all i can say about the "spinner" filter you may have grabbed off an old semi truck, even though they are designed to work well, usually they dont unless they are name brand like spinner 2 type a thing, i got one myself its a spinner 2 i am gonna modify the housing for better drainage without air assist and then see how it works, maily because it will have more bowl capacity. i did the filtering thing for quite sometime, but found that it didnt do quite as good of a job as the fuge, and the dewatering that is does do is a nice benefit, but to each his own of course. hope it all works out for u in the end.

If anyone is interested I have a LARGE Spinner II up on that infamous auction site ;-)
Item number 200327100959
Ending Apr-06-09 17:06:32 PDT

H everyone.

I am a long time lurker on this forum.

Just getting serious about setting up a dewareing and filtering rig for WVO to use in a diesel mitsubishi pajero 2.8L Turbo.

I have seen this - any comments on this setup before I part with my hard earned cash?

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBay...&_trksid=p2761.l1259

Thanks in advance to all.

Cheers,
Hamish

Centrifuge Cleaning:

Thinking that you can clean oil in an hour or two with a centrifuge is unrealistic. But, thinking you can clean oil as well using only filters is equally unrealistic. As I mentioned in this wonderful book of a thread; I have filtered oil through a 1 micron absolute filter then ran it through my DieselCraft centrifuge and still got a thin coating of black goop. This showed the centrifuge was removing sub-1 micron particles.

I've researched this a lot, and had oil samples tested at various run times in the centrifuge. Bottom line is that it takes 36 passes, or over a half hour per gallon of centrifuge time to get very clean oil. But, in order to remove most of the sub-1 particles it takes significantly longer, on the order 144 passes. Now, having said that, I've recently found there is an incredible difference in oil temperature from the top of my tank to the bottom, indicating that even though my oil circulates moves at 5% per minute, it still might have dead spots that take a long time to pass. So, different tank configurations or stirring might cut the pass rate. Ah, future research...anyway...

If you have any doubt, run your centrifuge for 24 hours, clean, run for another 24 hours. Scrap the contents into metal dish, take a torch and burn it until there is nothing flammable left...then ask yourself where that residue would go after it would have entered your piston.

I find the cost benefit to fall in the side of using very clean oil. I changed my truck filter last October, not because there was any sign that it was dirty, but I didn't want to have to change it during the winter, it had 18,000 miles on it. The replacement is still going with 14,000 miles on it.

Filtering oil has limitations and gets expensive. I heat my oil, turn on my centrifuge, and walk away like you would a dishwasher or or washing machine. Works for me.

Sam

Interesting post Sam. I always thought that the recommended amount of passes was around 10 or so. I tended to triple that but that is nowhere near that 144 number you came up with.
Let's see a 40 gallon batch at 10 gallons per minute is 4 minutes per pass which ends up at almost 10 hours for good results ?!?!?!
WOW .... it boggles the mind (is that correct even?)..... that puts a whole new angle on running a single pass centrifuge. If one was to run at only 5 gallons per hour that's 8 hours for the same sized batch (so in the same ballpark) but with no high pressure oil anywhere.

Jens

Sam,

I have had fascinating discussions with techs from Racor, Rosedale, and Lubetrak( our testing lab) about the meaning of absolute filtration. I do not begin to understand all of the issues and nuances of the term, but I think that I do understand that absolute filtration means that after passing through an absolute filter something like 98%+ of the solid impurities are removed. My understanding at any rate is that not 100% of the impurities are gone. Perhaps more importantly, the cleanliness of the oil after passing through an absolute filter is dependent on the amount of impurities held before the filtration. 98% of 1 million 1 micron particles per milliliter for pre-filtered oil would result in cleaner oil then 98% of 5 million particles per milliliter. So very dirty oil can have more contaminants then cleaner oil after filtration through an absolute filter.

To further muse: We run our relatively clean oil with an OC50 reaching 220 degrees for over an hour and for perhaps eight hours total. Then we pass it through a pair of double nominal 1 micron filters. We used to run it through a series of 2 micron absolute filters. No matter, because either way we filtered after centrifuging, when tested with ISO 11171-99, we still are barely achieving more than 98 or 99% cleanliness and do have particles larger than 2, 4, and 10 microns present. (Our group gets about 10,000 miles from a good absolute filter, like Baldwin or Fleetguard.)

Just wanted to share some thoughts on why you would see different size particles in the rotor after filtering through a 1 micron absolute filter.

Thanks to all who contribute here - you have helped us a bunch.

Veggieguy,

Interesting thoughts. It is good to hear someone else looking at this. I've pretty much quit researching particle content and size, I spent enough of my own funds to satisfy myself and other priorities have taken my time (and funds). Maybe I need to run oil through a 1 micron absolute filter for the number of passes equal to a centrifuge to make a fair comparison.

So an absolute filter would be more like nominal than a strict definition of absolute?

One of the tests I did was to take equal weights of centrifuge contents at different points along the cleaning process. I took each sample and added it to sythetic oil and sent that in for particle testing. This was after filting down to 10 micron nominal, which may have skewed the results of the test. But, the results indicated that centrifuge removed particles similar to the way a nominal filter would, the larger the particle size the higher precentage removal during each pass. So, 80% of all the 7 micron particles would be removed down a sliding scale to only 2% of the 1 micron particles would be removed during each pass.

Sam

quote:

Originally posted by Jens:
Interesting post Sam. I always thought that the recommended amount of passes was around 10 or so. I tended to triple that but that is nowhere near that 144 number you came up with.
Let's see a 40 gallon batch at 10 gallons per minute is 4 minutes per pass which ends up at almost 10 hours for good results ?!?!?!

It depends on what you consider "good results". Realize that Sam is going for extreme filtering, sub-micron, and he is the only person I know who goes for that level. 4 passes gives 10 micron absolute in my tests early in this thread. The number of passes goes up exponentially as you try to go finer micron levels, especially to the fractions of a micron that Sam is going for.

quote:

Originally posted by Sam Crowe:
So an absolute filter would be more like nominal than a strict definition of absolute?

Absolute means it removes 98% single pass, as he said above. Nominal means nothing, it might remove 50-70% but its not tested.

Hi guys

When i asked about some 5 and 1 micron sock filters being advertised here I was told they achieved "98% efficiency." After some reading around on the net I found this meant that only 2 out of every 100 particles at the quoted micron rating would likely pass through the filter.

Is this a better way of rating filters than nominal and absolute? - given that nominal means nothing and absolute is (apparently) impossible to achieve?

quote:

Originally posted by Paulus:
Is this a better way of rating filters than nominal and absolute? - given that nominal means nothing and absolute is (apparently) impossible to achieve?

Absolute is a good rating (the best rating there is) and is fully possible. They are more expensive filters.

I guess you mean to say 100% removal is impossible, and thats true for single pass, but multiple passes through an absolute is close enough to 100%. Or is 99.9% to 1 micron still not good enough for you?

quote:

multiple passes through an absolute is close enough to 100%

This is true even for sock filters rated to 98% efficiency? Because from the foregoing it would seem that 98% efficiency is pretty close to absolute...with for multiple passes.

SW, on another tack, do you agree with the criticism of DC-style CF's that they need pretty much continual supervision?

quote:

Originally posted by Paulus:

quote:

multiple passes through an absolute is close enough to 100%

This is true even for sock filters rated to 98% efficiency?

Yes 98% is the definition of absolute. 3 passes should give you 99.9%

quote:

Because from the foregoing it would seem that 98% efficiency is pretty close to absolute...with for multiple passes.

Yes 98% is the definition of absolute.

quote:

SW, on another tack, do you agree with the criticism of DC-style CF's that they need pretty much continual supervision?

No I have never supervised mine. I come back at the end of 4-6 hours of running and shut it off. No problems in 3 years of running it that way.

Apparently people have trouble making 1 hose that can handle 90psi, but I have had no trouble. 90 isn't very high pressure, my backhoe hoses regularly see 3000 psi. Buy one of those at any tractor store if you question your ability to make a 90psi hose.

Thanks SW

I used the blue pushlock air hose all last year, it's good for 250psi and 200 degrees I believe.

Sun Wizard, did you ever sit back and take in everything your CF experiment spawned?
It is pretty breath taking, you actually created a revolution in WVO cleaning/drying, that is pretty damned awesome.

quote:

Originally posted by Hamish Gale:
H everyone.

I am a long time lurker on this forum.

Just getting serious about setting up a dewareing and filtering rig for WVO to use in a diesel mitsubishi pajero 2.8L Turbo.

I have seen this - any comments on this setup before I part with my hard earned cash?

http://cgi.ebay.com.au/ws/eBay...&_trksid=p2761.l1259

Thanks in advance to all.

Cheers,
Hamish

Mitsu TD are very picky about getting your oil cleanest. Whatever method you choose make sure you do the honest work of testing the oil with the HPT at least to make sure there's no water in it. This means before during and after filtration, all the way to the next day when the oil is cold, even if you've put it in your tank, test it again.

In regards to the CF method. My last batch of 25 or so gal was awesome in scope to all previous. First I made some changes. Downsized the motor to a 1/4 hp and a 5/16 bypass because the 1/3 hp was bypassing so much it seemed a waste. This proved to be a vast improvement economically (4A vs. 6.4) but also in the quality of the filtration. With the old motor I was always having to edge down the flow through the CF to keep it @ 80psi. With the new motor by the time it was really set I was able to lock it down at 80, and as the oil got a little cooler a feather touch more flow kept it there.

The result was really fine and undoubtedly had to do with the method, but in an hour the oil was pan testing free of bubbles.

Another thing I did different this time, usually I heat the oil to about 200* F and then put it into the 120gal tank but this time I already had about 15 gal that had gone through the CF but not finished in the tank. So it was a matter of heating up more and taking some out again until the oil was hot enough. In this process I discovered that there was a vast difference in the temp at the bottom of the tank from the top [+/-20*). So I kept reheating until the bottom was 160* and this meant really getting the tank so hot I couldn't touch it. Overall the average temp was probably closer to 175* or so when the CF started.

The efficiency in this batch was awesome with the temp being that high the best factor no doubt. I could hear the CF literally encountering the water and giving it's whine as it pulled it into the rotor. All in all it yielded a full rotor's worth in the hour. The whole process seemed to gel though as initially with this motor in tended to surge a bit but when I aligned the feeder hose symmetrically and made sure the CF was level all of a sudden it locked in that solid flow rate 80psi and held it with more consistency than the old motor. Whereas before the power of the motor had dictated now the flow was dominant. This just goes to show from the origin of this thread the hypothesis that a 1/4 hp motor could do the job is definitely true. I have a 1/8 hp that also spins at 1725rpm and plan on trying it too. Point being if you establish the max. potential in the flow with temp and power it can really do wonders in a short time.

quote:

Originally posted by muzak:
I discovered that there was a vast difference in the temp at the bottom of the tank from the top [+/-20*).

Like my recent discovery. My temp controller was looking at the temp at about 12 inches down, but 30 inches down the oil, depending on whether the centrifuges were running or all the oil was being heated and by passing the CFs, the temp can be from 17 to 40 degrees difference.

What I found is that when I started my CFs at 140 degrees, the temp at the bottom of the tank was closer to 120. However, since the pickup is at the heater element at the bottom, the oil getting drawn may be closer to 140. I say "may" because the heated oil forms a rising column that doesn't get completely taken up and that oil would expand at the top thus giving a false centrifuge temp. Ideally I need to monitor the temp entering or leaving the pump.

Otherwise, a good mixing system could be used, especially since the stratified layers temp may be an indication of deader areas that could be holding particles longer than necessary. There is a good possibility that I could significantly cut my CF time by equalizing the temp distribution and thus the particle distribution. Or, possibly a cone bottom, or tilted tank where the pick up is at the bottom so the coolest most 'settled' oil is next up. Right now my setup might have several gallons of oil, several inches from the pickup, all around the sides of the bottom of the tank, that is just sitting there, very slowly moving toward the pickup. Infrared photos identifying cooling areas and heat columns would be interesting.

Regardless, this might be worth considering for someone building a new tank, for me I'm pretty happy, so it's hard to find the time or motivation to make design changes.

Sam

Yeah that's funny Sam I saw that you found this after I posted that. My methods are not so auto as yours. I used to just dangle a candy thermo into the depths of the tank. Generally I heat oil first and then pour it through a 1 micron bag into the saddle tank. If I get the oil to 200* externally and then pour it in the tank which is warmed, even after 20 min or so, then pour in more at 200* it will still have to cool to get to 180. Pouring into the tank mixes it up pretty good.

But this last round was different and I had some that was cold in the tank. The oil was naturally much more resistant to getting that hot so with a burn pile next to the tank and successive heating of 10 gal or so at a time it took awhile to get it there. But to check the temp I took samples off the bottom. In future I think my strategy will be to just heat to 200* pour in, check the bottom, and if it's 160 or so, start the CF.

Another thing that really helps in getting the water is the 1 micron prefilter. Since I have been doing this not once has there been black gunk in the rotor. But there is a full amount of wet oil in the rotor as it seems to make it more reticent especially in oil above 160*.

I have a 2001 7.3 liter vegistroke excursion. vegistroke uses a donaldson 2 micron filter before it enters the motor. I have been filtering vegoil for 3 years now on my sunwizard oc20 and can filter the most nasty oil to very clear in about 3 hours. I let my centrifuge run and heat up the oil for about 1 hour and then clean the centrifuge with lots of tar like stuff gook in it. then i let it go for another 2 hours and then clean it again. the oil is clear no matter how dark the color of the oil and then polish it through the same 2 micron donaldson filter that is on my truck. My truck can run for 10,000 miles or so before the light tells me its time to change the filter. I run a chip and exhaust and intake and run the truck hard on veg and it loves it. what else could you want from filtration!