BIODIESEL & SVO DISCUSSION FORUMS





Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Biodiesel Connections  Hop To Forums  Ireland Biodiesel    Biodiesel in Ireland
Page 1 ... 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 ... 146

Moderators: Shaun, The Trouts
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
Biodiesel in Ireland
 Login/Join
 
Member
posted Hide Post
Yes, That is correct.
 
Location: YORK UK | Registered: April 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
WOW!
Maybe the pump in your small reactor is cavitating and helping the reaction along, though that seems highly unlikely.
In any event that is incredible.
I look forward to the tests!
Cheers,
Jon
 
Location: Wellington County, Ontario Canada | Registered: February 07, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Hi Dgs,

These are my thoughts of what I would include in the test.
Have a look through the list and add anything you think should be included or any thoughts you have and get back to me.

If anyone else wants to add their thoughts please feel free


I like to try to keep experiments simple and specific.

Your objective in performing the experiment is to answer a question, not necessarily to make a batch of biodiesel that passes Warnqvest.

This is not a test for how fast the reaction goes using an eductor.
This is not a test of the quality of the reactor being used.

Are you sure that your reactor without an eductor can reliably make biodiesel that passes warnqvest in a single stage using the traditionally normal amount of chemicals in the normal time on oil that has not been neutralized

I would first titrate the oil and write it down

I think I would use WVO that has not been pre-treated, however, if you are getting the oil for both batches out of the same barrel...?

I would limit the test to a single stage reaction.

I agree with your thoughts to use same oil volume, same temperature, same % methanol and same KOH amount in both reactions.

If you have a formula that "just scrapes in" to pass warnqvest in a single stage using the eductor you could use it for both reactions.

Or you could use a formula that does not pass warnqvest and test the conversion of each test batch.

While the Warnqvest test does not tell you the actual conversion amount of the biodiesel, as long as you use identical oil in each reaction it should show you if one batch is more completely reacted.

I performed the majority of my testing before the Warnqvest test came along so I used viscosity to compare conversion.

This is not a test to determine whether the eductor makes the reaction go faster. Because of that I would increase the mixing time of the non-edctored batch or more likely run the reaction until no further increase in conversion is detected in both batches using a warnqvest test.






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
OK Tilly, I think I've got it.
How does this sound.

80 litres of non pretreated oil. (I will titrate this)

14% methanol (for convenience I will use 11.5 litres)

6gms/litre KOH, so a total of 480 gms.

Reaction will be at 60degs C methoxide also added at 60 degs.

I will let the reaction run for 1 hour (or until fully converted if this is before 1 hour)

As I said, I will do the 'with eductor' test first as the reactor is set up with this.

I will then do exactly the same test after removing the eductor.

I will do a 10/90 on both tests at the 20 min mark just to see how the reaction is going.

Do you think this is ok?
 
Location: YORK UK | Registered: April 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Yes, I think that would be an interesting experiment.
The oil for both batches is identical from the same drum

I await the results.






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
OK, here are the results.

Just to re-cap, both tests used the same oil which titrated at 1.1 (KOH) I did not check the oil for water but previous tests on this oil have given results of around the 800ppm region.
For the tests the oil was not glycerol pre-treated.
80 litres of oil was used for each test.
The process temperature was 60 degs C
The methoxide was 11.5 litres of methanol with 6.0 gms/litre KOH, total KOH 480gms.
The methoxide was added at 60degs, all within 30 seconds.
The only difference between the 2 tests was that one test was run with the eductor and one without.

First test (with) eductor.

10/90 test after 5 mins 1.2 mls
10/90 test after 20 mins 1.2 mls
10/90 test after 1 hour 1.5 mls


Second test (without) eductor.

10/90 test after 5 mins 1.9 mls
10/90 test after 20 mins 1.6 mls
10/90 test after 1 hour 1.6 mls

Re the last 10/90 on the 1st test- haven't got a clue!
 
Location: YORK UK | Registered: April 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Member
posted Hide Post
Interesting results.
What conclusions do you draw from that?






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
The piusi pump is a powerfull little thing.
Even though there was initially a slightly faster conversion with the eductor, the process without it soon caught it up.

Maybe a comparitive test with a less powerfull pump would be in order.

The last 10/90 on the with eductor test is strange, but thats what it was.All samples are pippetted into the tube for accuracy.

There is certainly a massive difference in KOH requirement between glycerol pre-treatment/no pre-treatment.
Good job I do this all the time.
 
Location: YORK UK | Registered: April 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
what direction is your eductor facing? Hopefully not in the same direction as the byproduct fallout!


" I don't know what I don't know until I know"
1994 GMC 6.5 Tubo 2005 Dodge ram 3500, 3 VW's 2000, 2002, 2005.
 
Location: Manitoba Canada | Registered: March 24, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Biotom,
It faces down at about 40 degrees. I tried it horizontally, facing the opposite side of the tank and it was less effective.

I don't think its that the eductor position is ineffective, more that these tests have maybe shown how effective the pump is by itself.
 
Location: YORK UK | Registered: April 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Hi Dgs,
I thought a lot of good information came out of your experiment.
Thank you for performing the tests and sharing the results.

I think that the third test result with the eductor might be an experimental error.
However, I have read in some reliable papers that some experiments have shown that it is possible to mix too vigorously which can lead to a reduced conversion. I forget the reasoning. This might be something you would want to check again at some point.

It shows how quickly the eductor mixes to completion.

I have read that at 60C the reaction should be finished in about 20 minutes provided you have satisfactory mixing vigor.
Your non-eductor test shows this to be the case.

It shows a slightly higher conversion with the eductor but not to the point that you can cut the KOH usage in half.

I agree with you that the Pre-wash is likely the main reason for the reduced KOH requirement in your normal prewash reactions.
I think that Hifley on the UK forum summed it up best when he said:
"DGS, you say that after glyc washing the oil does not titrate...Have you then done a 10/90 test to see if a partial conversion has already taken place, this has been observed by a lot of us before and would result in less caustic being needed for a full conversion as you have found...in effect this is a 3 stage process as you are part converting with glyc then doing 2 stages of normal conversion..."

The "magic" is in the prewash, not the eductor Wink






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Dgs If you look at the diagram I offered from the t jet company the eductor is placed near the bottom of the tank in an angled upward position. In this position you will be mixing the methanol/caustic (byproduct) back into the oil. In the downward position you are adding to the fallout rate I think.
I agree with the comments by Tilly, the reaction can be over mixed. I provided you with the formula to achieve optimum mixing for this chemical reaction. I'm not convinced that over mixing is what you are experiencing, rather a lack of chemical in the mix to get the desired conversion. None the less I greatly appreciate your work on biodiesel homebrew!!!!


" I don't know what I don't know until I know"
1994 GMC 6.5 Tubo 2005 Dodge ram 3500, 3 VW's 2000, 2002, 2005.
 
Location: Manitoba Canada | Registered: March 24, 2009Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Member
posted Hide Post
Thanks Biotom,
I realise the logic of what you are saying.
Do either yourself or Tilly know any more details of the over-mixing
Reaction?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dgs,
 
Location: YORK UK | Registered: April 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Hi everyone,

Its been a long time since I posted on here.

I just wanted to say that I have excess oil for sale. I have been selling it for 0.50c per litre as I pay 0.40c per litre for it plus transportation costs. So I am basically breaking even. I just dont have the room to store it. I can only process and use so much of it.

I will have about 200L extra a month to sell on at cost price.

If anyone is interested send me a PM or give me a shout/text on 085 721 8495.

All the oil is from chinese restaurants.

Cheers

Glyn
 
Location: Meath | Registered: September 02, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I was chatting with my mechanic earlier today about bio and vehicles suitable for use. I mentioned about disabling the DPF on some newer models and he said they're going to start testing DPF's on the NCT as of next February. Could be an issue for some of you with newer model cars that have had them disabled.
 
Registered: September 27, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Hi Womble,

quote:
Originally posted by womble:
If you were party to the private thread dedicated to this topic you would understand better Dgs's progression with his process.
I am sure that I would find the thread very entertaining.
I have a good idea of Dgs's progress with his process. It appears to revolve around doing a first stage reaction and pretending it was not a first stage reaction because the amount of chemicals present were not know so they did not count.
Then you add a magical eductor that cuts the KOH used in half.
Then the real magic starts!


quote:
But seen as you are not I suggest we continue this discussion there guys before this degrades into a constipated mess.
Isn't it amazing how just one well thought out experiment was able to clear out all that constipation?

We now know that even if you do not know the amount of chemicals used in the first stage reaction they still count towards the total chemicals used in the reaction.
We now know that an Eductor does not cut the KOH requirement in half compared to a well constructed reactor without an eductor.

Welcome to mainstream science

PS How many people were aware that Phenolphthalein was originally the active ingredient in Ex Lax? It has since been removed because it is a possible carcinogen






 
Location: ลึก ประเทศอินเดีย | Registered: March 03, 2001Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
quote:
Originally posted by Womble:
I was chatting with my mechanic earlier today about bio and vehicles suitable for use. I mentioned about disabling the DPF on some newer models and he said they're going to start testing DPF's on the NCT as of next February. Could be an issue for some of you with newer model cars that have had them disabled.
.

I'm hoping that even if they do, it will be emissions based resting and we should be ok in this regard with bio.
 
Location: Clare, Ireland | Registered: May 20, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
He did mention something about a Nox (is that spelt right?) test so maybe it will be, I'll ask him again when I'm in.
 
Registered: September 27, 2010Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Member
posted Hide Post
Hi All,

I posted up above the other day about the waste oil. I had a look last night and I actually have WAYYYYY too much there. If anyone is interested in 200-400 Litres for FREE give me a shout/PM.

Cheers

Glyn
 
Location: Meath | Registered: September 02, 2011Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I conducted another experiment today on 80 litres of oil, similar to the last ones (no glycerol pre-wash)
The oil titrated at 1.3 and I neutralised the FFA's and dried the oil before I reacted it.

The result was full conversion in 2 stages using a total of 6.75 gms KOH/ litre of oil. A total of 14% methanol was used.

A full report is available on the PM posts.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Dgs,
 
Location: YORK UK | Registered: April 27, 2014Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata Page 1 ... 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 ... 146 
 

Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Biodiesel Connections  Hop To Forums  Ireland Biodiesel    Biodiesel in Ireland

© Maui Green Energy 2000 - 2014