I really like the upflow ideas but because of space limitations, I can have only one 55 gallon barrel and not much else.

Any suggestions?

does your oil pan test dry before you even start your process!

I was thinking that would be a good set up before my centrifuge for a lot of pre filtering reasons!

also how many miles do you have doing this set up on one vehicle!

Not looking to make theoretical improvements...but I would like to adapt my current approach to include the upflow settling system. This means dealing with 90 gal at a time...usually not in cubies. After collection, I transfer VO into barrels to settle before filtering. I have a sunny spot on the shed wall for 2 barrels and the VO settles nicely there.

The way I understand the system...it works best with regular, but gradual introduction of VO. Seems ideal for 5-10 gal/wk collection rate, and your design is great for cubies.

Has anyone tried using a larger barrel for the 1st stage input vessel? With the hose bib controlling the outflow, could I use a 55 gal barrel on a stand going to the tube-diffuser for VO input?

If that seems too complicated, I can change my collection approach and work with cubies...I was just wondering if other folks have adapted the input to handle larger volumes of VO?

Hi John.

I have to admit that when I first saw the drawing of your simple system about a few months ago, I was pretty skeptical. It just looked a little too simple, if you know what I mean.

I guess after seeing the relative complexity of the CFs and Tim Cooks FE, I figured that your system was just too simple (good) to be true.

BUT

If you say that reasonably clean oil comes out and consistantly passes the pan test, then upflow settling must be capable of success.


Congratulations!


I noticed a little competitive antagonism creeping into the thread right from the first few posts and I hope that doesen't continue in this thread. Nobody likes someone taking shots at their creations whether purely theoretical or the physical embodyment of such.



I know that your system works fine as is, but like a few others, I can't help but wonder if adaptive experimentation could yield a system (or systems) that offered similar good results in other conditions such as with other oil types such as 1/2 hydro peanut or lard etc.

Dana has mentioned a method called "heat and settle" to thin viscosity in order to allow stubborn water to drop out easier. I wonder how much greater efficiency upflow settling would have if heat and insulation were added? By efficiency, I mean decreased residence time requrements etc.


I also wonder if water washing prior to upflow settling would help increase efficiency. By washing out a large portion of suspended solids and hygroscopic dissolved solids, water should theoretically precipitate out of suspention easier/faster. Even if no reduction in required residence time were found, the removal of hygroscopic dissolved solids would be nice as it would keep them out of on-board fuel tanks.

Adding heat and insulation could be tested seperately from water washing so that any recorded performance advantages could be accurrately attributed to the more beneficial adaptation of the original method.


I hope that what I've said doesn't come off sounding like any sort of criticism. I give credit where it is due: I think you have developed an very nice system, here John. I've heard the old saying of "If it aint broke, don't fix it", but I'd love to see if any added efforts would increase efficiency/effectiveness, or whether it's better to leave well enough alone.

Time constraints, safety issues, budgetary restriction and energy conservation issues may prove that the system works best as is.

I guess only experimentation will tell.

quote:

At the temperatures I operate, any hydrog-oil or fats are going to cause problems in a cold blend, so I get them out at step one along with all the moisture. I use that sludge as heating fuel, so it's a product of the process, not waste for disposal.

That's what I meant by suggesting that the system you described as being perfect for it's current application. No extra heating required and automatic seperation of high melt point fuels.

For someone in a warmer climate who wants to transesterify animal fats rendered out from deep fried meats along with the veggie, heat would prevent the loss of those fats through settling.

As you rightly mentioned for your application, these fats aren't waste, they're gelled liquid BTUs waiting for a solid base to combust with. I think that any northern logging/mining camp would really benefit from following your exact example, even just for the wear reducing lubricity on their expensive heavy equipment.

...
To John's system, pictured on page 1, I would add
the following simple device. Take some screen and
place it diagonally across the barrel, somewhere
in the middle, inside the barrel with the WVO.
The angle should be at least 45 degrees downward.

Why? If there is suspended water, such as Dana
suggests, then as WVO moves about the barrel...
Yes - there will be some movement/flow as you
pore in and remove oil, plus movement of lighter
oil upward and heavy downward. And movement
when outside temps change. ...this movement will
cause suppended water to past thru the screen
and perhaps contacting it and perhaps sticking to it.
If enough water particles stick together to the screen,
gradually they will become large enough so that
they will break holding tension and drop to the
bottom, thus cleaning the oil.

Several screens could be hung vertically to baffle
convection currents and at the same time removing
suspended water.

Has this idea been presented before? I don't recall
reading about it and I've read several thousand messages
on WVO and BD forums this past year. It is certainly
low cost, low maintenance.

I drive 125+ miles/day 7 days a week. Need cheaper fuel than
the commercial stuff. Bought a very strong MB 240D last month,
only 300k miles, and am fixing it up to run on WVO.
Still needs work, electrics are bad. But I have WVO sources,
lots of free cubies, building a shed to keep all out of sight,
researching, researching, researching.

These forums have been a great help. Thanks to all.

One thing - IMHO none of our suggestions on processing
and running on WVO don't prove a whole lot until we have run
for 100k miles. I.e., our ideas and tests are only a start.

I'll be doing 100k miles in 2 years, so hopefully my 240D
will still be running on WVO, saving me lots of money
when year 2010 strikes its starting bell.

I hope someone else beats me to 100K and gives us a report.

Pops
Old daug learning new tricks
hopefully learning by mistakes.
...

quote:

Several screens could be hung vertically to baffle
convection currents and at the same time removing
suspended water.

How do vertical screens baffle convection currents? (heat rises)

I'd figure that horizontal screens would do more.

In an unheated system, I can't see there being much convection happening at all.

quote:

Originally posted by anson:
i'm sorry obviously your system works well and doesn't need modification for you. i'm needling you because i haven't been able to make my own yet. i want to make one for an onboard application, which means i want heat, tiny bubbles, and lots of time for bubbles to interact with water before crossing the water line. i wanna be able to do 55 gallons in 15 minutes or so.

Bubbles and upflow settling don't go togeather (at least not at the same time in the same container. Bubbles prevent settling.

Upflow settling is basically the most efficient form of semi continuous settling whether it is heated or not. You can't get better settling in the same amount of space with any other method.

There is no way you can get 55 gallons of oil to settle in 15 minuts even with heated upflow settling. The only way you could get 55 gallons of oil dewatered and decontaminated in 15 minutes would be a very well tuned CF.

If you want to get 55 gallons of processed oil with 15 minutes of WORK, you could do that easily with a well laid out fixed upflow settling system.

I have run over 75 gallons a week thru my upflow settling system with less than 10 minutes of work a week.

Hi pops,

I have well over 1/4 of a million miles of vwo driving on oil processed with upflow settling and single pass gravity filtering.

I have tried baffles/ screens/ coalescing mediums and while they do allow for a slightly higher thru put, they are a mess to deal with. A 30 gallon tank with the screens could handle almost the same amount of oil as a 55 gallon tank without.

Hi pops,

You are right, it takes a lot of miles to tell if something really works. Over the years, I have run into a lot of people who say they don't worry about getting rid of the water etc. and their car runs great. Every last one of them quit running WVO after a year or two because "the engine was hard to start".

When I started with grease, it was all fats or fully hydrogenated oil. Even in the summer, I got my fuel with a shovel. With properly processed grease on a good conversion, not only will the solid fuel run well, the engine should last langer than on perto fuel. With improperly processed oil, the engine will not last as long as with petro fuel.

...
Thanks all for your replies.

John - I agree that it would be difficult to introduce a screen
thru a 2" hole. In your case where you keep your oil very very
quiet, a screen would probably not be worth the effort.

Welder - Yes, heat rises, but it does cause swurling (sp) currents.
These side currents could stumble into the screen(s) and leave
water particles on the screen(s). Those who heat their barrels
by the sun, have up currents on the sunny side and down on the
opposite side. There must be cross currents crossing from side
to side. Also I did mention a diagonal screen which could intercept
water particles going up or down. Not all my eggs are in 1 barrel.

Ron - Has that half million miles been in one vehicle or divided
up among the vehicles you mention at your signature? I was hoping
someone seeing my post might have completed 100k using only WVO
in one vehicle. Screening may well be not worth the time and mess,
but I did think it would be pretty much self cleaning w/ water
washing the crud downward.

I will try out my screen when I get my system up. Still researching
and picking at the collective gray matter.

Thanks again for your replies. Enlightening.

Pops
Old daug learning new tricks
hopefully learning by mistakes.
...

i have been planning a heat and settle system because a settle without heat system did not work. then i found this thread. now im wondering why my system didnt work and this one does. can someone find a reason why my system didnt dewater, but this one does?

i filled a 55 gallon open head drum with WVO, straight from the restaurants drum. pig snot, dog vomit, god only knows what else, included. i hot pan tested it, it failed. sealed the drum. let it sit for 4 weeks in a room that stayed at about 60 F.
i used a small jar to scoop a sample off the top of the drum, it failed the hot pan test.
i then pumped the oil out, starting at the top, to see if any separation of water had taken place.
about halfway down it looked like coffee and cream, so some separation had taken place, but no where near enough.
my oil is liquid below freezing.

the only differences i see between the way i did it, and this system, is filtering the heavy stuff out through the bug screen, and adding new oil to push the dry oil out.

can anyone figure out why my way did not work?

i just want to know if the two ways are that different, or is there something i should plan on doing differently when i build this upflow settling system.

quote:

can anyone figure out why my way did not work?

Generally speaking wvo must be fully liquid to allow suspended water to settle out. From your description yours was not.

yes, it was fully liquid. it is fully liquid down to at least 15 F, which is the coldest it has been when i collected it.

im just trying to understand how this upflow system can work without heat.

unless, by fully liquid you meant, it was thick because it was cold. in that case, you are right. it was very thick, but it shouldnt be any thicker in the upflow system.

quote:

Originally posted by 95ram:
unless, by fully liquid you meant, it was thick because it was cold. in that case, you are right. it was very thick, but it shouldnt be any thicker in the upflow system.

If you review little more closely you will see that john only uses his with oil that is presettled in the cubbie and he only poured the settled portion of the oil into his system. Since you did not do your experement with simular oil you can't compare the two.

ok, maybe im stupid, but i still do not get it.

are you saying if i presettle and only use the oil that is wet, but doesnt have the heavy junk in it, i should expect the upflow system to work for me?
the difference is presettling?

i have read the discussion from the beginning several times. i have even cut and pasted it to notepad and saved it. i saved the pic to paint so i can view it easier.

i just want to make sure i do not need to change anything in the design to get it to work with the oil, and at the temp, i will be using it at.

vegetable oil contains suspended water droplets that can often be so small that they will practically never drop out of the oil because surface tension force holding it up in oil ~equals the gravitational force pulling it down.

so yeah if you just dump oil in a drum it won't necessarily dewater effectively all on its own.

Hi everyone,

In Oz i've seen several systems like this that all fail to remove suspended water. As anson said the particles are too small to drop out themselves.

All the systems i've seen require some form of dryer included. There is the good old air stone trick that can be slow but good. There is also a system where the oil is finely sprayed onto itself to break the surface tension and allow the moisture to evaporate. A small fan must also be used to circulate air over the oil surface to evaporate the moisture. The small pump used to circulate the wvo slowly heats the oil which helps with the process. Do this correctly for 1-3 hours depending on the water content and the oil will pass any pan test you can throw at it.

This is what we have found anyway, froggo.

quote:

The only way you could get 55 gallons of oil dewatered and decontaminated in 15 minutes would be a very well tuned CF.

Hi Ron. Your wording seems a little strong (the ONLY way). I'm betting that there are petro refineries that can do 55 Gal in 1 minute. You don't sell DC CFs do you? (joking)