Soaps/Acetone

[julesandtash]

I put a couple of hundred ml of acetone (all I had left in a 5 litre can) in the first water wash of my two stage, no titration, in processor water washed batch yesterday. 300 litre batch.

First wash was the acid one, 500ml of concentrated Sulphuric acid in 25litres of water.
After that drained off, the second was the acetone, mixed with 45 litres of water, washed and settled for 3hrs then drained.
The water looked very contraminated but the bio was quite light in colour.

I did a second water wash with 45 litres of water and no acetone, mixed for 20mins then left it to settle overnight.
This morning the water was crystal clear so I drained it and started spray drying the bio which was sparklingly clear in three hours.

I suspect that, as Mark found, the Acetone really helped the first water wash leaving much less contamination in the bio for the second wash to take out.

[Head Womble]

I've just done my second batch using the acetone wash,
1st wash was the acid wash, 20l water and 400ml of hydrochloric acid (estimated due to lack of IPA)
2nd was with 30L of water and 40mm of acetone (twice the amount of acetone I used last time just to see if it made any difference),
50/50 is crystal clear, I can't do a titrated soap test as I have no IPA left.

I'm going to post these results on the VOD so all can benefit from our findings.

[1958steveflying]

All good results with Acetone on the washing front and also looking good on using Acetone in the reaction too which if washed after I am thinking it will be even more straight forward. At the moment I am playing with settling though.

Well done the testers. Good stuff.

[nigelb]

I've just done my second batch using the acetone wash,
1st wash was the acid wash, 20l water and 400ml of hydrochloric acid (estimated due to lack of IPA)
2nd was with 30L of water and 40mm of acetone (twice the amount of acetone I used last time just to see if it made any difference),
50/50 is crystal clear, I can't do a titrated soap test as I have no IPA left.

I'm going to post these results on the VOD so all can benefit from our findings.

Mark..with all due respect you have no results. You have changed your methods but as yet have no results. Without checking for soaps in a before and after test you have nothing to compare your results against. We all know how unreliable a 50/50 test is (me more than most with the testing I did a couple of years ago). It needs some proper testing to back up any findings you come across.

Nige

[1958steveflying]

I've just done my second batch using the acetone wash,
1st wash was the acid wash, 20l water and 400ml of hydrochloric acid (estimated due to lack of IPA)
2nd was with 30L of water and 40mm of acetone (twice the amount of acetone I used last time just to see if it made any difference),
50/50 is crystal clear, I can't do a titrated soap test as I have no IPA left.

I'm going to post these results on the VOD so all can benefit from our findings.

Mark..with all due respect you have no results. You have changed your methods but as yet have no results. Without checking for soaps in a before and after test you have nothing to compare your results against. We all know how unreliable a 50/50 test is (me more than most with the testing I did a couple of years ago). It needs some proper testing to back up any findings you come across.

Nige

I think he does have results, he used to take 4 to 5 washes to get a clear 50/50..... now its 2 washes so that must be an improvement... final soap amounts in PPM's will require your test !

[Head Womble]

Nige, I know I haven't done any side by side testing so it's not scientific,
however previous batches with the same feed stock have needed 3 or 4 washes (not counting the acid wash) to get down to around 50ppm soap,
allthough 50/50 tests are not accurate form your own admition a clear test indicates a ppm of less than 100 (I think that's what you quoted, correct me if I'm wrong).

As most bio producers don't do titrated soap tests and rely on 50/50 alone, they should benefit from this method.

To get a clear 50/50 after just one pumped water wash is, I believe, a good result.

[nigelb]

I don't think I've ever made that statement about 50/50 tests Mark. Far too vague. If I have I would like to retract it. If you can find it anywhere let me know and I'll edit it.

Steve...doing something once could be seen a something of  fluke. It really needs to be backed up with data over many batches including PPM results to have any sort of credability. Only then can it be seen as a result.

 I hope it's not a fluke and proves to be beneficial to Marks fuel production...indeed to anyones fuel. I'm trying to give my comments some sort of scientific credence. A 50/50 test is far from that.  The PPM data is important here. Mark has a kit...you have a kit. Mark has the equipment to have backed up the claim.

......and Yes I understand the importance of the claim of 4-5 washes down to 2.

Nige

[1958steveflying]

I don't think I've ever made that statement about 50/50 tests Mark. Far too vague. If I have I would like to retract it. If you can find it anywhere let me know and I'll edit it.

Steve...doing something once could be seen a something of  fluke. It really needs to be backed up with data over many batches including PPM results to have any sort of credability. Only then can it be seen as a result.

 I hope it's not a fluke and proves to be beneficial to Marks fuel production...indeed to anyones fuel. I'm trying to give my comments some sort of scientific credence. A 50/50 test is far from that.  The PPM data is important here. Mark has a kit...you have a kit. Mark has the equipment to have backed up the claim.

......and Yes I understand the importance of the claim of 4-5 washes down to 2.

Nige

Okay Nige.

[1958steveflying]

I don't think I've ever made that statement about 50/50 tests Mark. Far too vague. If I have I would like to retract it. If you can find it anywhere let me know and I'll edit it.

Steve...doing something once could be seen a something of  fluke. It really needs to be backed up with data over many batches including PPM results to have any sort of credability. Only then can it be seen as a result.

 I hope it's not a fluke and proves to be beneficial to Marks fuel production...indeed to anyones fuel. I'm trying to give my comments some sort of scientific credence. A 50/50 test is far from that.  The PPM data is important here. Mark has a kit...you have a kit. Mark has the equipment to have backed up the claim.

......and Yes I understand the importance of the claim of 4-5 washes down to 2.

Nige

Yes Nige I have a kit, but correct me if I am wrong here but it's accuracy depends upon colour change and my eye as to when and how much that colour change has happened would have no accuracy at all.

[nathanrobo]

I don't think I've ever made that statement about 50/50 tests Mark. Far too vague. If I have I would like to retract it. If you can find it anywhere let me know and I'll edit it.

Steve...doing something once could be seen a something of  fluke. It really needs to be backed up with data over many batches including PPM results to have any sort of credability. Only then can it be seen as a result.

 I hope it's not a fluke and proves to be beneficial to Marks fuel production...indeed to anyones fuel. I'm trying to give my comments some sort of scientific credence. A 50/50 test is far from that.  The PPM data is important here. Mark has a kit...you have a kit. Mark has the equipment to have backed up the claim.

......and Yes I understand the importance of the claim of 4-5 washes down to 2.

Nige

Yes Nige I have a kit, but correct me if I am wrong here but it's accuracy depends upon colour change and my eye as to when and how much that colour change has happened would have no accuracy at all.

Which was one of the failings of feedstock titration method.

My view for what it's worth is that those who are seeking out progress are bright enough to add rigour as they go. One of the attractions of this site is that it is, and has the opportunity to remain collaborative, where VOD has gone the opposite way. So rather than be negative, get involved, share your results or stand on the sidelines!

[nigelb]

Who's being negative Nathan?

[nigelb]

That is rather unfortunate Steve...not being able to detect a colour change in the test kit. It does make it a tad redundant. Probably best to pass it on to someone who can benefit from. If you wish, I could undertake some tests for you, FOC, if that helps. Let me know and I'll send you my address.

Nige

[nathanrobo]

Who's being negative Nathan?

I don't want to rain on your parade guys but there really is no need to add unnecessary chemicals to your bio to lower the soap ppm's further. As a final wash, try a hot pump wash. The residual heat left behind after this process is then used to dry the bio.

Nige

I've just done my second batch using the acetone wash,
1st wash was the acid wash, 20l water and 400ml of hydrochloric acid (estimated due to lack of IPA)
2nd was with 30L of water and 40mm of acetone (twice the amount of acetone I used last time just to see if it made any difference),
50/50 is crystal clear, I can't do a titrated soap test as I have no IPA left.

I'm going to post these results on the VOD so all can benefit from our findings.

Mark..with all due respect you have no results. You have changed your methods but as yet have no results. Without checking for soaps in a before and after test you have nothing to compare your results against. We all know how unreliable a 50/50 test is (me more than most with the testing I did a couple of years ago). It needs some proper testing to back up any findings you come across.

Nige

[nigelb]

Since when has it been negative to point out the flaws in a test program?

[nathanrobo]

Since when has it been negative to point out the flaws in a test program?

I refer u to my previous comments