The lazyman process

[Jamesrl]

Just to throw a spanner or two in the works, what percentage of your test sample is methanol, soap, free and suspended glyc all soluble in methanol?

[Julian]

Just to throw a spanner or two in the works, what percentage of your test sample is methanol, soap, free and suspended glyc all soluble in methanol?

You know I can't answer that!

All I can say is that the sample was given a very good human centrifuging before I ran the test (as I always do).

I'll start the other thread as this discussion is probably more pertinent to that.  The point I was trying to make in stating the 99.5% was that I got, as near as damn it, full conversion with a single stage in 45 minutes, (not the fastest but far faster than I normally manage to achieve with a two stage process) ... all credit to Tony's experimentation.

[Tony]

Hehe don't worry, the process works.

Jim just had trouble with ideas that aren't his own working out

[Jamesrl]

Hehe don't worry, the process works.

Jim just had trouble with ideas that aren't his own working out

Nah, that ain't not true 'cause as I says earlier, peeps was doin' it years ago sunshine.

I don't think there's anything out there that hasn't been tried by someone.

[1958steveflying]

I did read. .  Somewhere. .  a long time ago... that 100% conversion cannot be achieved in a single stage !  something along the lines that 100% conversion cannot be achieved while the glycerol is still present.
Hence the reason that 2 stage was so successful because once the stage one glyc was dropped stage two should be almost instantaneous if the correct doses are used.

This is not my own opinion but something I recall reading... way way back.. and I am not in anyway dissing anyone's findings but just throwing it back out there.

[Julian]

I did read. .  Somewhere. .  a long time ago... that 100% conversion cannot be achieved in a single stage !  something along the lines that 100% conversion cannot be achieved while the glycerol is still present.
Hence the reason that 2 stage was so successful because once the stage one glyc was dropped stage two should be almost instantaneous if the correct doses are used.

This is not my own opinion but something I recall reading... way way back.. and I am not in anyway dissing anyone's findings but just throwing it back out there.

You could well be right.  I know I got very close to a full conversion before I started demething.  However, if you take your statement to extremes, surely the glycerol produced in stage two, all be it a smaller quantity, would, to a degree, inhibit that stage too, but that's probably being pedantic!

The acid wash went OK.  I did another titration and that showed just slightly less than double the normal quantity of acid.  Once it's dried I'll do another 3/27 and post the result.

[Jamesrl]

I did read. .  Somewhere. .  a long time ago... that 100% conversion cannot be achieved in a single stage !  something along the lines that 100% conversion cannot be achieved while the glycerol is still present.
Hence the reason that 2 stage was so successful because once the stage one glyc was dropped stage two should be almost instantaneous if the correct doses are used.

This is not my own opinion but something I recall reading... way way back.. and I am not in anyway dissing anyone's findings but just throwing it back out there.

You could well be right.  I know I got very close to a full conversion before I started demething.  However, if you take
your statement to extremes, surely the glycerol produced in stage two, all be it a smaller quantity, would, to a degree, inhibit that stage too, but that's probably being pedantic!

The acid wash went OK.  I did another titration and that showed just slightly less than double the normal quantity of acid.  Once it's dried I'll do another 3/27 and post the result.

Steve's statement is true and known about in the 30's.

The bio researchers of yesteryear were well aware that multi staging with removal of byproducts between was the most effective way of achieving maximum conversion.

There was also mention of lower chemical costs, as we've found.

[Tony]

No doubt about it, two stage uses the minimal chemicals to achieve complete conversion.

I guess there is a curve between minimum process cost and minimum effort though, and I'm quite interested in a balance of the two.

As far as I can tell, single stage overdose is pretty minimum effort and combined with WBD pretty cost effective on chemicals too.  The only thing it uses more of is catalyst, which adds very little overall cost to production.

Despite the glycerol balanced reaction argument I'm getting nice clear 3/27 passes, which is good enough for me - just finished another batch today in fact

[Julian]

Just to put it on record ... don't know if it's any thing to do with the overdose, but this batch has been a devil to dry after washing.

Normal drying time and temperature in the processor plus an overnight bubble still left dirty orange juice which has taken most of today to clear using a bubbler and a Tosser Tube to reheat to 60°C.

[Tony]

Interesting, I wonder why?

[Julian]

Don't think I can pin it down.  No 7% prewash, obviously more soap hence more acid and sodium sulphate and I did use more water than normal for each wash.

Even so it's still strange it didn't dry in the processor at 80+°C.

[Jamesrl]

Don't think I can pin it down.  No 7% prewash, obviously more soap hence more acid and sodium sulphate and I did use more water than normal for each wash.

Even so it's still strange it didn't dry in the processor at 80+°C.

Aha! That'll be the wetter water then, adding soap to water makes it much wetter ya know, so the wetter the water the more drying required.

There it is in a nutshell.

[Julian]

Water is not wet.

[Chug]

I know I aint been online as much as previous years but I don't know how the feck I managed to miss this thread

And I'm almost cursing Bev and hubby right now as I did many tests with overdosing, amongst many other tests, but left the test samples behind at Bev's BB, I let her know asap and she saved them for months but they got thrown away in the messy divorce!

Anyway, if I recall correctly I had to go up to nearly 40% extra NaOH to get jelly.

As Jim said I got the idea to test from HCII saying he used 6g when everyone else had only just moved up to 5g from 3.5g.

My process from then on was almost as James-reckless eng outlines ie approx 8g per litre, except I never weigh it I just know the rough amount after using the same tub to measure it in for years...ha ha
I only went to two stage to get quicker, higher conversion (although I think with a bigger flow pump single stage would have been as quick) my process is still the same now.
Well it's almost the same I now add methoxide as soon as wvo is roughly mixed, ie a few mins after pump is turned on, then it's starting to react as its coming up to temp and reduces my overall time a bit, and of course I now always wbd.

EDIT:
Whilst searching for Tony from west Oz for the new VOD member from Oz I came across an old thread talking about this.
http://www.vegetableoildiesel.co.uk/forum/viewthread.php?tid=7267

P.S The graphs I mentioned in that thread are these

[Julian]

For the record, I've just done a 10/90 on the finished bio and, despite the additional catalyst being added before demeth, the result is the same as the previous test.

So, not withstanding the speed of over dosing, I think I'll go back to a two stage process.