So I've begun the construction of my second generation Jerry Rig II™ and had a design idea that I would like some feed back on before I go cutting holes.

So my processor is a 55 gallon drum and my idea is to use 3 input ports as opposed to just one. My reasoning, possible wrong, would be to allow for more movement and agitation of the WVO. I'm using a Harbor Freight blue pump. Here's a diagram of my idea:

http://picasaweb.google.com/th...#5400267738332972882

Do I have to many ports, should there be 2 ports maximum?

As always thanks to the group!

Jerry

I like that idea, but I don't think you are going to see the benefit with the little HF pump that you would if you used a bigger pump. If the inlet jets are left at 3/4", I doubt that pump will move enough fluid to even have all 3 flowing at any velocity (think 3 garden hose flows trickling into the drum). So you could choke each 3/4" inlet down to 1/2" to get some velocity for mixing, or the better idea would be to get a bigger pump. Say something 3-4x bigger than the HF pump, like 20 or more gpm.

I suspected as much. I'll just go with the one port for now and keep an eye out for a larger pump to meet my future design needs.

Thanks!

Jerry

Jerry
-good idea, but the little blue pump isn't big enough for more than 80 - 100 ltr batch. I even put in line mixers on my system, it helped a bit , the pump wasn't big enough to get the most out of them. my batch size is 160 ltr Tom

Jerry,

Splitting the pump input with one pump input high and one low will improve mixing. This will help compensate for the small pump size. Splitting the output of the pump will have little effect on mixing.

An eductor or high velocity nozzle on the pump output will have a much greater effect. See: http://www.make-biodiesel.org/eductors/ for more details.

Yeah; it wouldn't be hard to use the T-fitting anyway, and just put plugs in the other 2 ports until you get around to running the hose all the way around. I have a couple plugs in my Appleseed that are meant to be removed to cover expansion, if I ever feel like it.

nice idea..

forget the HF pump...
1. no thermal protection..NT pumps have them built in..
2. both NT and HF pumps don't move volume..5-10 GPM tops..or a turn every 10 minutes. you might want to consider a turn every 2 minutes..or more!
3. 2 inputs with one output..using a nozzle to increase agitation might work better..I know when I have NT 1.5" pump in used the add nozzle on the return seemed to improve processing.

are you base only processing or are thinking about using Acid as well? the smaller pump would do nice for acid.why? those of us who are researching acid..well we don't know but lower turn rates seem to work better? base only..HIGH turn rates..these shorten processing times.

-dkenny

Man I love this community! Great answers and advice from all, thanks! dkenny, I'm just doing the base process but your acid process sounds interesting. I'll have to read up on that.

I'm starting to worry that even with one one port I may under agitate. I'm planning on processing 35 gallons of WVO and based on the 22% methanol I figuring of needing to move 42.7 gallons. What type of times are you seeing for processing to get good separation at this volume? 4 hours?

Would this be the pump from NT http://www.northerntool.com/we...duct_6970_7738_7738?

Thanks again!

Jerry

quote:

What type of times are you seeing for processing to get good separation at this volume? 4 hours?

For a HF pump I would say that is pretty close. I have a Pitbull pump: it probably has a different name, too, but it has a 6" vane compared to the HF 1.5" vane. It is rated for 32gpm for water, HF is 5-6gpm for water. Neither will actually do those numbers with WVO, but I think the values stay about relative. My reaction with the Pitbull is probably done in an hour or so, but I run 2hr just to be sure and because I'm not pressed for time in the processing step anyway.

I can't recall how I figured it out anymore, but at some point I figured that the Pitbull turns my whole 45gal batch over about every 5 minutes. The HF can't even turn it over fast enough to prevent settling and keep the batch uniform.

quote:

-good idea, but the little blue pump isn't big enough for more than 80 - 100 ltr batch. I even put in line mixers on my system, it helped a bit , the pump wasn't big enough to get the most out of them.

I did great with the NT pump on 145 liters on this setup.

True, the pump is not a powerhouse. But it is a great value. And passing 3/27 with 18-19% meth single stage in less than an hour shows that it does get the job done.

My blue chinese pump(unknown brand, but it has internal thermal protection) has worked well for mixers up to 80 gallons, but I consider that the limit. The processor I use now is 42 gallons/160 liters of oil per batch. Cone bottom, with the return from the pump entering horizontally at the "42 gallon" level through 1-inch pipe.

Here's the theory: methoxide tends to settle into a layer sitting on top of the oil. The return flow disturbs the interface between the two liquids. This is the critical zone for mixing at the beginning of the batch. As the methoxide gets reacted and incorporated into the rest of the liquid, the point of injection is less important, except that stagnation must be avoided. This entry point also seems to work well for that purpose.

My 80-gallon mixer used a vertical internal return pipe that ended just short of the 80-gallon line. Its theory was to created a "fountain" of returning liquid that would stir up the methoxide layer floating above the 80-gallon level. The vertical pipe was 1-1/4" to minimize resistance. It worked. That was before 3/27.

I've run reactions in the 42-gallon reactor as short as 20 minutes, to see what would happen (it worked ok), but still set the timer for 2 hours "just to be sure". I usually start the reaction in the afternoon, but don't get around to draining the glycerin until the next morning, or maybe a week later.

Once the pump is started, I close the vent valve. The processor has a 30psi relief valve and a pressure gage. No indicated pressure develops during a reaction.

The braided plastic vinyl site tube has isolation valves. It's the only likely leak point.

Cheers,
JohnO

seems the shape of the reactor has a lot to do with the suitability of this pump. short and fat works better tham tall and skinny. in my reactor, 16" x 74" the phase seperation during reaction was so great that the pump pumps more byproduct than wvo. The only cheap cure for this was to add prop mixers. Tom

quote:

seems the shape of the reactor has a lot to do with the suitability of this pump. short and fat works better tham tall and skinny. in my reactor, 16" x 74" the phase seperation during reaction was so great that the pump pumps more byproduct than wvo. The only cheap cure for this was to add prop mixers.

Adding a second upper input to the pump seems to address this in a cost effective way. The parts needed to plumb a line from the upper element port were about $25 I think.

HTH.

Andrew
-good idea, wish I would have thought about it at the time! adding prop mixers was a very big job! I'm sure that would have greatly improved the value of the in line static mixers as well. Not much is gained by simply recirculating the byproduct! Tom