BIODIESEL & SVO DISCUSSION FORUMS






Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Biodiesel  Hop To Forums  General Biodiesel Discussion    B100 use in post-injection modern diesels, leading to high engine wear
Page 1 2 3 4 5 

Moderators: Shaun, The Trouts
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
B100 use in post-injection modern diesels, leading to high engine wear
 Login/Join
 
Member
posted Hide Post
In case it's useful to someone, here's what I'm doing to run B100 in my Duramax 08, with the DPF currently still on.

I have an aux fuel tank. I keep petro diesel in one tank and B100 in the other, and I can switch between tanks with a switch in the cab. I use the Quadzilla Stealth 2 tuner with the off-road no-DPF software. I switch to the "stock tune" (standard software) and petro diesel tank while the DPF regen, which does the dreaded post-injection, is running. The rest of the time I run with B100 and the no-DPF software, which prevents regen from running.

Here's what I do. I have a 150 mile commute. Normally I'm running B100 and the no-DPF tune, to prevent regens. Once per commute I switch to the stock tune.

If the CLEAN EXHAUST FILTER light comes on, I know I need to run a regen. I switch to the petro tank. The next time I drive, I'll be running petro and the stock software, so DPF regen will not be a problem. The CLEAN EXHAUST FILTER will flash for 20 to 30 minutes, which I assume means the regen is running. When the warning stops, I assume regen is done. This is the behavior described in the Duramax owner's manual. I then switch back to B100 and the no-DPF tune.

If the CLEAN EXHAUST FILTER light does *not* come on, I assume that a regen is not needed and I switch back to the no-DPF tune and do another commute on B100.

This works, I guess, but is time consuming and error prone. Once I did a regen on B100 by mistake. I'm not happy with it and I'm going to remove my DPF in a few days.

For me, the annoyance and the reduced mileage with the DPF are bigger factors than its advantages: staying legal and reducing emissions. But I live in a rural part of Arizona (Mohave County) where there are no emission inspections and dealers are likely to be tolerant of the DPF removal. If emission inspections were required, I might come to a different conclusion.

My regens are occurring about once every 300 miles. An interesting question, also suggested by others on this thread, is whether the regen is really required that often, given that I'm running B100 which runs with 50% less particulate emissions. I don't know the answer. The problem is determining when the filter is full. To be safe, I'm relying on the stock software to do that.

For others who don't want to remove the DPF, if I were continuing down this path I would look into other ways of determining whether the DPF is full and needs a regen. Maybe someone who knows more about DPFs will be able to come up with a clever way to do this. Something convenient (easy to check) is needed.

Note that this approach is only relevant if you have dual tanks with a switch, and you are willing to buy a Quadzilla tuner or equivalent (there are other tuners that can disable the DPF regen).

I admit that the article about post-injection problems with biodiesel may be overblown and biased. I don't know. The reason I'm not comfortable running the DPF regen with B100 is because I'm conservative about my new truck -- I don't want to take risks that are unclear.

For more on DPF delete, the exhaust system to order, and tuners that work, see:

http://www.dieselplace.com/forum/showthread.php?t=212196

--mark

This message has been edited. Last edited by: greybird,


08 Chevy Silverado running B100 made with a BioPro 190 from Utah Biodiesel
 
Location: NW Arizona, USA | Registered: March 09, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
member
posted Hide Post
Very relevant to this discussion:

http://biodiesel.infopop.cc/eve/forums/a/tpc/f/419605551/m/8371032572

Also, thanks to everyone for the info on DPF deletion. Could prove very handy.


Kumar Plocher
Yokayo Biofuels
Yokayo Biofuels Facebook page
.........../ \..............
fueling / R \ evolution since 2001
'''''''''''''/____\'''''''''''''''''''

Sustainable Biodiesel...
 
Location: Ukiah, CA USA | Registered: September 19, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by William Brown:
This is yet another example of how a falsehood becomes established truth. Even in the original article there was a stunning lack of proof. Let's provide some proof before we accept it as fact.
I think that folks need to understand that the results of this study point to one possible outcome. When dealing with the catastrophic nature of this possiblility, the authors urge manufacturers to err on the side of caution.

Kind of the same as the rule about not using cell phones on airplanes. Would making a call cause the plane to crash? Probably not. The consequences of the one-time fluke where a phone causes interference with avionics (a plane crash) are so great that the FAA decided to err on the side of caution.

Another example of this near over-reactive attitude is found in recalls from any auto manufacturer. Take the Ford 7.3 liter Powerstroke's CPS issue: The recall states that the old design of the CPS is failure prone and that a failure could cause a loss of power and thus could cause an accident. I have heard of many many CPS failures, none of which caused accidents, but Ford feels that the consiquences of just one accident justify the expense of replacing all of the faulty CPSs they produced!

So, anyway, I am agreeing with you that people should not accept a study like this as the final word. But do not discount this study as completely bunk! You risk ruining a very expensive engine if you do. It is simply raising a red flag as to one possible outcome of a small set of circumstances.


'93 Chevy K3500 w/6.5 turbo, 4x4. 20k miles on bio and counting.
'02 Ford F350 4 Door Short-Bed w/7.3 Powerstroke. 15k miles on bio.
 
Location: Utah | Registered: July 17, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
member
posted Hide Post
So I've now heard of oil dilution problems in '07 and later model Dodge trucks. Is anyone aware of the same things happening in other makes/models?

Also, are the only 2 solutions

1) use less biodiesel, and change oil more frequently

or

2) install a DPF delete kit?

I'm trying to warn my customers, but I don't have that much to go on.


Kumar Plocher
Yokayo Biofuels
Yokayo Biofuels Facebook page
.........../ \..............
fueling / R \ evolution since 2001
'''''''''''''/____\'''''''''''''''''''

Sustainable Biodiesel...
 
Location: Ukiah, CA USA | Registered: September 19, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Yes VW did tests documented in the thread you linked above which showed 45% oil dilution with as little as B5 blends. It occurs in every engine with a DPF, its just that some makers haven't done (or released results on) the research on biofuels that cummins and VW have.


YVORMV - Your veg. oil results may vary, see www.burnveg.com/forum
95 Dodge Cummins 4x4
Zero fossil house- 100% solar power and heat.
 
Location: N. Colorado | Registered: August 31, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Couldn't this problem be solved (legal like) by eliminating the post injection and adding a fuel injector into the PDF?


'93 Chevy K3500 w/6.5 turbo, 4x4. 20k miles on bio and counting.
'02 Ford F350 4 Door Short-Bed w/7.3 Powerstroke. 15k miles on bio.
 
Location: Utah | Registered: July 17, 2006Reply With QuoteReport This Post



member
posted Hide Post
I called Blackstone a while back and asked what they used to test for fuel dilution of crankcase oil. The guy told me it was tested by flash point, which I know will not pick up dilution by biofuels since they raise flash point so much over what is normal for diesel.

If they test for viscosity that's probably a better indicator of oil dilution by biofuels.

quote:
Originally posted by William Brown:
Okay, I'm calling BS on this issue. I just got back my first oil analysis for my '08 Jeep GC CRD and I have <0.5 fuel in the oil where <2.0 is the norm and my TBN is 5.3 which means there is plenty of additive left. Here's a quote from the report:

 
Location: Pittsboro, North Carolina | Registered: March 07, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
member
posted Hide Post
The top of this page we're on talks about doing a manual switchover to a tank of diesel if you have an auxiliary tank. Thanks to Joe Beatty for pointing me to this.

I was wondering if you couldn't just rig a Frybrid or other controller to do this switchover for you automatically (and an SVO-style dual tank setup)?

It'd introduce modifications that some people would be uncomfortable with (ie deaaler/mechanic issues) but would not be a hard modification to make. It'd leave the DPF in place.

I think that's option #3.
 
Location: Pittsboro, North Carolina | Registered: March 07, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
member
posted Hide Post
also, hope I'm remembering the right thread to post to-

the myth about common rail injection causing 'polymerization' of biodiesel is a total urban legend.

I was around on the forums when the first mechanics (people associated with Boulder Boidiesel, which ran some university shuttles with a 6.0 engine on biodiesel) made the mistake of assuming an unrelated problem they saw was "polymerization" and saw that they went way out on a limb and claimed it was due to the New Vehicle Technology Of The Year- common rail, which had just been introduced. The local bidiesel activists shouted from the rooftops that everyone with common rail should watch out for the "Common Rail Is Incompatible With Biodiesel Because It Polymerizes The Biodiesel Under Such Terrible High Pressures Problem".

the problem is, that isn't actually true, and what they were seeing does not resemble polymerization.

What they saw a problem with was specific to the Ford 6.0, not common rail in general.


The Ford 6.0 Problem seems to at times be that the fuel filter disintegrates. It seems that different people experience this at different intervals, and not everyone experiences this. There are disagreements on this being the cause of the Ford 6.0 Problem, and I always point out that the Ford 6.0 injectors (they get clogged by some kind of goo that keeps on coming) don't like diesel either, so perhaps we still don't know what exactly is the matter with those who have the Ford 6.0 Problem.

thread in which lots of people prove me wrong on there being a problem:
http://www.thedieselstop.com/forums/f22/6-0-b100-problems-213077/

and another one:
http://www.thedieselgarage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79448

The one in which someone first showe3d (I think) that it's actually a filter issue (which would explain why some users get it and some users have no problems- different parts manufacturers I'm speculating), was on biodieselnow.com somewhere a year or so ago.
 
Location: Pittsboro, North Carolina | Registered: March 07, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by girl mark:
also, hope I'm remembering the right thread to post to-

the myth about common rail injection causing 'polymerization' of biodiesel is a total urban legend.

I was around on the forums when the first mechanics (people associated with Boulder Boidiesel, which ran some university shuttles with a 6.0 engine on biodiesel) made the mistake of assuming an unrelated problem they saw was "polymerization" and saw that they went way out on a limb and claimed it was due to the New Vehicle Technology Of The Year- common rail, which had just been introduced. The local bidiesel activists shouted from the rooftops that everyone with common rail should watch out for the "Common Rail Is Incompatible With Biodiesel Because It Polymerizes The Biodiesel Under Such Terrible High Pressures Problem".

the problem is, that isn't actually true, and what they were seeing does not resemble polymerization.

What they saw a problem with was specific to the Ford 6.0, not common rail in general.


The Ford 6.0 Problem seems to at times be that the fuel filter disintegrates. It seems that different people experience this at different intervals, and not everyone experiences this. There are disagreements on this being the cause of the Ford 6.0 Problem, and I always point out that the Ford 6.0 injectors (they get clogged by some kind of goo that keeps on coming) don't like diesel either, so perhaps we still don't know what exactly is the matter with those who have the Ford 6.0 Problem.

thread in which lots of people prove me wrong on there being a problem:
http://www.thedieselstop.com/forums/f22/6-0-b100-problems-213077/

and another one:
http://www.thedieselgarage.com/forums/showthread.php?t=79448

The one in which someone first showe3d (I think) that it's actually a filter issue (which would explain why some users get it and some users have no problems- different parts manufacturers I'm speculating), was on biodieselnow.com somewhere a year or so ago.




This thread is about post injection issues, the Ford 6.0 isn't a post injection engine.
The Ford 6.0 isn't common rail, it's unit injection.
If you have "goo" coursing it's way through your fuel system, you have a biodiesel quality issue. The design of the Ford 6.0 doesn't create "goo".
The majority of the problems with the Ford 6.0 injectors is the electric/spool valve/hydraulic end of the injector which is known to stick (Ford will even install a program to heat/buzz/cycle that part of the injector to help the problem) which has nothing to do with fuel which enters at the bottom third of the injector at about 60 PSI.
I also noticed on Biodieselnow that you opined a couple years ago that the Ford 6.0 doesn't tolerate B100, you would be incorrect.


1992 F350 w/Cummins
2004 F250 w/Edge Platinum
both on B100
 
Location: Webb, MS | Registered: January 29, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
member
posted Hide Post
Finally got to catch up on this thread again and fully read the NREL study previously posted - as well.

Much thanks to William Brown for linking it for all of us...

To give you an up date on our B100 testing in a Ford 6.0 TurboDiesel Engine Truck (pre-post injection technology) after ~31,000 miles of straight B100 on a 12 year old vehicle with ~150,000 miles to start with.

Initial oil sample taken at 5,000 miles during first oil change and the last oil sample was taken after more than 15,000 miles with out an oil change. All samples taken in between justified the extension of oil changes.

Soot content was virtually undetectable and there is still a visible difference in the "dirtiness" of the oil. I do wonder if part of this is due to dilution even if this older model Ford isn't equiped with post injection (At B100 levels on an older truck? - do any professional diesel mechanics have thoughts on this???)

The test results also indicated it wasn't diluted with "volatiles" however as Girlmark points out biodiesel hardly qualifies as a volatile so we really don't know from the test results about this.

So my question regarding the NREL study is the issue of "preloading" the Diesel Particulate Filter(DPF) does this drastically misrepresent what would really happen when burning biodiesel particularly in higher precentages???

It seems to me that if biodiesel is not producing near the amount of soot since it is a more complete combustion wouldn't this negate the Balance Point Temperature (BPT) factor and therefore ultimately reduce the number of post injection regeneration burning cycles?

Greybird does a phenomenal job demonstating that using B100 only has required a cycle at ~ 300 miles (does anyone know what the regen. cycle rate is on regular diesel fuel???)

Greybird would you be willing to run on Petro for a while and see how often the DPF light comes on??? Isn't it possible using the engines computer to verify the number of regeneration cycles for a specific period of time??? This would tell us a lot...

Since the study indicated a 67% effective reduction in particulate matter (PM) by running biodiesel even at (I believe) lower precentages would seem to suggest that running Dinodiesel should cause something like 3 times the number of regeneration cycles. So perhaps every 100 miles if Greybird's thoughts are correct.

Lastly it seems to me that if these fancy engines cost so much why not include a feature which allows the owner to kind of dial in their fuel or for the system to automatically sense that the engine regeneration cycle back pressure and temp. are different and therefore self compensate -- Am I asking too much here???

GCG
 
Location: Michigan | Registered: May 08, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
To give you an up date on our B100 testing in a Ford 6.0 TurboDiesel Engine Truck (pre-post injection technology) after ~31,000 miles of straight B100 on a 12 year old vehicle with ~150,000 miles to start with.


There isn't a Ford 6.0 that is twelve years old, they came out in 2003.


1992 F350 w/Cummins
2004 F250 w/Edge Platinum
both on B100
 
Location: Webb, MS | Registered: January 29, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post



member
posted Hide Post
Brady,

Ya! I just got correct by Chad also through another email. Thanks for keeping me honest; it's a 7.3 TurboDiesel F250.

GCG
 
Location: Michigan | Registered: May 08, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
That test needs to be done on a 6.0, not a 7.3
They are 2 totally different beasts.
I have had to either replace or clean the filters on my 6.0 5 times in the last 20k miles of B100
I have not noticed any of the filters coming apart or getting weaker. I buy them from NAPA
 
Registered: May 13, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
A good statistician can make the results support any conclusion that is desired.

The problem with all this theoretical information is that it requires real-world empirical testing to have any real meaning.
  • Biodiesel and Veggie Oil Cling to cylinder walls and metal surfaces better than Mineral Oils.
  • Biodiesel and Veggie Oil are better lubricants than Mineral Oils.
  • Biodiesel and Veggie Oil may also aid with dissolving sludge buildup (haven't verified).
So, the obvious conclusion is that the Biodiesel and Veggie Oil will necessarily damage an engine if a small amount leaks into the crankcase.

What needs to happen is to get a thousand vehicles out on the road running predominantly B100... and just see what the long term effects of the fuel is on the vehicles.

What the auto makers need to do is recruit, say the first 1000 car buyers who are willing to run predominantly ASTM B100.... extend their warranty to say 150% warranty support and send them out to tear up the cars & pickups.

Fleet vehicles, of course, are better to do it with as they are easier to compare... but perhaps more difficult to support. Perhaps get 1000 NY Taxi cab drivers to drive Diesels, and randomly assign half of the cars to Diesel, and half to B100.

So far I haven't burnt up an engine yet.
Usually the duct tape and bailing wire holding my vehicles together wears out long before the engine wears out.

So, my question is what is the bottom line?

Will the Veggie/BD engine wear out at 200,000 miles while the mineral Diesel engine might wear out at 250,000 miles?????

The majority of "dead engines" I see are normally due to neglect, and running the car without oil or water.
 
Location: Oregon | Registered: October 17, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by keelec:So, the obvious conclusion is that the Biodiesel and Veggie Oil will necessarily damage an engine if a small amount leaks into the crankcase.


IIRC, Sappok is postulating that the polar biodiesel molecule will cause the additive package in synthetic oil to drop out of solution. This will cause his "premature engine wear". But veggie oil is non-polar so I doubt his reasoning could apply in that situation.

In the few articles I've seen regarding oil dilution none has reported any engine damage. So, to me, this is much ado about nothing. The solution remains increased oil change frequency and/or a delete kit for the DPF. No prob.

But, as I've queried on the Jeep forum (I'm Section106 over there) what does "premature engine wear" mean? Are we taking about a few thousand miles off the life of the engine or are we taking about catastrophic engine failure after a few tanks of B100? I need metrics.

And girlmark, I'm confident in the Blackstone Total Base Number value. If B100 causes the additive to fall out and I have more than enough to protect the engine then I assume that there isn't that much bio in the oil. Not enough to cause a problem anyway.
 
Location: Hampton, Va | Registered: May 02, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
As far at the technical side I don't think anyone really knows what's going on but these are my experiences and they may be helpful:

I have made over 3000 gallons of biodiesel over the past couple of years. Three-thousand. That's a good bit as far as I have seen. Since I have made all that fuel I have burned it all as well. I have used it in 4 vehicles myself.

2001 VW Beetle 143,000
2004 VW Beetle 74,000
1997 Dodge Cummins 235,000
2007 Chevy Silverado with DPF 27,000

It obviously runs great in the older cars but in the Chevy it absolutely doesn't work well...
Similar to the poster who has dual tanks, I have used single tank B100, D100, and all sorts of mixtures of both. The Duramax runs regen cycles CONSTANTLY especially with slower, low speed and city driving. It even says in the manual about once per tank of fuel. That means you can't really ever run B100 at all. I have done it and the mileage drops to 7mpg yes SEVEN and probably would have dropped less if I let it. The problem is the Duramax system runs the regen cycle at will and you don't notice it unless you are really looking for it with running D2. But, when it runs it idles a little higher than normal maybe 200RPMs. You can tell but you really need to watch and I park in an enclosed area so the sound is much louder than it is parked in the open. So, it runs the regen many times but most people never notice and never care. The exhaust pipe is VERY hot, though and you can smell it cooking anything on it kinda like any new exhaust system when you first run it (like a lawnmower, motorcycle, etc.) possible the oils on the pipes to keep them from rusting when stored. So that's the deal with D2.

As for B100 here's what happens: You drive, the engine is even quieter than before and it runs great. Everything is great. Mileage seems to go up to 17mpg (on my truck) if you reset the mileage meter. Then, the regen cycle kicks in eventually. You can tell because mileage starts to fall fast. You then notice the high idling at that point. The biodiesel WILL NOT do whatever D2 does. I have theorized that it just doesn't burn in the exhaust stream like D2 if it even makes it that far. Chevy drivers know that they have the oil life monitor system. It must be pretty good because your oil life percentage PLUMMETS! I have had oil life monitor perentage drop in just a few DAYS after an oil change to zero percent. It must have been during a regen but that only happened once. Usually it's a few weeks and it will drop daily. After a while maybe a couple tanks of fuel, the system finally starts to warn you. "Run regen cycle NOW". In the manual it tells you to go over 40 mph on the highway for a little while like the Dodge and I'm sure the Ford manual says. This is in case you were using D2 and did hours of idling and stopped traffic and the DPF couldn't regen normally. If you get this message you have gone too far. You're really not supposed to see it come on. The check engine light will then come on and the truck runs ok but the message dings at you and won't go away till you put D2 in the tank and let it run. Once the D2 gets in there it takes a few minutes of regen and all is well. Sometimes the check engine light takes a day or two to turn off but I think Chevy does the reset per 100 crank cycles or something.

I have done my own experiments and found that you can run up to about 60 percent bio to 40 percent D2 and it will run ok but sometimes the mileage will suffer so I have been running about 33% bio to 66% D2 and it works much better. I know that bio shouldn't clog the filter but I think it's causing a cooling effect on the filter and thus clogging faster. I know the flash point it way lower than 1200 degrees but I just don't think that filter gets that hot with bio. With D2 i'm sure it does but I have never measured it. I have never had the oil analyzed but I have changed it myself and of course it's black as coal and doesn't "seem" thinner. I think frequent oil changes are always better no matter what fuel you run. If you have a 48,000 dollar truck you can afford some Rotella here and there.

On the truck forums for Chevy they all hate the DPF whether or not they use biodiesel. Some claim that after removing it they are getting well over 20 MPG. The best I can get is 14.5 or so. I have gotten it up to over 17 MPG but as soon as that first regen kicks in it drops and the average is 14.5mpg. Chevy doesn't have "instant" MPG so the average can be reset while driving and then you get a more instant reading but the avg is actually more accurate because going up or down a hill doesn't change anything quickly.

Anyways, I have driven the hell outta this Chevy trying to force the bio to get hot enough and it will not regen. I have high idled it at 3000 rpms for minutes at a time and it WILL NOT regen on B70+. You must use D2 at least in 40 or more percent mix.

Sorry so long but I haven't seen anyone be the guinea pig yet and I hope this can enlighten some on what is actually happening on a DPF system using different blends of bio. The truck still runs awesome and smells great on bio. It's under warranty and has had some service. I always run a full tank of D2 before I take it in just to be sure.
 
Location: Sav. GA | Registered: May 15, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Since the post-injection problem is primarily a US emissions issue... Please comment if you know about this situation being a problem outside the US?
1) For equipment sold in the Philippines... is this a problem for 2007 and newer engines?
2) Is it only a problem for auto / truck engines?
3) Is it also an issue for 2007 and newer electric generation Diesel engines?
4) What about marine engines?
5) Has there been any change in recent engine designs?
6) Where can I find an updated / current list of manufacturers whose engines are affected?

Thank you.


Joseph Tinnerello
+1-435-659-0578
 
Registered: May 22, 2016Reply With QuoteReport This Post



  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 2 3 4 5  
 

Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Biodiesel  Hop To Forums  General Biodiesel Discussion    B100 use in post-injection modern diesels, leading to high engine wear

© Maui Green Energy 2000 - 2014