quote:

The only problem is that it is not true. Rapeseed is higher in linolenic than soy. Which is kind of an embarrassing thing for ASG not to address.

Forrest G
It is not wise to quote studies done in 1998 and believe nothing has changed till 2007.
Rape / canola had a higher content years ago.
By selective measures farmers use very different seeds this days.
Resulting in ASG findings.
Nothing embarrassing for them.
Depending which seed is tested the result differs.
Hence ASG is correct and you are.....whatever
The same thing can be done with soy or is already on his way.
see also :
http://www.canola-council.org/PDF/Performance1-3.pdf#zoom=100
BMW Fan

I've also asked ASG for further clarification on this. Will let you know what they say.

In the meantime, here is a reply I received quite some time ago when I asked for some details on how they arrived at this conclusion concerning their recommendation against use of soy....

"Hello Edward,
sorry for late reply, I just returned from a business trip. The examples mentioned in our info letter are taken from our daily business. They are representing not only one specific sample or engine failure. We collected informations from different customers, other research laboratories and of of course a lot of own experiance from daily business and generated the statements made in the letter. This letter was prepared to answer the daily asked questions of customers about vegetable oil fuels advantages/disadvantages.
Best regards
Juergen"

Yes, I know soy is king in the US, for now.
I used to grow the stuff - I farmed, for quite a few years, near Detroit, in the corn/soybean belt.
I think Canola is a better fuel, and I have had a number of people tell me thet can't get it, in parts of the US, and I urge them to keep trying, and, almost always, they are successful in locating some. Low-lin / high oleic oils in both soy and Canola will make the whole situation better for all, and these are fortunately becoming more available.

RE: the question someone had (Chasee?) on return to tank, yes, it was a 6-port, and yes, two or three three-ports and a controller would be the way to go in future when using such a small diesel tank, especially. Remember this was converted in 2005, and at that time a lot more single 6-ports were in use.

Dear BMW Fan,

Fair enough criticism. Here's data on linolenic acid from the 2005 edition of Bailey's, generally considered the "Bible" on vegetable oil.

Canola 9.6
Rapeseed 9.1
Low linolenic Canola 2.1
High oleic canola 2.6
Soybean 7.6

Now, if it seems to me that if they chose a low linolenic variety of Canola/Rapeseed, they should have disclosed that, and it would have been more fair to compare it to a low linolenic variety of soybean, which has less than 1% or 3% linolenic depending upon the variety.(1)

Seems that would have been more of an apples to apples comparison.

-Forest

http://www.zerotranssoy.com/sol_lowlin_main.htm

In this debate of soy vs. canola, we seem to be ignoring the point I think we are agreeing on: that without the injector and chip mods he would have probably not gotten the problem, since he wouldn't have gotten unburned VO dripping down his cylinders, coking his rings, scoring the cylinders, then entering the crankcase and eventually after 10k miles without a change causing polymers there. It appears most of the damage was due to ring coking, scoring cylinders, loss of compression, and not in the crankcase. The crankcase is where the soy vs. canola debate becomes more relevant. The ring coking which started the whole mess would probably have occurred equally on soy or canola, with the extreme temps around the 2nd ring. Do a test, heat a pan of each up to hot enough to turn to coke, a hard black deposit, and I think they will both create an equally hard mess.

Which is something the single tankers need to worry about more since the blowby of wet VO mainly occurs at startup on single tanks. Proper dual tank rigs don't appear to have that problem, because the rings seal up good after the engine is up to temp. As long as we don't do those performance mods.

You are speaking my mind, Sunwizard.

-Forest

I think it's best to wait for clarification on the linolenic statement, from ASG, before commenting further on this, but it seems from the email I received in the past that they based this report on what was the most commonly used Canola and soy at the time. That is my guess. So, as Klaus (BMW fan) has commented, that may mean they are indeed accurate in their comments for what may be a realistic context at the time of the report.

As I have said, and Klaus has also said, there is rapid change occuring in these oils at this time. Widescale adoption of newer varieties of oilseeds will lead to better circumstances and likely updated reports in future, as these oils become commonplace. That uptake by the food oil/food service industry will be very rapid, as they seek to replace hydrogenated soy with new low lin / high oleic liquid oils that do not require hydrogenation and so do not have trans fats.

Which will be a better situation for all; but was not what was available the last number of years.

The user stated that the oil was the following:

"Soybean oil from a Thai restaurant. They change it once a week."

He's not saying hydrogenated, and not the new types which are really just coming to market in a big way right now.

During the same time period, a virtually identical engine was operated in much the same way, but with Canola oil, and has accumulated around 300,000 km (and 600,000 total on the engine). No big differences in proceedures that I know of - not to say they have not existed, then may have

- but that engine is healthy and this one is obviously not, and soy, traditional soy oil, was, I think, the biggest part of the problem. The ASG report supported that hypothesis. We will see when they reply if there is an error in their statement re: relative linolenic content of the Canola and soy they typically encounter, or not. Since they are so heavily involved in this on a day to day basis, I suspect not, but we will see.

Sunwizard: re: injectors and chips.... it is not being ignored. It has been part of my comments all along, and others have commented on it as well. I don't think people should use these with SVO and certainly an issue here.

RE: your comment on the Canola versus soy only being an issue in the crankcase....I disagree, on the basis that the ASG report we are discussing specifically states effects at the injector. And was we all know, anything such as this problem they talk about, at the injector tip, from the use of whatever soy oil they baed this on, can lead to a poor atomization, which *then* leads to other problems including even higher than usual amounts of SVO in the engine oil.

quote:

Originally posted by BMW Fan:

quote:

The only problem is that it is not true. Rapeseed is higher in linolenic than soy. Which is kind of an embarrassing thing for ASG not to address.

Forrest G
It is not wise to quote studies done in 1998 and believe nothing has changed till 2007.
Rape / canola had a higher content years ago.
By selective measures farmers use very different seeds this days.
Resulting in ASG findings.
Nothing embarrassing for them.
Depending which seed is tested the result differs.
Hence ASG is correct and you are.....whatever
The same thing can be done with soy or is already on his way.
see also :
http://www.canola-council.org/PDF/Performance1-3.pdf#zoom=100
BMW Fan

Hi BMW Fan,

I do believe Rapeseed oil is superior as fuel but just not for the reason stated. Rapeseed oil has an Iodine Value around 92 versus Soybean Oil at about 130. Canola is around 117.
Genetic engineering and selective breading are underway for all three. The new KFC oil is a low lenolenic variety of Canola. Varieties of soy are now down to 3% linolenic or even lower. Fortunately the Food Industry's interest is the same as ours, higher stability oils.

quote:

During the same time period, a virtually identical engine was operated in much the same way, but with Canola oil, and has accumulated around 300,000 km (and 600,000 total on the engine). No big differences in proceedures that I know of - not to say they have not existed, then may have

- but that engine is healthy and this one is obviously not, and soy, traditional soy oil, was, I think, the biggest part of the problem.

Virtually identical...does that mean chipped and modded? Long oil change intervals?

If not I don't see how you can legitimately use it to support your theory regarding soy being the main culpret.

Can we surmise from your apparrent familarity with this conversion Ed that it was a PlantDrive conversion?

quote:

Originally posted by Edward Beggs:
RE: your comment on the Canola versus soy only being an issue in the crankcase....I disagree, on the basis that the ASG report we are discussing specifically states effects at the injector. And was we all know, anything such as this problem they talk about, at the injector tip, from the use of whatever soy oil they baed this on, can lead to a poor atomization, which *then* leads to other problems including even higher than usual amounts of SVO in the engine oil.

If soy were causing greatly increased injector coking, we would be hearing more reports of it since soy is by far the main VO being burned in the US.

No dewatering could have caused erosion of his injector tips which has been documented also. It would be interesting to see his injectors. But above all else, they were modded, which causes the problem we are discussing all by itself, no other things needed. So why try to blame it on another aspect which is not as likely, when we have an obvious cause that is known?

Since there are multiple possible causes often, an interesting thing to do would be to compile a database of failures, with the best guesses as to causes, and then see if any common patterns show up. This is sort of what we try to do in our heads, but putting down in a scientific form would be interesting.

quote:

Originally posted by Edward Beggs:
Sunwizard: re: injectors and chips.... it is not being ignored. It has been part of my comments all along, and others have commented on it as well. I don't think people should use these with SVO and certainly an issue here.

This has been a very interesting discussion, but dang I hate the direction it has taken <g>. I suspect some, if not much, of the oil I collect is soy, and I know my powerstroke is chipped. Could this modification be selectively bad for the TDI?

Sam

Good points, Sunwizard.

Ok - all in all, a combination of factors led to this problem. So, to summarize, and hopefully we all agree, and others can use this, at least as a guide for SVO use in a TDI:

1. Change lube oil more often, likely twice as often, as usual.

2. Get lube oil tested on a regular basis and use vegetable based motor oil.

3. Get fuel SVO tested against DIN 51605 (if you believe that that is a good spec.)

4. Use two, and preferably 3 (faster purge time), 3 port valves and a controller of some sort.

5. Use the best fuel oil and best prefiltering techniques you can.

6. Get the injectors rebuilt or exchanged at time of conversion. Get them removed and tested once a year or every 50,000 miles whichever comes first.

7. Do not add performance modifications such as power chips or modified injectors.

8. Do not even think of single tank on these unless it is and well proven conversion to fully optimize the engine for vegetable oil of the tpye you intend to use, and has been designed for your climate, and you are willing to follow all the recommendations of the supplier.

9. Follow all the recommendations of the kit supplier.

10. At the first sign of rough running, poor starting, reduced fuel economy, unusual increase or decrease in lubricating oil consumption, reduced power or unusual increase in black smoke, or any smoke, start investigation of possible causes.

11. Make sure you get that engine out on the highway, and give it a long hot run once in a while, and do an Italian tuneup (full throttle run) once a week. Avoid idling and low engine loads on SVO.

12. Ensure your SVO is hot enough, consistently, under all operating conditions, as much of the time as possible. 70C target temp.

13. Make sure the SVO is not *too* hot (limit to 100C)

14. Cross your fingers, it is still not a guaranteed success long term, but maybe other TDI issues will get you before SVO does, and maybe you will save money, have fun, feel like you are doing the right thing environmentally and politically, and etc.

Have I missed anything?

And, I think there is a database on one of the Euro sites, concerning SVO failures, and what can be learned from them. If anyone knows more, can you post it?

And yes, it was one of our conversions. One of the first TDI's we did and one of very few with such a small diesel tank, only a few gallons. Most have larger diesel tanks, many have much larger diesel tanks, and the owners should top those up with diesel when they get down to about half. If they want to upgrade from the single 6-port to two or three 3-ports and a controller, if they do not already have that, we are happy to assist.

I am going to stick to my guns here and say that I think if he'd have run Canola and not used soy, it'd still be running. It might not have made all the difference, but I think it would have helped offset some of the other issues.

Fair enough?

Pretty even, Mr. Beggs.

One question: What's the basis on the maximum temperature recommendation. Vegetable oil won't being to thermally degrade until about 300F.

And can you elaborate on "vegetable oil based motor oil." I didn't think any of those were ready for prime time.

-Forest

quote:

13. Make sure the SVO is not *too* hot (limit to 100C)

Do you mean too hot prior to the IP Ed?
If so 212°F is too hot IMO.

BTW..It takes guts to admit it was a PlantDrive conversion. Can you provide the basic details on what the conversion consisted of?

TDI computers sometimes get unhappy with fuel temps above 100C. Plenty hot for viscosity reduction, falls into the recommended range specified in the ACREVO study as actually the minimum for SVO in a DI diesel, and was the max. temp used for the TDI emissions study we did along with VOControls and which was physically undertaken by Kevin at Albuquerque Alternative Energy, in which the TDI's emissions were across the board lower than on diesel.

TDI's tend to run cool, as you know, I am sure, so they need efficient coolant-based heating, and most often looped returns, and IMO, electric fuel heating as well (just as is used to boost the sometimes inadequate cabin heat).

Fuchs Plantpure. Looked into it for North America the last few years....

Minimum purchases (lots!) and high prices, prohibitively high, sadly. But if lots of owners bug Fuchs North America, maybe they will offer it here in 2o litre pails or something, at some kind of reasonable price. Based on Canola.
I just run Canola in the crankcase once in a while in winter, older engines, short time periods, experimentally. Excellent lubricant on its own, well documented. No problems, but the specific types and additive packages of something like the Fuchs product is definitely the only way to go. Not sure if the other one mentioned is Canola-based or is just a really good full synthetic.

Oh, one contact in the UK with a lot of fleet experience suggests that by using an oil centrifuge, they were able to go to 2/3rds of usual oil interval versus half (twice as often).
That was based on oil analysis, and seems to support the idea some have had that bypass lube systems, (centrifuge on bypass system, or some other type of bypass filter) can actually filter out agglomerated polymerized particles as they begin to form, catch them on the fly.

Then there is the whole realm of continuous replenishment and using new SVO of the "right kind" as lube oil, then as fuel. So, never in the crankcase long at all. Makes sense to me.

Fuchs actually has a patent on this idea, and they shared it with me a number of years back, and suggested that of course it should be used with only their (Canola-based) oil.

BTW, did you know that a mere 1% Canola oil blended in with diesel fuel can reduce engine wear (as measured by iron particles in the lube oil) by up to 50%? and that 0.1% brought lubricity-deficient low sulphur diesel fuel back to baseline ASTM spec (Hertz et al)

Sorry, that is Fuchs Planto aka Plantopur, sometimes also called "Titan" line, I think.

And it's pronounced "Fooks", and is a long established German lubricants company, with distributors in both Canada and the US, mostly only now selling industrial lubricants. Put some pressure on them.

Oh, while I am at it, check out Hernandez' TAMU patent on Filter Refining of vegetable oils using sodium metasilicate. For all you who want to neutralize oil the easy way without creating soaps and working with caustic soda, and having to water wash the oil afterwards. Kinda fun. But of course, you must license the process from TAMU. (Texas A&M).

Ok, I have to get back to work now, people are waiting for me to ship them stuff and I don't like to keep them waiting too long!

Ed...lot of info there...but when you are citing VO fuel temps..where exactly are you measuring them at? Without that critical bit of info VO fuel temps are almost meaningless.

quote:

Originally posted by john galt:
Here's a baseline reference for a normally operating engine.
With no additional heat added to the fuel [other than what the filter and IP heat soak from the engine at cruising speeds 65-70 MPH], the temperature of the insulated injector line just before the injector is 50°F to 60°F above ambient temperature.

Eg: on a 70°F day the injector line temperature ranges as low as 120°F and generally around 130°F. This temperature may vary 5°F depending on whether the engine is coasting downhill or pulling uphill under load. A remote probe under an insulation wrap gets a shielded temperature of the injector line.
Engine: 3.4L TDI, fuel: 20%VO-80%ULSD

I also found to be true that using the shielded-probe method of measuring temperature with un-insulated fattywagons heaters, the temp was only around 160-180°F while cruising and would creep up to about 200°F while sitting idling. After this I insulated them with pieces of torch blanket and silicone tape which resulted in temps of 190-200°F temps while cruising and the necessity of turning off the heaters while idling longer than 1.5 minutes. Insulation is important for EVERY part of the veg system, and adequate temps are vital to avoid coking.