheebsy FYI, interesting info