For those of you keeping score...

Still waiting on my pump. I didn't notice it was backordered when I ordered.

I have made a few more batches since the last post. I have been able to spin them all to 50 - 75ppm using KOH, with or without prewash.

quote:

Anyone no how to test the concentration of KOH in the sample?

The soap test. Use the version found in the NREL and you get both catalyst content and soap content.

Well, no left over KOH....

I did another test today (still have the single tank setup though). Soap ended up about 40ppm. 3/27 test was perfect. No BD fell out of solution. I also did a pHlip test. I think it turned out good too. Horrible at close up pics. There is a slight mirror surface on the red layer too.

pHlip test

Those things are next to impossible to photograph clearly. Strong lighting from the side, slightly elevated. Adjust the height of the camera to see different effects, like the mirror finish or the clarity etc. It also helps to do it in a photography box with a white background. Just some tips from someone without the proper camera to bring it off.

Did another pHlip test just to be sure.

Test 2

How do the test results look Rick?

I think I now have a process (which works for me) to clean the fuel with nothing added to it. A little extra cost on electricity to run the motor, but no water, mag, etc.

On a side note, after actually seeing what the soap really is in the fuel, I am even more certain I don't want fuel running through my injector pump not cleaned! That is some thick and nasty stuff when condensed.

It's hard to tell from the picture. I used a 75W metal halide 12" away from the vial in this picture. It passes cleanly. I don't have a nice camera with a macro lens. Just a cheape digital camera.

I adjusted the height so you could see the nice shiny reflection. What it does not show is that I could easily read fine print through the upper half of the vial. no hazyness at all.

If you can get a nice shinny reflection from the interface and the bio on top is clear like perfectly dry biodiesel then it's a go.

Here is a failing sample:

Proffessional Photography on this one:

Mine would look most like the reference sample. The BD was clear (the "test" label on the side of the bottle was showing through it). There were no globs of oil on the surface between layers and the mirror surface was tough to see. I think due to the shape of the vial.

The BD did a have a slight haze to it compared to the pure BD100 sitting next to it. But you could still read through it.

From the way you describe it, sounds like you have a near miss there. In new fuel, the hazy is caused by monoglycerides mostly. A slight hazy would fall in that gray area where most people are not sure if it passes or not. You should see the mirror really clearly. If you stand with the sun in your face (or any light source) and hold the vial at about chest level and slowly move it up and down. There will be one spot where the sun will flash briliant in the mirror interface. On a passing sample I can see objects like my computer screen reflected in the mirror surface. On the reference vial. I commonly hear, "my biodiesel is better than the reference". That's due in part to the way the reference vial is sensitive to shipping.

I know the sample still has about 40ppm of soap in it. I use 91% iso and not the red bottle 100% stuff. I am not sure if that makes a difference in the soap test though.

Either way, the process appears to be working and passing (or near passing ) all of the standard quality tests (3/27, pHlip, shake-em-up).

the only real drawback I see is the added equipment needed. Even with the single tank setup, I can drop the soap from 1500-2000ppm to around 300ppm in about 2-3 hours. The last bit of soap is where the time comes in. I think once the two tank setup is working, the time should decrease dramatically. I also think cold filtering will help and I want to do some tests on that as well. The soap is much thicker near 32F and the BD is still very liquid.

Bayshorecs

I'm keen to try soap removal using a centrifuge like the Spinner II or Dieselcraft units. It's been 5 weeks or so since your last post in this thread - have you made any further advances in that time?

Anyone else using centrifugal filter for soap removal?

Cheers

Nick

I know it's been awhile since someone posted here, but I have a question.

Would two of these Spinner Filters in Series be a better use of resources than investing in a two tank system?

If the pump can keep up with two in series, it would be almost the equivalent of two passes at once. Even with a two tank system, I wonder if two in series would be able to cut the time and energy enough to make it worth the extra couple hundred dollars.

Twenty4Seven,

With the cold weather and the backorder pump, I have not been able to work on the design any more. I still use my current single tank setup and can clean 20 gallons of fuel to under 100ppm in about 3 hours.

Gatzdon,
Two filters in series will not work. The discharge on the filter should not see any back pressure. It should free flow from the filter. You can put multiple filters in parallel to increase filtering throughput though.

To those who are wanting a Spinner II, I have an ad on the classifed section. The model 960 is $450. The model 25 is a much smaller unit that does the same job but has a smaller bowl and is for smaller capacities. The 25 sells for only $275. You can either send a PM or email me directly at farmboymotorsports@yahoo.com

The model 25 is too small for the liquid process I feel. I need to clean the bowl enough as it is since it is a liquid process. You would need to clean the bowl on the 25 every 15 minutes. Bigger/more is better for the filter in this situation.

My two.

No argument from me. I sell these for bypass lube filtering. The 25 is the one to use on Dodge Cummins and such. I have a 960 on my semi. If one doesnt want to make a lot of fuel or has plenty of time on his hands, I wanted to let them know about the 25. Most would want the 960.