N.E.T Creations and Reviews (Naturally Extracted Tobaccos or Teas)

[50YearsOfCigars]

@Raven-Knightly

I have noticed references to “PGA” on this thread

Unfortunately the abbreviation PGA gets incorrectly thrown around internet vape sites as shorthand for Pure Grain Alcohol. To a chemist what they are really talking about is Ethyl Alcohol, and it would be much less confusing if they used the correct chemical name for that compound.

The term Anhydrous is common to both solvents Ethyl Alcohol and to Propylene Glycol as both compounds are hydroscopic. It is essentially impossible to drive all the water out of them when the landscape is that of our ‘kitchen chemistry’ … Even for a trained chemist using very expensive lab equipment and techniques it is very difficult to handle these types of solvents in their Anhydrous form. But the good news is that is not necessary for our purposes. Just don’t worry about it. There will be a little water dissolved in your solvents, probably about 3% by weight, but water is a great solvent for most of the flavor molecules that we are trying to carry into our vape juice, so it is a non issue for us. It might even be a little bit of a benefit.

@Raven-Knightly

Will be placing an identical glass container into my…“heating contraption” along with some water, and see if I can observe (or induce) temperature changes

Great ! Thats the place to start. I think you will find that the issue is that device. Most of us have had very good luck using re-purposed crock pots and a temp controller. i use water bath in the crock pots, but i know that @Kinnikinnick uses rice as the conductive media because it has several advantages such as it is easy to work with, poses less hazard of accidentally contaminating your extraction with spilled water, and is generally cheap and convenient.

I get my crock pots from the local junk store (here they call them ‘antiques collectible shops’ hahaha - ) for about $5 each. On Amazon you can get one of these nice controllers and be in business for less than $20 including the rice !!!

Inkbird All-Purpose Digital Temperature Controller Fahrenheit &Centigrade Thermostat w Sensor 2 Relays ITC-1000
by Inkbird
Learn more: Amazon.com

[Raven-Knightly]

[Note: Please pardon any typos. Will circumvent net-bot with reply-edits to correct any major ones.]

Thanks in no small part to Kinnikinnick’s kind and patient lending of his attention and time in our related communications, I’ve put together something of a process for NET extractions, and have emerged from initial runs with some nice and clean (and “not bad tasting”) results using the following blends:
D&R Windsail Regular (Virginia)
C&D Red Virginia Ribbon
PS Luxury Bullseye Flake

Tried various things, and find the overall process to (appear to) be fairly “forgiving” to deviations. Most resulted from my own inexperience and desire to explore my curiosities. One arose out of my limited quantity of PG relative to VG around, and my limited budget inspired me to try some PG/VG solvent blends, in addition to also trying PG-only. VG is slightly more “polar” than is PG - but its significantly higher viscosity (at room temps) observably results in less molecular mobility during the cold phase.

Used around 8 Hours time for one initial warm-phase (in the range of around 117 - 137 *F). My little coffee-cup warmer rig is a rather humble item, but I have learned its ways, and managed to use it in fairly hands-free operation over the warm-phase (periodically checking/tweaking temp, and stirring). My impression is that breaking-up the tobacco leaves used (resulting in more exposed surface area) is not problematic - given adequate post-filtering performed. Periodically stirring (with my glass thermo, or a small spoon) during the warm-phase maximizes distribution of the leaf-bits in solvent. Giving the jars a few good shakes once/twice per week throughout what has been 35 Day cold-phase times seems to be a good idea - as breaking up the leaf cell-wall structures is said to be a desirable goal to achieve.

The AeroPress is great. I have done filtering with the (~20 Micron pore-size) coffee filters that come with, followed by using some filter-paper that I had around (likely either a 6 or 7 Micron pore-size). It definitely helps to use some sort of lubricant on the inner walls of the cylinder (I used just a bit of VG). One thing noticed is that if one’s hand-cut filters fail to cover the entire area of the inner diameter of the removable bottom-piece (with the large holes in it), one can at some point lose the seal, and pressure, causing extract juice to well-up just a bit around the sides (not in the end lost). Those occurrences were not a big deal, however. Managed to adequately succeed, nevertheless. I will in the future be cutting (slightly) wider diameter filter disks (as recommended and shown in the post that I am replying to).

.

The above likely being familiar territory for most readers of this thread, I will describe a pre-filtering tool that I have tried and found to be very workable for my own purposes. I found some Blake & Croft Sink Strainers (2-pack set, 2 sizes included, the larger 11cm diameter, 3.5cm depth being the more useful item). They are an (approx) 14(per Inch)-mesh made of some type of stainless steel. Quite strong and sturdy for what they are. One-half Ounce of macerated leaf-bits fits perfectly into the straining area, and the depth works out very well in wide-mouth (standard, or the shorter “elite” shaped) 8 Oz mason-jars. The strainers (properly placed and pressed together) can take a rather significant amount of physical force. Only slight distortion of the mesh (at the very bottom/center of one) has occurred as a result.

Just a few small little bits of leaf parts made it through the initial pre-filtering straining. Not bad at all ! Not enough to interfere on the filter-paper with the following two filtering phases using AeroPress. Regardless of macerated leaf-bit size, the pre-filter processes went quickly and easily. What I like the most about the entire process used is that the extracts do not touch any unnecessary surfaces at all. The pre-filtered yield (juice-out/solvent-in) appears to be very high. Ditto following 2 more filterings.

Here’s a series of images that show my various extraction contraptions (both on break, and at work):

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Many thanks to Kinnikinnick for his gracious assistance in my “maiden voyage” into NET realms !

[anon13011326]

Excellent, good to see you you working through the process. @Kinnikinnick is a great source and help. Keep it up, the VG used as a solvent is interesting although I hesitate using it because of the viscosity myself. I think it would take forever to filter through my 2 micron Buchner system.

[Raven-Knightly]

@anon13011326

… the VG used as a solvent is interesting although I hesitate using it because of the viscosity myself. I think it would take forever to filter through my 2 micron Buchner system.

Having a look at information about your device, probably so ? When the VG ranges from around 25% to 33% (relative to the PG in mix), the viscosity is nicely lower at room temps - thus more workable:

Viscosity of Glycerol as a funtion of Temperature (Degrees C)

Not a noticeable difference (in the pre-filtering straining process described) between PG and PG/VG. Was busier thinking about juice when AeroPressing, so there (may, not sure) have been some differences (between PG and PG/VG) in terms of the resistance to physical force presented by the filter-paper and output holes. The pressures exerted when compressing the AeroPress are (probably) significantly higher than that of the Buchner system ? Have wondered if a slow approach (as opposed to more rapidly executed compression and extraction, as I have done) makes a difference. My question really is, “are there components existing on/in the macerated leaf-bits which one does not want to extract, or is it a matter of concern regarding (only) minimizing (towards elimination) all larger sized particles ?”

The resultant extracts look quite “clean” (to my eye). Need to do more tasting/vaping. So far, nothing seems untoward - but I am so “green” to this stuff that my “newbie” impressions need “seasoning”. Still have a bit of my references (C&D Red Virginia Ribbon, and PS Luxury Bullseye Flake extracts made by our master-classman Kinnikinnick), which will be a valuable reference to taste-compare with.

[anon13011326]

@Raven-Knightly

My question really is, “are there components existing on/in the macerated leaf-bits which one does not want to extract, or is it a matter of concern regarding (only) minimizing (towards elimination) all larger sized particles ?”

NETs are typically hard on coils, I feel the larger particle size contributes to that. Using the Buchner filter with a vacuume of a little less than 15lbs and a 2 micron filter finishes filtering about 100 ml in less than 10 minutes, I do pre screen in a mesh strainer first. This leaves me a concentrate that is very flavorful that I mix at about 7%. Works for me.

[Kinnikinnick]

It makes me happy when I see folks doing things “their way”. As I’ve said many times, trial and error is our teacher in the NET realm. Sure, we glean info from others, but it in the end, we find what works best for ourselves.

Happy for you @Raven-Knightly! Hopefully with time and effort, you’ll find that maceration method that suits your vaping pleasure.

@anon13011326

NETs are typically hard on coils, I feel the larger particle size contributes to that.

My notion has always been the natural sugar content in the leaf is what causes the gunk. Who knows? But, I don’t fret too much about the issue/idea too much… my lung capacity, health, and wellbeing has improved 99% since I stoppped inhaling real burning tobacco leaves. That’s good enough for me I’ll be glad to change wicks and do a coil burn on a daily basis if it means I can have the joy of vaping NET every day!

Mmmmm… tobacco goodness!

[anon13011326]

@Kinnikinnick

my lung capacity, health, and wellbeing has improved 99%

That is what its all about, and enjoying it along the way.

[Raven-Knightly]

Thanks for your kind words, my friend ! For all of my analytical head-scratchings before the fact, getting to working through and accomplishing the process of extraction has been beneficial - and I do rather enjoy the meditative state of mind brought about by mental concentration when trying to bring things imagined and speculated about together with what awaits the dreamer, finally “reduced to practice”.

My tastes/preferences, and thus targets, also dynamically move and evolve, evening tastes different than morning, getting more familiar with my gear and trying various vaping approaches means a lot in terms of perspectives of thought. Presently, I’m finding 12 mg/ml Nicotine at 10-12 Watts with ~60/40 PG/VG and 20% NET flavoring content to be about right for me. Am consuming approximately one-half of the daily Nicotine that I absorbed over 48 years of puffing-away. I tried to smoke just a tad (of the Red VA and Lux BE) in a pipe. Got a brief Nicotine rush (that base-Nic could equally provide, albeit at slower rates), followed by a bad headache, and my lungs punished me for a day or two. No more !

Am using between 2:1 and 3:1 ratios of Virginias / PS Lux BE (am guessing that I like the interesting “Perique” flavors in the latter). The “threshold” of the for me desirable PS Lux BE proportions in the Virginia flavors varies (by the time of day, and it seems edging in general towards more PS Lux BE). It seems that this may be the trickiest element, and I wonder if that “G.L. Pease Haddo’s Delight” that Kinnikinnick recently posted about is the kind of thing to explore later as an option to the PS Lux BE.

@Kinnikinnick

David5362: NETs are typically hard on coils, I feel the larger particle size contributes to that.

My notion has always been the natural sugar content in the leaf is what causes the gunk.

@50YearsOfCigars

… delicate items that are now considered to be some of the most important aroma precursors responsible for tobacco flavor are sugar esters, beta-o-glucopyranose (a glucose tetraester) This and the more predominant sucrose tetraester, as well.all these compounds are subject to auto-oxidative reactions, which cause degradation, in response to heat …

I see that the melting point (MP) of Glucose is ~146 *C, and that of Sucrose is ~186 *C - both being coil temperatures reached well before Nicotine (BP ~247 *C) begins to vaporize along with PG (BP ~188 *C) present in juice. Esters of these sugars might well tend towards having higher MPs. Thus, it seems that these molecules may begin to form a sticky gunk (and “plaques” on coil-winding surfaces) right around the temperature where the PG boils (on the coil-winding surfaces) - which we know is still well below the BP of Nicotine (~247 *C), and thus is a temp. predictably reached whenever vaping. It (may) be that larger particle-sizes in the juice might serve to form such “plaques” a bit more rapidly ? That (might, possibly) be an argument for using higher Wattage and/or shorter wire length coils (with a lower “heat-capacity”, thus faster temperature changes), in order to reduce the time at beginning of the draw, when only PG, and little Nicotine, is vaporizing. However, there is no way to avoid the cooling phases - where sugars/sugar-esters still have adequate time to harden onto the coil winding-surfaces.

Am reading that Glucose and Sucrose decompose at their melting-points. Their esters (may, possibly) behave similarly (though perhaps at somewhat higher temps) - making for complex/varied behaviors ? Such decomposed (“caramelized”) sugars/sugar-ester components may become a hardened “gunk”.

Anybody have an estimate of how small a particle size can be resolved by our eyes when eyeballing well-illuminated extract up-close ? My filter-paper (likely 6-7 Micron pore-size) result looks “clean”.

I also wonder to what (if any appreciable) extent a Rayon wick (and the necessity for the juice to travel upwards in top-coil atomizers) might possibly act to (some) extent as a particle-size filtration element. Perhaps not one affecting relative mobility of particles in coffee-filter (~20 u) pore-sizes and below ?

[anon13011326]

@Raven-Knightly

Anybody have an extimate of how small a particle size can be resolved by our eyes when eyeballing well-illuminated extract up-close ? My filter-paper (likely 6-7 Micron pore-size) result looks “clean”.

I have no idea. I do know that after using doubled paper coffee filters I was surprised at the amount of sediment recovered on the 2 micron filter as a last filtration, I skip the coffee filters now.

[Kinnikinnick]

@Raven-Knightly

an extimate of how small a particle size can be resolved by our eyes when eyeballing well-illuminated extract up-close ?

From what research I’ve done… depending upon your age, humans can see anywhere between 6 and 40 micron particles with the naked eye. Small children can see at a much lower micron level than adults. So, we, as olds, can probably see somewhere between a 30 and 40 micron particle size.

[Raven-Knightly]

@Kinnikinnick

… we, as olds, can probably see somewhere between a 30 and 40 micron particle size.

Interesting. If so, my extracts appearing (to my eyes, even using magnification) as “clean” (after using probably 6-7 Micron pore-size paper) might be expected - and not necessarily altogether informative.

[Raven-Knightly]

@Raven-Knightly

When the VG ranges from around 25% to 33% (relative to the PG in mix), the viscosity is nicely lower at room temps - thus more workable …

Am finding that the 2 in-process jars of macerating C&D Red Virginia Ribbon that I tried making up and warmed the other day (using 100ml, 67% PG and 33% VG) are indeed just a bit too viscous (at ~60 *F in my cupboard), as compared to a previous run of same (in 100% PG). Viscosity appears to decrease (somewhat) to a more desirable level at the ~74 *F temperature of this room (still too “gooey”) - so I’ll be storing them here - and will probably be sure to stick with using 100% PG solvent only going forth.

[The_masteres]

Hello,

Thx for sharing.

Are you still able to use your aeropress for coffee ?

[The_masteres]

Thank you all for the information provided in this great post.

I have been vaping Italian Net since a long Time, and it costs me a lot of money, so have decided to give a try to DIY using cold maceration with only PG.

At this stage I have put some Cigare to macerate and in the meantime, have invested on some material which is a brand new aeropress and many filters.

For the filters, i have ordered many sizes hoping to get better results and also making the process easier/faster : qualitative 10 micron, 4 micron, 2.5 micron and 1.5 micron.

I will update with more info soon

[jimmyd]

This thread is like an old friend, good to see it return.

The summer heat is gone and the cooler weather of Autumn has me thinking about NETS again. When I smoked a pipe this was the time of year I thought about breaking out my Latakia and Basma blends, they just seem to go well with long walks and cool nights

Now with vaping, it’s been my quest to come up with DIY ‘Oriental Tobacco Black’ and Balkan type NETs. I have more than two dozen jars of heat assisted PGA NETS aging, some over two years, that came out of my tutelage with Str8vision’s help over at the other place. (most of the tobaccos I use to make NETs were also very well aged, some for 15+ years!)

It was always about time, having the patience if one is so inclined, to turn the pursuit more toward art than science…and to somewhat justify why I bought all that tobacco way back when.

[The_masteres]

Hello vaper Friends,

My cigare maceration is still ongoing, one month have passed. I still have to be patient.

In the meantime , I started looking for some pipe tobacco to make some good NET and would like your advice in order to make my choice among the following:

Cornell & Diehl : PIRATE KAKE

Peter Stokkebye: BALKAN SUPREME

John Patton Bulk: LATAKIA JUNCTION

Peter Stokkebye: PROPER ENGLISH

Have ever tested on of the above and which ones would you chose ?

Thank you

[Josephine_van_Rijn]

@anon13011326

I skip the coffee filters now.

When you poor your liquid carefully into another container, the sediment will remain on the bottom.
I usually do that several times, giving it time to settle before pouring it out again.
You’d be amazed how much you filter out that way.
It makes the filtering through a micron filter much easier, it doesn’t get clogged up.
Especially with cigar macerations, that is basically clean after that.

You will end up with some leftover liquid full of sediment. You could filter that out separately, or it costs peanuts, why bother?

[Wozzle]

Well, I just finished reading all 557 posts on this wonderful thread. Thanks to all who shared their valuable information, knowledge and pitfalls through their DIY NET experiences! Looks like I have a shopping list and a new hobby to pursue!