BIODIESEL & SVO DISCUSSION FORUMS





Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Biodiesel  Hop To Forums  Other uses for Glycerine by-product    burning glycerine with wvo

Moderators: Shaun, The Trouts
Go
New
Find
Notify
Tools
Reply
  
burning glycerine with wvo
 Login/Join
 
Member
posted
I see that there are several discussions about burning straight glycerine in turk burners and such, and the problems that arise with too little heat to completely burn the glycerine. I was thinking of mixing my glycerine with wvo and pushing it through our evaporator burner. right now the burner uses 13 gph of waste motor oil. we will be upping this to about 18 gph and using wvo. No.2 oil burns at about 1800F if memory serves me right, not exactly sure what waste motor oil is but I assume it is hotter because the pans really dance when I switch over to it. Any way, if I were to mix say 10-20% glycerine with my oil (either wmo or wvo) I think it would be hot enough to burn the glycerine without any problems. If this is true, then that would be a win/win situation for me. Any thoughts?
 
Location: smithville flats, ny | Registered: August 28, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
lew
-did you mean 1.3 gph?
-The byproduct will not co mix with the wmo,that has been my experience. You may need some kind if stirer to keep the two combined. What I am thinking about, is spraying the byproduct full strength, into the wmo flame. This way, there would be enough heat to completely burn the byproduct.Check out these pics, the top one is a straight by product, the second is wmo





" 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
Tom

No, I meant 13 as in thirteen and 18 as in eighteen. We burn this much in one of our maple syrup evaporators.

In those pictures, was the glycerine picture of just pure glycerine, and if so, was it dememthed? i am assuming that it was preheated, to what temperature?

Possibly i could take another much smaller oil gun and direct its nozzle pattern into the oil pattern. Or run another oil nozzle line down the same tube as my original burner and the two fuels could mix in the atomized state. Just thinking out loud.
 
Location: smithville flats, ny | Registered: August 28, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Lew, I've been talking with Tom on a seperate discussion about his setup. By the way it's me, Bill. While talking with Tom I couldn't help but think about your setup. Even though you guys are burning at very different rates and Lew is using a pressure system and Tom is using a type of siphon system with compressed air you are both in my opinion burning at a rate high enough to burn the byproduct completely. I don't claim to be an expert but I've been very interested in burning byproduct for a while now and Lew I think you're right with your two ideas for introducing the byproduct. The fuels won't stay mixed for long so if you could engineer a way to mix them close to the nozzle or right before the pump that would probably be easier than adding a second nozzle. I think the only challenge with mixing just before the nozzle or pump would be accurately controlling the flow rates and especially making sure the glycerine doesn't have more head and start backfeeding the line/tank for the other fuel. You're pretty sharp and resourceful and can probably come up with a very simple but functional to that challenge. Once that's figured out you could probably easily make the system so you could start on the waste oil and once the chamber is warm (and I know first hand that's a BIG freaking chamber you've got) turn on the glycerine feed. If you decide to go the other route and use a second nozzle to spray into the waste oil flame, and I don't think this is the best choice for complete combustion, I would recommend checking out Tom's setup. It's super cheap to build, off the shelf parts, and stone reliable as he's used it for going on what Tom, 13 years? If you went with a smaller nozzle for the second fuel, similar to what I use I think it could be too prone to plugging. Just my opinions, Bill
 
Registered: March 23, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Bill,

Long time no hear. Thanks for the vote of confidence. You are right that there is a simple solution and that it should involve just one nozzle (much easier firing than trying to mix the 2 in mid air). I just need to do some thinking and rebounding off people like you and this site. How about this? 2 tanks, one for glycerine and one for wvo. Each tank has its own pump, the glycerine one is throttled down to say 20% output of the WVO pump. these two pumps would supply a small feed tank (15 gallon tank maybe) that had a pressure pump to the main burner like the one in the back of my sugar house if you remember what that looks like. If not, it's a small open top tank with a pump that feeds a line to the burner(40 feet away). this tank is fed from the 1000 gallon storage tank by means of a float switch and a solenoid. When the float drops in this feed tank it activates a solenoid valve that opens up to allow oil to come into the feed tank. the pump in the feed tank keeps a constant pressure on the feed line by way of a pressure relief valve back into the small feed tank. This feed back into the tank would be enough to keep the solution of WVO and glycerine mixed, but not enough to do the initial mixing. So my thought now is to still use the small feed tank idea but instead of using solenoid valves from each tank use a pump from each tank so that you could throttle the glycerine tank pump down to 20% of the WVO pump. When the float switch in the small feed tank calls for more oil, it would turn on both pumps and they would in turn feed their respecptive products through one of those helical mixers and into the small feed tank where the main pump to the burner would keep it all mixed up. I think this idea could be improved upon and made easier, just need more time to think it over. Any input?
 
Location: smithville flats, ny | Registered: August 28, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Lew, why not just skip a step and have both pumps feeding one nozzle maybe with a couple of check valves instead of feeding a tank? I'll have to do an experiment to see how fast they start to seperate but I think it's pretty quick. Unless you had a circulator pump drawing off the bottom of the mixing tank and dumping it on top to constantly keep it mixed. The only other thing I can think of right now is possible trouble lighting and keeping a mix lit on a cold start. Is your nozzle heated? If so, is it adjustable? You may have to start on waste oil and once that big freakin' chamber is warm, introduce the glycerine. If that's the case, I think you'd almost have to have seperate pumps and lines mixing in the nozzle and not a tank. Any thoughts? Another problem I see is if you have a problem and have to go back to only waste oil, you've got a tank full of mix. If you're mixing at the nozzle you can just turn the glycerine off. Back to you Sir. Tom feel free to jump in here also, you definitely have valuable experience and insight. Lew, you should see the boiler Tom designed and built, it's HUGE and awesome.
 
Registered: March 23, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Member
posted Hide Post
tigfila

After reading my last post I am amazed that you could understand that, even I was confused.

I was also wondering about the fast separation and how that would affect things. I thought I could set the burner pump on a 2 line system to keep the mixture moving and have the return line go back to the mix tank. The pump that I use in the mix tank does pull off the bottom and dump back in the top so constant mixing wouldn't be a problem.

I hadn't though about if there was a glycerine problem how I would switch back to plain oil, that's a good thought, have to work on that one. That would be a major problem.

As far as heat for the nozzle, I have an inline heater after the burner pump that keeps my oil at 160F then shoots it down the tube to the nozzle.

Cold starts are not a problem because when I start up the evaporator, I start on No. 2 oil for about 5-10 minutes to warm up the fire chamber and to give the oil preheat chamber time to come up to temperature. Once the oil preheater is up to temp., I switch to my waste oil. At the end of a boil I switch back from old oil to No. 2 and shut off the oil preheater. Once the preheater has cooled sufficiently, I shut everything down. The preheater holds about a quart of oil and letting it run with no heat for 15 minutes or so is enough to flush most of the old oil out and leave a "lean" enough mixture so that it can start cold the following boil.

Running 2 pumps straight from the storage tanks (gly and old oil) to the nozzle pump sounds intriguing, but metering the output without back flow to either tank needs to be overcome. Also, where would the mixing take place? In the pump? Would this be enough?
 
Location: smithville flats, ny | Registered: August 28, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Lew is your pressure pump a gear pump? I think it must be. Very simple, tee in another line fed from another gear pump between your current pump and nozzle, gear pumps are positive displacement pumps so if you want it tuneable so you can adjust the ratio you would need returns in each line back to each respective tank with valves to adjust the flow of each. Just to be safe you'd probably want check valves just before the tee to prevent backflow. You'd prolly also want a liquid filled guage tee'd in to the nozzle line after the check valves so you could adjust your pressure as you tune your ratio. Once you learned the limitations on ratios it would be routine to open this valve so much or close this valve so much and just forget it. For safety's sake you'd prolly want relief valves between each pump and "tuning valve" but that's prety simple. The mixing would take place in the common pipe just before the nozzle. So have Hut get busy mocking up even a simple crude version of what we're talking about to test our theories. I think your list of things for him to do was getting too short anyway wasn't it! Let me know what you think.
 
Registered: March 23, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Bill
I like your idea of bringing the two feeds into one pump, the flows could be adjusted with simple ball valves since the flow rate is high! Tom


" 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
THe pressures would have to be EXACTLY the same from both feed pumps, or one pump would override the other. The pump with less pressure would just kick all of its oil back through the pressure relief into its own tank and all you would end up with would be the oil from the pump with the highest pressure. It could work, but I think it would be very finicky to adjust. Once set up and ready to work, it should be fine.
 
Location: smithville flats, ny | Registered: August 28, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
I think I have to disagree with you Lew. If we were talking about centrifugal pumps yes but not gear pumps. Here's why, in a positive displacement pump such as a gear pump the pump WILL move x amount of liquid per revolution period. The pump creates no pressure, the restriction in the hydraulic circuit (that's what we are talking about) creates the pressure. All the pump does is create volume, the circuit creates the pressure. One pump cannot backfeed through another running gear pump, but you could add so much volume to the same circuit with the introduction of a second pump that you blow something! As we know liquids aren't compressable! That's why you need returns between each pump and check valve to throttle the pumps. Here's how I kind of picture it, You start on waste oil with the glycerine pump also running but all of it's volume returning to either the tank or before the pump in the suction line. When the chamber is hot you slowly start throttling the waste oil down while throttling the glycerine up and you'll be tuning these by watching a pressure guage that's in the nozzle lines after the pumps and check valves. Did I explain my thoughts better this time? Bill
 
Registered: March 23, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
Bill,

I know what you are saying about the difference between centrifugal and positive displacement pumps. I envision what you are saying is to have one pump from each tank with a pressure relief valve for each pump "t"eed together with a check valve before the "t" for each pump. Also each line from each pump shall have a valve of some sort to regulate flow. This then feeds the line that has a pressure gauge on it that feeds the burner pump. I think it could work.

I do not know this for fact, but I assume that the seals in an oil burner pump are made to work with pressure coming from one direction, not both. Assuming I am correct, the line feeding the burner pump cannot be overpressurized. In my current setup, I run enough pressure at the feed pump to give 10 psi at the burner pump. Just enough to deliver the oil to the pump. so with this new setup, I could start with a feed pressure of just oil at say 8 psi, then add the glycerine until I reached say 10 psi. This would give me a 80/20 mixture in theory?
 
Location: smithville flats, ny | Registered: August 28, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post



Member
posted Hide Post
Sounds like a winner to me. Now try it out and let us know Big Grin. You have so much cool stuff laying around you should be able to whip this up in no time!
 
Registered: March 23, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
No time at all. Between the goats, the syrup business, biodiesel, the house, the kids, the wife, and that pesky job, you are right. NO TIME AT ALL. Hopefully by sugaring season I will have this worked up. I first have to redesign that big freakin fire box to accomodate 18 to 20 gph oil. It's set up up for 11-13 right now. Also have to rig up a way to put the new 5 x 10 pan on top of the fire box. It weighs between 900 and 1000 pounds. The old one that it is replacing was easily picked up by 4 guys and you just slid it on or off. Not so with this bad boy. I'll have to make some sort of track system and lift it with comealongs and roll it into place. Should take no time at all.
 
Location: smithville flats, ny | Registered: August 28, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
You know Hut's not doing anything except plaing around on the computer sending me email!
 
Registered: March 23, 2007Reply With QuoteReport This Post
Member
posted Hide Post
And hitting every diner in sight, and fixing my truck, and getting ready to chase white tails. I think it will take him a while to get a deer this year. I kept him kind of busy this summer and he knows I'll keep him busy this spring hauling sap. I think he's using hunting as an excuse LOL. I'll get him going on it after deer season ( I hope). thanks for the input.
 
Location: smithville flats, ny | Registered: August 28, 2008Reply With QuoteReport This Post
  Powered by Social Strata  
 

Sponsors    Biodiesel and SVO Forums Home    Forums  Hop To Forum Categories  Biodiesel  Hop To Forums  Other uses for Glycerine by-product    burning glycerine with wvo

© Maui Green Energy 2000 - 2014