When is enough, enough?

Collecting, filtering and dewatering of WVO SVO vegetable oil. For Biodiesel producers too.

Moderators: SunWizard, coachgeo

When is enough, enough?

Postby David » Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:00 pm

Lately I have been reading a lot of technical discussions about the intricacy's of veg fuel production and composition.

No use trying to hide the fact i am neither intelligent enough nor have the required attention span to get into whether the safe limit for dissolved water in SVO is 500PPM or 247.09 ppm, how many Di-glycerides there are going to be if I react bio in a certain way, what the safe level of soaps and FFA's are and all the rest.

All i know is that I process my oil as carefully as I practically can, put it in my vehicle and I have yet to have any significant problem in the 4 years I have been doing it.
Sweet.

Now as the technology with veg expands thanks in no small part to the work by people such as Sun and others, I'm getting to the point where the real question to me is, " Is any fuel up to the standards the purists ask for?" And "In practical terms, what is the difference in life expectancy of my vehicles doing what I do now and if I produced " Perfect" fuel that met the standards that are often preached?"

It seems to me If I dry oil by evaporation i'm going to cause this problem, if I dry it like that then i'm asking for trouble with something else and if i take the 3, 7 or 10th option, then there is still an issue with them as well. If I use a steel drum then this will happen copper will cause something else plastic is perfect but in many cases impractical....
To me it seems it's impossible to meet all the required ideals.

It's the same if I say right, i'll do bio instead. Then we come back to the issues with FFA's and glycerin and water and the left over molecule of god knows what from god knows where and we start chasing our tail again.

Maybe I should throw my hands up and say " All the veg fuel stuff is crap, i'm sticking to Diesel"
Then i run into the problem that here in Oz, Dino has a reputation for being crap and is documented to have caused huge amounts of pump and fuel system failures as well as random damage through contaminated blends of paint thinner, industrial solvent and whatever.
No joy there either.

So the question begs, If I want to baby my precious vehicle and make sure that all the bases are covered, what do i do?
How much will this cost in setup, production of the final product and most of all, My hands on time.

Now given a machine that allows testing through time travel, If I were to only put the most perfect fuel I am capable of producing practically into my vehicle and compare that to what i am using now which would seem to be a tragedy in purist terms, given the vehicles being used exactly the same, How many more miles do i get out of it with my perfect fuel as against the comparative rubbish many would say i'm using now?

If making " perfect" fuel requires double the time i'm investing now and substantial outlay say for a CF or something, will the benefits justify or even be worth that extra added cost and time? If what i'm doing now will get me exactly 123, 041 KM up the road before I suffer a fuel related problem necessitating a repair bill and If i did it perfectly and got 151,003 km up the road or even 200,000KM, is it worth it?

Making the most of the fantasy time machine, Does it matter if my fuel is not "perfect "and i get a shorter IP/engine life?

The cars I have now are 32 and 22 years old. How long will I keep them and what will turn out to be the reason i will get rid of them?
Will it be like my first Merc where the thing rusts to the point of uneconomical repair even though the engine I tried all sorts of things through is virtually perfect, will it be like my wifes car where some clown barrels into it and the thing is written off while being in completely serviceable condition otherwise, or will i just make more money, get bored with what i have and get something better even if not substantially newer?

My point is while I'm all for learning and developing the veg fuel technology, how far do we go AND how do we know the standards we look to now are going to add PRACTICAL increases in life span over say standards half or even 1/4 as stringent?

With say the benefit of Suns developments with water testing, how hard will be to achieve the 500 or 300 PPM ( whatever you subscribe to ) water content and what will the vehicle life difference in that be over say using oil that passes a ( variable reading) HPT that could be much higher?

Is there a practical rather than perfect set of goals we should aim for?


oh, and while we are it it, why is the sky blue and the earth round??? :D :roll: :D :lol:
_____________________

I don't give a damn about what might or could happen until a significant group of people can tell me it HAS happened to them.
Until then, it's just more endless gloom and doom Veg folk law.
David
 
Posts: 333
Joined: Thu Mar 06, 2008 4:12 am
Location: Sydney Australia

Re: When is enough, enough?

Postby SunWizard » Tue Oct 05, 2010 6:22 pm

David wrote:My point is while I'm all for learning and developing the veg fuel technology, how far do we go AND how do we know the standards we look to now are going to add PRACTICAL increases in life span over say standards half or even 1/4 as stringent?

With say the benefit of Suns developments with water testing, how hard will be to achieve the 500 or 300 PPM ( whatever you subscribe to ) water content and what will the vehicle life difference in that be over say using oil that passes a ( variable reading) HPT that could be much higher?

Is there a practical rather than perfect set of goals we should aim for?

I agree. I am working on making testing easier than ever before. With only the HPT we have been mostly in the dark about what's really going on. That's one big reason why I am comparing all the water testing methods, which is showing the HPT isn't very good, and sandy brae isn't either. The practical goal I like is to get the WVO dry enough that no suspended or free water will form due to a cool down or a little humid air coming in through the tank vent. Since most agree that suspended or free water can cause some damage, how much damage or after how many miles is debatable. My goal with all this is to make it easy for the average dummy; and the 2 tests I like best (cap. water + FFA) now meet that goal, being even easier than the HPT. That goal is also why I am putting my data into charts since they are easier to understand than all the text. The text is for the types who want to analyze and prove to themselves how its working, and how I developed the ideas. Because these ideas like % saturation are way different than anyone is used to.

I have found PPM is a bad measure to compare WVO against this goal, since it varies hugely depending on the FFA. It looks to me like % saturation is much more useful than PPM. I set a goal to get the % saturation below 60%. I find that 60% is easy to reach since my CF runs have all been getting below 30%.

I don't care as much about PPM, I am mainly reporting it as a means to compare to the tests that have measured PPM in the past. And I bought the expensive little thing so I might as well at least use the 50 test packets it came with. Its interesting to us engineer types. Its also useful to test the accuracy of the cap. water sensor, which I am finding is more accurate than sandy brae. Plus sandy brae costs $250 + $2 per test, while the cap. meter costs $50 + 0 per test.

As you know I disagree with most of Dana's FUD, such as evaporative dewatering methods causing trouble, and several others, and some of my testing is to check out the truth about whats going on in my WVO. Some of you here don't know who Dana is, and that's a good thing, you can safely ignore our references to him.

Measuring FFA is so simple and cheap with the new strips I found, that I will surely continue doing it, since it shows the total degradation of the WVO. I know that beyond a certain FFA we are causing more damage due to the polymers formed, and the large amount of water it can hold onto, and maybe the corrosive aspects. What FFA level is harmful is another debatable number. I am choosing 3% as my limit. Mostly its useful to compare between sources or stored barrels to decide which to reject. We take what we can get, but we ought to take the best WVO we can get, and leave the rest for the renderers or use it for other things like my home heating.
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: 1723
Joined: Mon Dec 11, 2006 2:53 pm
Location: N. Colorado


Return to Vegetable oil Collecting, Filtering and Dewatering

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 0 guests

cron