Embedded Files
What is the HASH-VAC?
HASH-VAC is not a thing, it's a state of mind...the Hash-Vac is basically just a vacuum and a sieve. It is more of a concept or way of cleaning and drying hash. The original design started as a wet dry shop vacuum, 70 micron nylon screen, and a glass beaker. The vacuum cleaner with attachment is used to suck fine particles through the screen and at the same time the suction creates turbulence in the enclosed container on top of the sieve. The turbulence is used to move particles on the sieve and aid in removing particles finer then the sieve opening. The main advantage of using the Hashcru Headhunter sieve is the efficiency in removing trichome stalks from the material on top of the sieve.
During vacuum operation, air is moved across the surface of the screen and hash. The high air flow increases the evaporation rate of any free unbound water. The turbulence blows the hash around and allows for rapid drying of the hash. Care must be exercised not to allow the temperature or agitation to reach extremes that may damage the trichome head integrity. Extreme vacuum force applied incorrectly can cause heads to rupture and or water to become entrapped in the hash.
Did you just say in addition to removing contaminates it can actually dry water sieved hash?
YES, and if you add the correct type of 520nm LEDs you can evaporate water at a rate of 4X the speed without them. ***The use of a water activity meter to confirm dryness is crucial to achieving a level of dryness that will not promote microbial growth. The hash may seem dry on the outside, but may have water trapped below the surface. The water will try to work it's way to the surface and may leave a buttered matte appearance.
Recommended equipment to use Hash-Vac tech to dry hash:
LeBrew Aqua Gauge for measuring water activity. (THAT IS MY AFFILIATE LINK, FULL DISCLOSURE, I GET PAID IF YOU BUY USING THAT LINK).
A 4-6HP wet dry shop vacuum, 2.5" hose with various nozzle attachments, including a floor sweep and various round nozzles with bristles.
DELMAR brand dust separator with a five gallon bucket. Two of these can be added in series if you are not dropping out all desired particles in the first bucket.
Sieve screens to retain the collection you desire to keep on top of the screen. For example if you want to keep >70 micron, use a 70 micron or appropriate LPI screen.
Clear cover that will cover the entire top of the screen frame
Optional: 520nm MT polarized LED, or any LED light in the green light spectrum.
Drying technique (WARNING: YOU MUST KEEP THE HASH FROM CLUMPING OR YOU CAN TRAP WATER INSIDE THE HASH, FREEZE AND MICROPLANE IF NECESSARY, SPREAD THIN AND LEAVE OUT OVERNIGHT AFTER VACUUM DRYING):
Work in an environment that is cold enough to keep the hash stable. Carefully monitor the condition of the heads to verify the heads are not rupturing. Place hash directly from collection bag onto a framed drying sieve.
Pour water over the hash to spread it out in a thin even layer that covers the entire surface of the screen. This step can also be used to rinse the hash more to remove any additional fine particulates. Continue to pour water over the hash while operating the floor sweep vacuum nozzle below the sieve until no undesired small particles are visible. Then use the floor sweep or other nozzle to remove any observable water. As the excess water is removed the hash can start to fly up off the surface of the sieve. It typically takes a few minutes to remove excess standing water from a 20x24" 200 LPI screen.
Once the excess water is removed place a clear rigid cover over the sieve frame to prevent hash from flying away. The 520 nm LEDs can be placed facing down towards the hash. The closer the light the stronger the effect. MIT peer reviewed research shows that the photo molecular effect from magnetically transverse polarized 520nm LED at a 45 degree angle effect can increase evaporation of water by 4X.
Continue to work the vacuum under the sieve screen until the hash reaches a water activity level below 0.6AW. The hash can be placed in the freezer and worked through a microplane if it starts to clump. Work in short sessions and place the sieve in a freezer to prevent melting of heads. Most standard water sieve collections can be dried to below 0.6AW, in less than 60 minutes with this technique.
***For additional drying (THIS STEP IS HIGHLY RECOMMENDED TO REMOVE ANY WATER THAT MAY BE TRAPPED BETWEEN HEADS), the hash can be spread thinly and left out with air flow and the green lights. The green lights are only effective at the surface, the hash needs to be agitated to expose water around trichomes below the surface layer. Nitrogen or argon gas can be used inside a chamber to create a completely dry environment, and a fan can be used to circulate the air in the chamber. A system can be set up to monitor humidity and automatically purge the chamber with dry gas to speed evaporation of any remaining free water.
What about the Low Temp Industries TEST OF THE HASH VAC METHOD FOR DRYING HASH?
After reading the article carefully, I think there are both strengths and weaknesses in the experiment. Overall, I don't think the study is robust enough to conclude that the Hash-vac process itself caused the terpene loss they observed.
What they did well: they washed one large batch of material and split it into different treatment groups, which is much better than comparing different harvests or cultivars. They measured water activity (aw) rather than relying solely on time. They sent samples to an independent laboratory for cannabinoid and terpene analysis. They clearly reported their methods and published the COAs instead of just summarizing the data. Those are all positives.
Where I think the experiment has problems: the biggest issue is that they did not isolate a single variable. They compared: Non-vacuum → freeze dry (19 hours), Hash-vac → freeze dry (8 h 45 min), Hash-vac → air dry (50 hours). They only reported using time as a determination for dryness. They did not freeze dry the sample to the same water activity level as the Hash-vac sample. In order to reduce varibles all the samples should have been dired to the same water activity level. A measure of water activity is an acceptable way to verify all samples are at the same level of dryness. I did not see a water activity measurement for the freeze dried sample.
The problem is that the hash-vac processed samples were not analyzed for terpene content immediately after the vacuum process. Instead, every Hash-vac treated sample underwent another drying step. That means if terpene loss occurred, there are at least three possible causes: the vacuum process, the additional freeze drying, the prolonged air drying. The experiment cannot distinguish between them; therefore, the experiment does not allow anyone to make a definitive scientific conclusion. It's just more "bro science".
The water activity issue: This is probably the point I find most important. They report reaching 0.420 aw after approximately 180 seconds of vacuum drying. If that measurement is accurate, then the material is already well below the commonly cited microbial threshold of 0.60 aw and is essentially dry from a water activity standpoint.
If the objective is to evaluate the Hash-vac process, I would have expected one of two things: analyze the sample immediately after reaching the target aw, or define an endpoint other than simply continuing to dry it. They did not define how they determined the freeze dried samples were actually dry.
They subjected one sample to nearly nine additional hours in a freeze dryer and another to roughly fifty hours in a 2.5% RH environment. Those additional drying exposures become confounding variables.
The air-dry comparison is especially weak, the "Vac Air" sample spent approximately 50 hours in an environment they report as 55°F and 2.5% humidity. Assuming that humidity measurement is accurate (2.5% RH is extraordinarily dry for a room environment), that environment has a very high drying potential. If the sample had already reached 0.420 aw before entering that environment, continued exposure could reasonably continue removing volatile compounds. The experiment doesn't separate losses caused during the initial vacuum step from losses during those additional 50 hours.
The freeze-dried comparison also has a limitation, the Hash-vac sample was supposedly "dried" more quickly than the control. That shortened the freeze dryer cycle from 19 hours to 8 h 45 min, which is an interesting operational result. However, if the sample was already very dry before entering the freeze dryer, it raises another question, was the freeze dryer still removing water, or was it increasingly removing volatile compounds after the moisture endpoint had effectively been reached? The experiment wasn't designed to answer that.
The reported terpene difference, they observed: control: 8.33% total terpenes, vacuum + freeze: 7.52%, vacuum + air: 7.45%. That corresponds to roughly a 9.7% reduction in total terpene concentration for the vacuum/freeze group compared with the control. The data clearly show a difference between the finished samples. What the experiment does not demonstrate is when that difference occurred. That's an important distinction.
What I would have changed: if the goal were specifically to evaluate the Hash-vac process, I would design it more like this:
Split one homogeneous batch. Vacuum one half to the target water activity. Leave the other half untreated with the Hash-vac process and dry that in the freeze dryer until it reaches the exact same water activity level as the Hash-vac treated sample. Analyze both immediately. That would separate the effects of Hash-vac processed samples from the effects of freeze drying, effects of prolonged drying, cumulative effects.
That type of design would make it much easier to attribute any terpene changes to a specific process rather than to the entire drying sequence.
What is my overall assessment of the Low Temp Industries test?
I think the experiment provides useful evidence that the Hash-vac method can substantially reduce freeze-drying time, which is a meaningful operational finding.
However, I don't think the experiment conclusively demonstrates that the Hash-vac process itself caused the observed terpene reduction. Because every Hash-vac-treated sample underwent additional drying after it had already reached the reported water activity target, the study includes significant confounding variables. As a result, I view the terpene findings as suggestive rather than definitive. A stronger experimental design would have analyzed the material immediately after Hash-vac drying or included matched control groups at each stage of the process. That approach would have provided much stronger evidence as to whether the Hash-vac process itself affects terpene retention.
Overall, I think Low Temp Industries does an excellent job creating educational content and engaging the solventless community through social media. However, based on the experiments they have published, I don't believe their experimental designs consistently follow the level of scientific rigor needed to draw definitive conclusions.
They initially approached me about collaborating on the first Hash-vac experiment. However, the first time I actually saw the experiment was when the video was released. Later, I spoke with Levi, who said they wanted to work with me on the second experiment. Once again, the discussions were limited to the Hash-vac technique itself rather than the design of a scientifically controlled experiment.
From what I have observed across several of their published experiments, the primary weakness is experimental design. Many of the studies include multiple uncontrolled or confounding variables, making it difficult to attribute the results to a single factor with confidence. Because of these limitations, I believe the experiments are valuable for generating hypotheses and encouraging discussion, but they should not be viewed as providing definitive scientific evidence without additional, properly controlled testing.
How do I buy the Hash-Vac?
Ha! Did you read about the Hash Piston orders? IT'S JUST A VACUUM CLEANER, THE REAL MAGIC IS THE HEADHUNTER SRS ! You can employ most wet/dry vacuums. I suggest purchasing the largest HP and hose sizes possible. You can always scale the size down. In addition to the vacuum cleaner you need a dust collector or cyclone to capture particles, this maintains the same suction power through out the process. If a dust collector is not used the vacuum performance will decrease do to filtration clogging. Here is a list of components that can be used for the HASH-VAC concept. There are affiliate links for each of these products and I receive financial compensation (~3%) if you click the link and purchase one of these products using my link. I believe you can find lower prices for some of these items and if saving money is important to you I encourage you to find a lower price the 3% commission I receive is not significant and I would prefer you to find the best deal.
4-6 HP Vacuum cleaner or FOX Alien HFS 800
DELMAR bucket top separator.
SHOP-Vac 5 gallon Stainless Steel Bucket collector. THE DUST COLLECTOR FOR THE SHOP VAC DOES NOT WORK TO SEPARATE TRICHOMES!!! BUT THE STAINLESS BUCKET AND ROLLING STAND ARE NICE OPTIONS.
What is the difference between WET-DRY VAC vs. DUST COLLECTOR SYSTEMS?
Wet-dry vacuum systems are typically designed for maximum suction and pick up of larger particles. In addition most shop vacuum systems are not capable of filtering out 99.9% of dust particles, where dust collector systems like the FESTOOL Dust Collector systems with cyclone collectors are designed to reject particles based on density. All lower density particles that leave the accept port of the cyclone are captured by the dust collector bag or HEPA filter. The system is designed for the correct vacuum head pressure and air speed to drop most particles of interest, and the system will protect the environment from finer particles that are removed from the accept port. The finer less dense particles that are of small micron size often are not captured by standard shop vacuum systems. If a shop vacuum is utilized the exit air should be exhausted from the lab so workers are not exposed to particles that can cause health hazards.
What is a cyclone separator?
Cyclone separators are devices used to reject particles from an air stream. They use centripetal force to separate particles based on their density. Separators are used to reduce particles entering a vacuum chamber, this reduces filters clogging and maintains vacuum pressure. Cyclones can be used in series to reject different density particles from the airstream. Cyclones are not effective when the particles are sticky, so they should be used with the appropriate input material or at temperatures that keep material stable. Longer hose length going into the cyclone will decrease the air speed and potentialy cause less dense particles to pass out of the accept port and pass into the vacuum bag or vacuum filter. The cyclone must be sized properly, heavy particulate input can overload the cyclone causing it not to work properly.
What is a hydrocyclone?
A hydrocyclone is an innovative, non-moving device that harnesses fluid pressure to efficiently separate materials based on their density. Imagine a powerful centrifuge, but without any moving parts! It works by injecting a liquid mixture tangentially into a cylindrical-conical chamber, creating a strong vortex. Denser particles are flung to the outer walls and exit at the bottom (the "underflow"), while the lighter liquid spirals upwards and exits from the top (the "overflow").
How do I build a Hash-Vac "State of Mind" system for producing pure trichome heads without using "cold plasma" technology?
First determine the desired outcome. Do you want to dry, clean, or do both? Then piece together the components to make that happen.
That Hash-Vac I built is loud, what can I do to protect my hearing?
I am not a doctor, or safety professional (I only have 9 fingers left...). Wear hearing protection rated for the decibel level in the work area. If you don't enjoy the silence this brings consider using noise cancelling headphones. There are several songs dedicated to the HASH-Vac that can be downloaded here: @hash.vac on Instagram.
There seems to be a lot of small particles floating in the air, is that safe to breathe those particles?
I am not a doctor, or air particle safety expert, but my intuition tells me we should reduce particulate intake into our respiratory system. I highly recommend anyone working in cannabis wear the appropriate N95 rated dust mask and other appropriate personal protective equipment. Utilize the Hash-Vac with a real HEPTA filtration for the exhaust. Use HEPTA filters in the lab, design airflow to pull particles away from people working in the space, and wear an N95 mask.
3D PRINTER FILES FOR THE HASH-VAC (MORE FILES SOON...THESE ARE BASIC TINKER CAD GENERATED SHAPES, NOT REALLY OPTIMIZED MORE LIKE AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROJECT, IF YOU WANT TO MAKE BETTER FILES AND POST SEND THEM, I WILL CREDIT YOU!). I made these files so you have easy access, the cost of printing is cheap, please do not pay crazy money to have someone else 3D print these!!!
HASHCRU OG 150 MM Guillotine Frame for 2.5" VACUUM HOSE ACCESSORY-this is the first set up and more for the hobbist or someone who wants to test the technique. The process works better with vibration, so my best recommendation is to print the 30cm Round Frame.
Narrow Vertical Nozzle 20MM Diameter (this is a prototype and intended to be used with a nylon filter bag placed over the top to filter incoming air).
GUILLOTINE 30cm ROUND FRAME dialed for the VEVOR 30 cm VIBRATORY SIFTER.
Glass lid nozzles works with the glass lid available on AMAZON, (AFFILIATE LINK FOR LID).
GUILLOTINE TOP RING 30cm ROUND (print QTY 8 per 256mm print plate). This file can be modified to create taller walls, which may benefit water sieving stacks with smaller micron sizes or limited open areas.
GUILLOTINE BOTTOM RING 30cm (print QTY 8 per 256mm print plate)
QTY 24, #4, 1/2" STAINLESS STEEL SELF TAPPING SCREWS (AFFILIATE LINK FOR SCREWS).
20 MESH STAINLESS STEEL BACKER SCREEN FOR HEADHUNTER SRS (AFFILIATE LINK). While not required for most screens, this offers support to reduce the risk of tearing or ripping.
I offer an acrylic lid for the 30cm round frame. E-mail if interested.
Google Sites
Report abuse