RUG blending isn't as good......

Single Tank WVO systems and blending SVO WVO to thin it.

Moderators: SunWizard, coachgeo

Postby SunWizard » Mon Aug 25, 2008 1:00 pm

Here is some more info on RUG blending from Cummins who does the most extensive testing of fuels of any company I have seen:

WARNING

Under no circumstances must gasoline or alcohol be used to dilute diesel fuel. This practice creates an extreme fire hazard and under certain circumstances an explosive hazard. Gasoline dilution is not an effective way to lower cloud point (20 volume-percent gasoline only lowers cloud point 4°C [7°F] and it lowers the fuel viscosity, cetane number, and flash-point). Alcohol dilution will increase the cloud point.

http://www.cummins.dk/fileadmin/dokumenter/Bulletins_Litteratur/Fuels_for_Cummins_Engines.htm

This is a long page with lots of good info about additives, microbial contamination, water, etc. Another interesting point confirming their approval of <5% WMO:

CAUTION

Do not blend more than 5 percent used lubricating oil with the fuel. Do not blend other used oils with fuel, such as transmission fluid, gear case oil, and so forth.
YVORMV - Your veg. oil results may vary.
95 Dodge Cummins 4x4 SVO WVO conversion.
81 Mercedes 300D- stock and happy on V80/D20 blend.
Low fossil net zero house- 100% solar power and heat.
SunWizard
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:53 pm
Location: N. Colorado

Fuels for Cummins Engines

Postby mixer » Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:03 pm

Hello SunWizard, and thank-you for posting this most interesting report from Cummins on RUG blending. First of all I would like to point out that their report supports the RUG blenders finding that “Gasoline dilution ... (of) 20 volume-percent gasoline ... lowers cloud point 4°C [7°F] and it lowers the fuel viscosity, cetane number, and flash-point.” Now, the point of the report is simply to discourage people from adding gasoline to their summer diesel fuel (D-2) to get the fuel to work in cold weather. The object of the report is not about discouraging people from recycling waste vegetable oil (WVO) from the rear of a restaurant and filtering it and thinning it with gasoline or some other solvent.

The premise of the blender is to approximate the viscosity of D-2 diesel fuel (1.3 to 5.8 centistokes (1.3 to 5.8 mm per second) at 40°C [104°F]) by blending thinning agents, such as gasoline, with thicker fuel bases, such as WVO and WMO.

Fuels for Cummins Engines
Service Bulletin Number 3379001-10 Date: 01-JUN-2005
http://www.cummins.dk/fileadmin/dokumen ... ngines.htm
Advocating blending 5-30% gasoline with WVO in the tank from the pump is far less dangerous than blending a few ounces of two-stroke oil into a can of gasoline for a lawnmower.
mixer
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:30 am
Location: Tucson, AZ USA

Postby coachgeo » Mon Aug 25, 2008 3:47 pm

Not having read any of this I dont know so it needs to be asked.

are these test and resulting conclusions about not using RUG based on data collected about blended fuel burned in CUMMINS engines. If so.. what; if anything, is unique to the engines used in the test? DI, IDI, CR, etc. Is their a piston cup that acts like a swirl chamber.. or is it flat top pistons, .. etc.

Was these conclusions all based on combustion issues?... or was any of it based on washing down of the cylinder walls by the RUG? Was any of the conclusions based on the lower luberocity of the diesel blend?

These things are very important to know when considering the correlation of the conclusions to blending with WVO
Life; It's all in the Balance

Moderator
coachgeo
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 10:46 am
Location: North Texas

Postby John Galt » Mon Aug 25, 2008 4:12 pm

The information in the report is very important for people burning 100% diesel fuel in their late model Cummins engines.

It has nothing to do with VO, in fact it specifically states, do not mix anything but used motor oil with diesel and then only 5%.
Do not blend other used oils with fuel

presumably used VO is included.

Diesel fuel with gasoline mixed in could also present a shop hazard if a mechanic was to assume it's non volatile diesel fuel.
John Galt
 
Posts: 526
Joined: Tue Mar 04, 2008 9:17 pm
Location: Coldest North America

Postby SunWizard » Mon Aug 25, 2008 4:26 pm

Its for DI engines which is the type cummins has made for a long time. It includes big rigs. Cupped pistons.

They don't state every detail of how they reached the conclusion. Its mainly interesting because they are one of the few companies scientifically testing blends, and most of the same effects of additives that occur in Diesel we are also finding occur in WVO.

The slight lower of cloud point is good, and the lower viscosity. They are concerned with lower viscosity because of lubricity issues, we don't have to worry about that unless RUG somehow reduces lubricity of WVO too much, which there has been no testing of. RUG clearly lowers the lubricity of Diesel to unacceptable levels, increasing IP and injector wear exponentially.

The lowered cetane is something WVO users have argued doesn't happen, here is proof that it does.

The lower flash point is a concern because of "EXTREME" fire hazard and explosion hazard. They don't say where that extreme hazard occurs. My guess is because diesel engines are designed around a specific (high) flash point fuel. They don't have the special devices used to control evaporative (explosive) RUG fumes in the fuel tank, and anywhere else. Adding a small amount of RUG lowers the flash point for the blend to the RUG flash point which is -40F, D2 is 143F. Because we are mixing with WVO doesn't change this issue.

A low flash point doesn't make combustion better as some mistakenly believe, because diesels depend on auto-ignition temperature for combustion: Diesel is 410F, RUG is worse at 475-540F, WVO worse yet at 690F. See this thread about that:
flash point/specific gravity TESTED
Last edited by SunWizard on Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:12 am, edited 1 time in total.
YVORMV - Your veg. oil results may vary.
95 Dodge Cummins 4x4 SVO WVO conversion.
81 Mercedes 300D- stock and happy on V80/D20 blend.
Low fossil net zero house- 100% solar power and heat.
SunWizard
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:53 pm
Location: N. Colorado

Postby mixer » Mon Aug 25, 2008 4:59 pm

Hello coachgeo the direct quote, as posted by SunWizard states (above) “Under no circumstances must gasoline or alcohol be used to dilute diesel fuel. This practice creates an extreme fire hazard and under certain circumstances an explosive hazard.” So, that is not what we WVO/WMO blenders are typically doing. We are thinning thicker fuel bases, such as WVO and WMO, down with thinning agents, such as gasoline, or kerosene, to approach the viscosity of diesel fuel, because the premise of the blender is to approximate the viscosity of D-2 diesel fuel (1.3 to 5.8 centistokes (1.3 to 5.8 mm per second) at 40°C [104°F]).

Further, the mix of WVO and even 30% RUG is NOT explosive. All one need do is make such a mix up and put about a cup of it in a wide mouthed can with an open lid and light it. The mix will not explode, but will indeed light with a non-aggressive flame. Do be prepared to put the flame out with a lid and do this experiment outside, away from buildings, not near any flammable objects and away from children and pets.

And, if you examine other auto-manufacturers owner’s manuals, you will find that they even recommend thinning summer diesel (D-2) with gasoline or kerosene in cold weather. So, while Cummins might take a fearful point of view on the subject, Volkswagen, BMW and Mercedes actually recommend the practice.

Sources:
Fuels for Cummins Engines
Service Bulletin Number 3379001-10 Date: 01-JUN-2005
http://www.cummins.dk/fileadmin/dokumen ... ngines.htm

Owners manuals that recommend Mixed Fuels
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/veggie_fu ... message/63
Advocating blending 5-30% gasoline with WVO in the tank from the pump is far less dangerous than blending a few ounces of two-stroke oil into a can of gasoline for a lawnmower.
mixer
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:30 am
Location: Tucson, AZ USA

Postby SunWizard » Mon Aug 25, 2008 7:52 pm

Note that they stopped recommending it in any owners manuals by the mid 80's. It would be interesting to find why. My guess is they learned of some problems it causes. And because D2 now has far less lubricity that it used to.

The mercedes manual states to use RUG only if no other option is available, and "If regular gasoline does have to be added, its proportion should not exceed 30%. Engine power may drop accordingly to the proportion of supplementary fuel. For this reason, keep percentage of fuel added to the minimum necessitated by the ambient temperature. "

This also means your MPG will drop along with your power, as has been observed by many blenders. This will make RUG no cheaper per mile than using Kero or D2 even when its cheaper by 10-20% and if you use less %. Here is a sample calculation using current prices for my truck (using a typical value I could easily buy/sell my filtered, dewatered VO for $2):
V80/D20 blend:
2g D2 @$4.50+ 8g VO@ $2 = $25 for 10g, @20mpg= $.125/mi

V90/RUG10:
1g RUG @3.6 +9g VO@ $2 = $21.6 for 10g @ 18mpg = $.12/mi

If you add a cetane boost as many do, then your cost for the RUG blend goes even higher. You get less power by 10%, along with the possible risks with RUG which are not there with D2. If you can get stale RUG for free, that would make it cheaper.
Last edited by SunWizard on Fri Sep 24, 2010 10:13 am, edited 1 time in total.
YVORMV - Your veg. oil results may vary.
95 Dodge Cummins 4x4 SVO WVO conversion.
81 Mercedes 300D- stock and happy on V80/D20 blend.
Low fossil net zero house- 100% solar power and heat.
SunWizard
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:53 pm
Location: N. Colorado

Postby td2dv » Mon Aug 25, 2008 8:28 pm

http://www.cummins.dk/fileadmin/dokumen ... ngines.htm

Bio-Diesel Fuel

With increased interest in emissions and reducing the use of petroleum distillate based fuels, many governments and regulating bodies encourage the use of bio-fuels. Bio-diesel fuels must be considered experimental at this time.

Bio-diesel fuels are methyl/ethyl ester-based oxygenates derived from a broad variety of renewable sources such as vegetable oils, animal fats, and cooking oils. Their properties are similar to diesel fuel, as opposed to gasoline or gaseous fuels, and thus are capable of being used in compression ignition engines. Soy Methyl Ester (SME) or some SME Diesel is the most common bio-diesel in the United States and is derived from soybean oil. Soy Diesel is a bio-diesel or petro-diesel blend based on SME. Rape Methyl Ester (RME) Diesel is the most common bio-diesel in Europe and is derived from rapeseed oil. These fuels are collectively known as Fatty Acid Methyl Esters (FAME).

Cummins Inc. test data on the operating effects of bio-diesel fuels indicates that typically smoke, power, and fuel economy are all reduced. However, as there are no firm industry standards on the content and properties for bio-fuels, consistency and predictability of bio-diesel operation is not well documented. There are provisional specifications for FAME issued in Germany under DIN V 51 606 and also recently through ASTM as PS121; however, these standards are under development and are subject to change.

Cummins Inc. certifies its engines using the prescribed EPA and European Certification Fuels. Cummins Inc. does not certify engines on any other fuel. It is the user's responsibility to use the correct fuel as recommended by the manufacturer and allowed by EPA or other local regulatory agencies. In the United States, the EPA allows use of only registered fuels for on-highway applications. The EPA has additional alternative fuel information at: http://www.epa.gov/otaq/consumer/fuels/ ... tfuels.htm.

It is the responsibility of the user to obtain the proper local, regional, or national exemptions required for the use of bio-diesel in any emissions regulated Cummins® engine.

Warranty and the Use of Bio-Diesel Fuel in Cummins Engines

Cummins Inc. neither approves nor disapproves of the use of bio-diesel fuel blends. There is a major difference between operating on pure (100 percent concentration) bio-diesel fuels and bio-diesel or petro-diesel fuel blends. Cummins Inc. is not in a position to evaluate the many variations of bio-diesel fuels, and the long-term effects on performance, durability or emissions compliance of Cummins® products. The use of bio-diesel fuel does not affect Cummins Inc. materials and workmanship warranty. Failures caused by the use of bio-diesel fuels or other fuel additives are not defects of Cummins Inc. parts or workmanship and therefore will not be covered by Cummins Inc. warranty.

Given the current industry understanding of bio-fuels and blending with quality diesel fuel, it can be expected that blending up to a 5 percent volume-concentration will not cause serious problems. This is consistent with the position taken by worldwide fuel system manufacturers.

For customers intent on blending bio-fuels above a 5 percent volume-concentration, the following concerns represent what is currently known in the industry. Concentrations beyond 5 percent by volume can have an adverse affect on the engine's performance and the fuel system integrity or durability. The affects are more serious with increasing concentration levels. Areas of concern when operating with bio-diesel fuels include low temperature operability (fuel gelation, filter plugging), heat content (poor fuel economy), and storage and thermal stability (filter plugging, injector deposits). In addition, from our fuel systems suppliers, the following issues are also noted:

Swelling and hardening or cracking of some elastomer seals within the fuel system or engine
Corrosion of fuel system and engine hardware, especially aluminum and zinc
Solid particle blockage of fuel nozzles and passages
Filter plugging
Injector coking
Higher injection pressures due to physical flow properties, reduced fuel system life
Added stress and heat to injection components, especially rotary fuel pumps
Increased pump seizures and early life failures
Poor fuel spray atomization, reduced fuel economy
Poor lubricity, reduced service life of fuel pump and fuel system.
Pure bio-diesel fuel is not stable and its acid content increases over time which can damage powdered metal components.

Operational Factors to Consider:

The oil change interval can be affected by the use of bio-diesel fuel. End users are advised to use oil sampling to monitor the engine oil condition and to determine the optimum oil change interval. Pure bio-diesel fuel can cause a chemical reaction with lube oil resulting in oil sludging.
Bio-diesel provides approximately five to seven percent less energy per gallon of fuel when compared to distillate fuels. To avoid engine problems when the engine is converted back to 100 percent distillate diesel fuel, do not change the engine rating to compensate for the power loss when operated with bio-diesel fuels.
Elastomer compatibility with bio-diesel is still being monitored. The condition of seals, hoses, gaskets, and wire coatings must be monitored regularly.
Bio-diesel fuels can pose low ambient temperature problems for both storage and operation. At low ambient temperatures, fuel can possibly need to be stored in a heated building or a heated storage tank. The fuel system can require heated fuel lines, filters, and tanks. Filters can plug and fuel in the tank can solidify at low ambient temperatures if precautions are not taken. Consult your bio-diesel supplier for assistance in the blending and attainment of the proper cloud point fuel.
Bio-diesel has poor oxidation stability which can result in long term storage problems. The poor oxidation stability qualities can accelerate fuel oxidation in the fuel system. This is especially true in engines with electronic fuel systems because they operate at higher temperatures. Consult the fuel supplier for oxidation stability additives.
Bio-diesel fuel is an excellent medium for microbial growth. Microbes cause fuel system corrosion and premature filter plugging. The effectiveness of conventional anti-microbial additives, when used in bio-diesel, is not known. Consult your fuel and additive supplier for assistance.
Care must be taken to remove water from fuel tanks. Water accelerates microbial growth. Water is naturally more prevalent in bio-diesel fuels than in distillate fuels.
Benz 240-D
Minneapolis
WVO/RUG (10%) 5 mo/yr
td2dv
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 4:47 pm

Postby mixer » Tue Aug 26, 2008 8:02 am

Hello SunWizard, while you state
This also means your MPG will drop along with your power, as has been observed by many blenders. This will make RUG no cheaper per mile than using Kero or D2 even when its cheaper by 10-20% and if you use less %.
and I often read this opinion expressed on the various bio-fuels forum, this has not been my experience.

I find instead that my engine has more power with RUG added to 100% WVO, and I seem to get better fuel economy; however I have no accurate means of calculating my fuel consumption at this time, because I have no meter on my transfer pump. However, if you examine the collection of testimonials in support of RUG blending (link below), I am not the only person who has found more power and better fuel economy with a RUG blend.

I have also read on bio-fuels forums about a French research project with vegetable oil fuels that found adding alcohol to a fuel stock at about 10%, will improve fuel atomization and actually result in increased fuel economy, even though alcohol has fewer BTUs/unit volume than do WVO or diesel, in spite of what Cummins reports.

If there is more power and better fuel economy with a RUG and/or alcohol blends with WVO, even though alcohol and RUG have fewer BTUs/unit volume, than do WVO or diesel, then the question is why? I believe the thermodynamics of mixed fuel combustion, is thick fuels, such as WVO and WMO, tend to retard ignition in a compression ignition engine; whereas, gasoline and alcohol tend to advance ignition in such engines; thus with a skillful blend one could theoretically maximize combustion and thus end up with ideal fuel economy and reduced emissions.

Sources:

"Gaydou, A.M., Menet, L., Ravelojaona, G., and Geneste, P. 1982. Vegetable energy sources in Madagascar: ethyl alcohol and oil seeds (French). Oleagineux 37(3):135–141."
Advocating blending 5-30% gasoline with WVO in the tank from the pump is far less dangerous than blending a few ounces of two-stroke oil into a can of gasoline for a lawnmower.
mixer
 
Posts: 32
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2008 8:30 am
Location: Tucson, AZ USA

Postby SunWizard » Tue Aug 26, 2008 9:36 am

mixer wrote:I find instead that my engine has more power with RUG added to 100% WVO, and I seem to get better fuel economy;

More power compared to what? If compared to unheated V100, I agree since the lower viscosity will help atomization. Best to compare for power and MPG is running on 100% D2, or V80/D20, or heated V100, all of which also give you a lower viscosity. There are numerous reports on the forums of people who switched from V90/RUG10 to V80/D20 and noticed a large increase in power. There are several who have emailed me thanking me for inspiring them to try out more D2/ less RUG in their blends after the noticeable increase in power they got. Mileage claims are subject to so many variables its hard to compare.

I tend to believe Mercedes and BMW statements about "Engine power may drop accordingly to the proportion of supplementary fuel.". Since power is easily measured on a dyno, that is the best way to answer this question, maybe someone will try that someday, or find data from someone like Mercedes to back up their statements.
YVORMV - Your veg. oil results may vary.
95 Dodge Cummins 4x4 SVO WVO conversion.
81 Mercedes 300D- stock and happy on V80/D20 blend.
Low fossil net zero house- 100% solar power and heat.
SunWizard
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:53 pm
Location: N. Colorado

Postby SunWizard » Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:00 am

mixer wrote:Further, the mix of WVO and even 30% RUG is NOT explosive. All one need do is make such a mix up and put about a cup of it in a wide mouthed can with an open lid and light it.

It certainly is explosive, and I think Cummins has much better knowledge of this than you. Its the vapors which evaporate from the blend (at all temps above -40F) that are explosive when contained someplace like a half full tank, storage barrel, or garage. Please don't try any explosive tests like this at home, and be careful around anything that makes sparks near your tanks or barrels. You are doing a large disservice to people if you actually convinced someone that RUG vapors are not explosive, and you ought to study it further. Air with > 1.4% RUG vapor is explosive, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explosive_limit
D2 starts evaporating at 150F compared to RUG at -40F.

Basically it means you need to follow all the same precautions that are needed when using 100% RUG, which is special metals (not steel) non sparking storage containers, tanks, nozzles, wrenches, PUMP MOTORS, no smoking, etc. With VO and D2 (before blending RUG), the risk is far lower, so many may have gotten much more lax on those precautions. Some diesel vehicles don't use the special (more expensive) metals and evaporative emission controls, since with D2 there is no spark ignition hazard. This I think is why Cummins comes up with their "extreme fire hazard" warning.
Last edited by SunWizard on Tue Aug 26, 2008 11:16 am, edited 4 times in total.
YVORMV - Your veg. oil results may vary.
95 Dodge Cummins 4x4 SVO WVO conversion.
81 Mercedes 300D- stock and happy on V80/D20 blend.
Low fossil net zero house- 100% solar power and heat.
SunWizard
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:53 pm
Location: N. Colorado

Postby coachgeo » Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:04 am

SunWizard wrote:....They don't state every detail of how they reached the conclusion.....

The lowered cetane is something VO users have argued doesn't happen, here is proof that it does. ...
The lack of details is the problem particularly in the statements about lower cetane. here is why

1. Yes, using chemical math..... it does... without a doubt lower cetane.

2. BUTTT... due to burn characteristics (2 ignition points) there seems to be evidence that shows the RUG blend ACTS/PERFORMS like a fuel of higher cetane than its true mathmatical cetane.

What gets confusing in the amature discussion boards talking about RUG blending is that the antidotal conlusions being discussed are based on the "acting" / performing like no cetane value is lost . They are not refering to the mathmatical numbers, but to the "acting"/Performing they just do not state that, or state if poorly. Many probably do not even have a clue about the chemical math side of the discussion so it gets blurred.

If lack of detail detail in the Cummins reports does not show it.... then we do not know if their statements are based on the chemical math or on engine performance/acting. If they are discussing conclusions based on the chemical math.... well..... sure they are right..... but what about actual"performance"? Now if they did test engine performance and came up with their conclusions..... then we have to decide how well those conclusions correlate to WVO/RUG blends or pay out big buks to test it ourselves.
Life; It's all in the Balance

Moderator
coachgeo
 
Posts: 569
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 10:46 am
Location: North Texas

Postby td2dv » Tue Aug 26, 2008 10:57 am

My hand operated transfer pump moves 1 us gallon per 10 revolutions. I get 30 mpg on D2 and 32 on WVO/10% rug. I chose RUG for blending because of it's availability and price. D2 may work as well but I don't think it thins as much. I filter cold to trap the thick stuff. The RUG dissolves the rest. I'm curious how cold this will work. Here is my viscosity test, again.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g4hgvSe3c2I
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiGdk2VSglk&NR=1
The injection pump determines timing. I think the RUG helps propel the flame front and increases the efficiency of the combustion event. In addition to my gas milage improving my operating temperature went up to the extent I had to take out the winter thermostat (88ºc) and put the summer one (80ºc) back in.
Benz 240-D
Minneapolis
WVO/RUG (10%) 5 mo/yr
td2dv
 
Posts: 38
Joined: Thu Jun 12, 2008 4:47 pm

Postby BMW Fan » Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:08 pm

I might have written this sentence hundreds of time since 2000.

You may google for SCHUR MIX 80/15/5 SVO / RUG / IPA
or go direct to

http://members.aol.com/hpschur/raps.html

At the bottom of the page you'll find hints for viscosity.

Thousands of people went this way.

The experience td2dv and others made are easily repeatable.

BMW Fan


http://www.crawldog.com/klausold/
BMW Fan
 
Posts: 225
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 6:48 am
Location: Nova Scotia, Canada

Postby SunWizard » Tue Aug 26, 2008 12:53 pm

Here is a translation of the above page:
http://translate.google.com/translate?u ... l=de&tl=en[/url]
YVORMV - Your veg. oil results may vary.
95 Dodge Cummins 4x4 SVO WVO conversion.
81 Mercedes 300D- stock and happy on V80/D20 blend.
Low fossil net zero house- 100% solar power and heat.
SunWizard
Site Admin
 
Posts: 1720
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:53 pm
Location: N. Colorado

PreviousNext

Return to Single Tank Systems and Blending

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron