Hi Tom >Keith, >You wrote: > > I think this is a misunderstanding. I didn't say what you say below, > > "standardized; can't fail", and I didn't mean that standardising the > > process means there's no need for tests, > > I apologize for a poor choice of wording suggesting a >"misunderstanding".
Thankyou Tom, but mea culpa, I could have been clearer about it but it was late and I was whacked. > You are unquestionably a proponent of quality testing. > -Tweak the process to get consistently good BD. > -How do you know you have succeeded in tweaking just right? QT > -QT each batch > Who did I learn this from? :-) Who did I learn it from? Partly from some really bad examples that I think you're aware of, but mostly from the collective wisdom of the Biofuel list. To which you contribute a great deal. I guess we all owe each other eh? >Re: Big lunch > You and Robert inspired me last summer to grow more edibles. Then Robert and I will go to heaven! (And so will you!) >I had moved >towards flowers. Now I grow more of what I eat, and I'm eating pretty good. > A short while back there was discussion of growing fruits/veggies on >lawns, side yards, etc. I mention what I had for lunch or dinner just to >keep the thought alive. You can grow good food even on a little patch of >land. >The experience is priceless. Indeed it is. Thankyou for keeping the thought alive, please don't stop. > > poached Muscovy egg and stir-fried Swiss chard in the offing... > Mmmmm Mmmmmm Mmmmmm > I'm getting hungry :-) I'm getting sleepy! Later... Best Keith > Tom > > > >----- Original Message ----- >From: "Keith Addison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >To: <biofuel@sustainablelists.org> >Sent: Friday, August 10, 2007 3:53 AM >Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Glycerine Settling Time > > > > Hi Tom > > > >>Hi Keith, > >> > >> > Then if you do one-litre test batches first, especially with iffy > >> > batches of oil, > >> > >>Ooooops. > >> > >> I took Joe's point to be: If you have to re-process it is possible to > >>use info from the QT to determine how much (how little) methanol you'll > >>need > >>to use. > > > > I also took that point, there were others though. It's a useful > > method, cheaper reprocessing, but I think we all agree that > > reprocessing itself is to be avoided if at all possible. Or I thought > > we did anyway. > > > >> I think that both Joe and myself have "standardize(d) the process" > >>so that passing the QT is the rule, not the exception. > > > > That's not what Joe said: > > > >> >>It makes sense. Glycerin is an emulsifier. Have you ever tried > >> >>dosing the batch again with a little methoxide? After you remove > >> >>the glycerin it doesn't take much to get the last bit of the > >> >>reaction to go and settle out the remaining glycerin. Of course > >> >>this is well known already. Kenji and many others do straight base > >> >>catalysis as a two stage deal. You can do a methanol test of sorts > >> >>and the unreacted oil will settle out. Then you can use the > >> >>measured amount of unreacted oil in the methanol test vial to > >> >>estimate the percentage unreacted oil in your batch and dose > >> >>accordingly with the stoichiometric amount of methoxide. Assume > >> >>neutral oil for this calculation. Rod and I do this regularly if > >> >>the batch fails the QT and it works like a charm. Will save you > >> >>settling time in the long run. > > > > "Rod and I do this regularly if the batch fails the QT and it works > > like a charm." That "if" makes it a little ambiguous, but the > > "regularly" bit puts a question-mark on what's the rule and what's > > the exception. > > > > "Kenji and many others do straight base catalysis as a two stage deal." > > > > Less methanol notwithstanding, my question remains - why reprocess, > > as a standard procedure, instead of avoiding the problem in the first > > place? > > > > Could be wrong, but it sounds like Kenji and others might be doing > > this rather than doing a titration - you know the old line: "There's > > no need for titration, just use 6.25 g". And then using the methanol > > test to try to fix the regularly ensuing disaster. A different > > version of that here in Japan is to put the stuff through a > > centrifuge, though the product still doesn't pass any quality test or > > standards test. > > > > What you describe is much the same as what I described, doing > > (whatever) tests during the processing, adjusting accordingly and > > conducting the whole thing as a single stage. > > > > From Joe's replies so far I can't tell if he (and Rod, and Kenji and > > many others) are doing it that way or not, but it seems not: > > > > Your question (and mine): "Don't you have to heat up the whole batch > > again? (Time and energy)" > > > > Joe's reply: "This is all done right after draining the glycerin. I > > leave the heater on during this period. Do the rough QT right away > > before wash test." > > > > Rough QT? Anyway, how long is it settling before he drains the glyc? > > > >> I run a QT towards the end of the reaction because I do not want to > >>re-process. > > > > Indeed not. > > > >>It takes me a few minutes and I like the certainty of knowing > >>the BD is good before I pump it into my settling tank. > >> If the test should fail when I'm making a batch for my car, I could > >> use > >>Joe's suggestion to help me better approximate the amount of methanol to > >>add. > >> > >> If the process has been standardized, why bother? > > > > I think this is a misunderstanding. I didn't say what you say below, > > "standardized; can't fail", and I didn't mean that standardising the > > process means there's no need for tests, whether in-process tests or > > 1-litre test batches or whatever. Anything can fail. I'm all in > > favour of any tests that are helpful at any stage. So I agree with > > all you say here. > > > > Indeed, whatever "rough" might mean, using the methanol test to > > fine-tune the amount of extra methanol needed for reprocessing is a > > useful technique. > > > > But I'm not in favour of using reprocessing as a standard method, > > which, pending a better explanation, seems to be what's being > > proposed here. > > > >>As you say: > >> > >> >there shouldn't be any batches failing the QT. > >> > >> I've had a few failed batches in the past year. It seems to happen > >> when > >>I think I have it all figured out; standardized; can't fail. On one > >>occasion > >>the pump was making a bit of a "funny" noise when I came back to turn it > >>off. Turned out a bit of paper towel or something had gotten into the > >>impeller; inadequate agitation? Had I tested the BD before pumping it into > >>the settling tank I could have avoided re-processing. > >> While condensed water in bottom-of-the-barrel methanol or recovered > >>methanol, contaminated caustic, etc may rear their ugly head in 1L test > >>batches prior to running a batch, I think I would still run a QT prior to > >>settling. > >> > >> >>Big skies > >> > > >> > :-) And broad horizons. > >> > >>Big lunch to you, > >>I just had a garden pizza with Brocolli, zucchini, green peppers, sliced > >>tomato, and chopped (v. mild) hot peppers. > >> > >> > >>Mmmmm Mmmmmm Mmmmmm > > > > :-) Great Tom! A big lunch definitely helps when it comes to broad > > horizons. But quite often it's quicker just to amble on out and eat a > > bit of garden in the meantime, and pin one's hopes on a big dinner. > > On the other hand, I think there just might be some poached Muscovy > > egg and stir-fried Swiss chard in the offing... Man, it's going to be > > hard ever to go back to the city life. > > > > All best > > > > Keith > > > > > >> Tom > >> > >>----- Original Message ----- > >>From: "Keith Addison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>To: <biofuel@sustainablelists.org> > >>Sent: Thursday, August 09, 2007 3:36 PM > >>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Glycerine Settling Time > >> > >> > >> > Hi Joe > >> > > >> >>Tom; > >> >> > >> >>It makes sense. Glycerin is an emulsifier. Have you ever tried > >> >>dosing the batch again with a little methoxide? After you remove > >> >>the glycerin it doesn't take much to get the last bit of the > >> >>reaction to go and settle out the remaining glycerin. Of course > >> >>this is well known already. Kenji and many others do straight base > >> >>catalysis as a two stage deal. You can do a methanol test of sorts > >> >>and the unreacted oil will settle out. Then you can use the > >> >>measured amount of unreacted oil in the methanol test vial to > >> >>estimate the percentage unreacted oil in your batch and dose > >> >>accordingly with the stoichiometric amount of methoxide. Assume > >> >>neutral oil for this calculation. Rod and I do this regularly if > >> >>the batch fails the QT and it works like a charm. Will save you > >> >>settling time in the long run. > >> > > >> > Well, settling time is free. > >> > > >> > Acid-base aside, there's the two-stage base-base process, which quite > >> > a lot of people use and like, but otherwise why do more than one > >> > stage? Do you mean two separate stages, with a methanol test in > >> > between? So you process it twice? Plus extra methanol. > >> > > >> > Why not do it in a single phase? Todd Swearingen once suggested this > >> > here (discussing mixing pump sizes): > >> > > >> >>To judge an appropriate reaction time, pull an exact amount of fluid > >> >>(200 ml would suffice) out of the reaction stream every half-hour or > >> >>hour after an arbitrary initial ~1 hour reaction period. > >> >> > >> >>Presuming that the contents of the reactor are kept homogenous from > >> >>the pump flow, the volume of the glycerol cocktail that settles out > >> >>of each sample will give you a fair gauge as to when your reaction > >> >>completed. > >> >> > >> >>The suggestion would be to continue the reaction for ~1/2 hour > >> >>beyond the point where your glyc cocktail volume stabilized. > >> > > >> > That works. Then, surely, you can standardise the process, with the > >> > only variable the amount of lye according to the titration level. > >> > Then if you do one-litre test batches first, especially with iffy > >> > batches of oil, and you have a clear idea of how your test-batch > >> > processing relates to your full-scale processing, life should be > >> > easier and there shouldn't be any batches failing the QT. > >> > > >> > What did I miss? > >> > > >> >>Big skies > >> > > >> > :-) And broad horizons. > >> > > >> > Keith > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> >>Joe > >> >> > >> >>Thomas Kelly wrote: > >> >> > >> >>>Joe, > >> >>> > >> >>> I took a sample from my latest batch of BD destined for my > >> >>>boiler (failed QT; but very little residue dropped out). It had > >> >>>settled for almost 10 hrs. > >> >>> That was yesterday morning. Today there is a small, but > >> >>>noticable, bit of glycerine on the bottom. More settled out after > >> >>>the initial 10 hrs of settling. > >> >>> > >> >>> I don't have any results with good BD to compare it with. > >> >>> > >> >>> If it turns out that glycerine settles out slower from > >> >>>incomplete vs complete reactions, it would answer the question I > >> >>>asked about getting emulsions when I washed low quality BD after > >> >>>letting it settle overnight, but not getting emulsions when it > >> >>>settled for a few days to a week. > >> >>> It would also help with a friendly disagreement I have with a > >> >>>friend. He seems to think that unreacted glycerides will settle out > >> >>>of the BD given time. He has taken to going with about 16% > >> >>>(vol/vol) of methanol in his batches. > >> >>>His logic: > >> >>> "Unreacted oil causes emulsions, right?" > >> >>> "The emulsions I get in the first wash after settling the > >> >>>BD overnight are due to the unreacted oil?" > >> >>> "When I let it settle for a week or more I don't get > >> >>>emulsions, therefore the unreacted oil must have settled out." > >> >>> > >> >>>More likely: > >> >>> Some unreacted glycerides are still there, but after a week of > >> >>>settling more of the glycerine has settled out. Even a small amount > >> >>>of glycerine compound the emulsifying effects of the unreacted > >> >>>glycerides ..... Yes? > >> >>> > >> >>>By the way, I always ask him "Did you do a quality test?" > >> >>> His answer: "Oops, I forgot." > >> >>> > >> >>> Thanks Joe .... and Rod ..... for bringing this to my attention > >> >>> A push to make a lot of BD for heat is just around the corner. > >> >>>It might be best to include more settling time in the schedule. > >> >>> > >> >>>Tom > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>>----- Original Message ----- > >> >>>From: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Joe Street > >> >>>To: <mailto:biofuel@sustainablelists.org>biofuel@sustainablelists.org > >> >>>Sent: Tuesday, August 07, 2007 3:02 PM > >> >>>Subject: Re: [Biofuel] Biofuel Quality Test > >> >>> > >> >>>Hey Tom; > >> >>> > >> >>>Take a sample from your fuel after settling 6-8 hrs and set it > >> >>>asside in a mason jar for the longer period and see what settles > >> >>>out. Rod believes that glycerin settles slower in a poorly > >> >>>completed reaction. I believe he is right. And yes it only takes > >> >>>a little glycerin to emulsify your wash. > >> >>> > >> >>>Joe > >> >>> > >> >>>Thomas Kelly wrote: > >> >>> > >> >>>>Mike, > >> >>>> I let mine settle for a week when I can. It washes much easier. > >> >>>> I > >> >>>> doubt > >> >>>>that it does anything for an incomplete reaction though. That is to > >> >>>>say, > >> >>>>I > >> >>>>don't think the unreacted oil will settle out. > >> >>>> > >> >>>>But: > >> >>>> I have been wondering about something. > >> >>>> When I started making BD it would never pass the methanol quality > >> >>>> test. > >> >>>>I inevitably got emulsions in the wash. Now, when I make BD for my > >> >>>>"oil"-fired boiler, I use only about 16-17% (vol/vol) of methanol. > >> >>>>The > >> >>>>BD > >> >>>>does not pass the quality test, but I don't have the same emulsion > >> >>>>problems. > >> >>>>Is it because I let it settle longer (24+ hours vs 6 - 8 hrs)? > >> >>>> Does the presence of a small amount of glycerine/soaps make that > >> >>>> much of > >> >>>>a difference when trying to wash BD from an incomplete reaction? > >> >>>> > >> >>>> Tom > >> > > >> > <snip> _______________________________________________ Biofuel mailing list Biofuel@sustainablelists.org http://sustainablelists.org/mailman/listinfo/biofuel_sustainablelists.org Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Search the combined Biofuel and Biofuels-biz list archives (50,000 messages): http://www.mail-archive.com/biofuel@sustainablelists.org/
