Acetone to aid reaction !

[Dickjotec]

It's certainly possible, when I did the 'foam' batch the air was very humid and cold. It may be the reason the 'HMPEs' foam but not why they form.
Dick

[nathanrobo]

It's certainly possible, when I did the 'foam' batch the air was very humid and cold. It may be the reason the 'HMPEs' foam but not why they form.
Dick

Our best guess about the so-called HMPE's is that they are really mono's or fats, so regardless of the conditions that cause them to form, they are better when they become apparent and are removed.

[Dickjotec]

It's certainly possible, when I did the 'foam' batch the air was very humid and cold. It may be the reason the 'HMPEs' foam but not why they form.
Dick

Our best guess about the so-called HMPE's is that they are really mono's or fats, so regardless of the conditions that cause them to form, they are better when they become apparent and are removed.

Personally I would rather know why they form and so not create them but I don't think the 'foaming' is a reliable indicator that they are present. In the past I have had more to remove and no foam on bubbling but of course this batch is the first I have done using acetone.

Dick

[nathanrobo]

It's certainly possible, when I did the 'foam' batch the air was very humid and cold. It may be the reason the 'HMPEs' foam but not why they form.
Dick

Our best guess about the so-called HMPE's is that they are really mono's or fats, so regardless of the conditions that cause them to form, they are better when they become apparent and are removed.

Personally I would rather know why they form and so not create them but I don't think the 'foaming' is a reliable indicator that they are present. In the past I have had more to remove and no foam on bubbling but of course this batch is the first I have done using acetone.

Dick

I totally agree ref the foam not being an indicator as I've never seen it.  The point that I make about the 'HMPEs' is that there presence, assuming that they might be mono's or fats, means that you want them to form and then to get rid of them.  So I guess you are right about the importance of know how they form, but it would be so that you could encourage them to form and then extract them. 

Still theoretical, but if we're right, making them form should be part of the process unless the fats can be removed prior to reaction or if mono's, they can be prevented from forming in the reaction.

[Head Womble]

I don't think so Julian, in the past when I've de-methed to the extream I've had foam forming as it's pumped into the settling drum,
this is not the normal bubbly foam that that disperses in a few mins, but sticky toffee type stuff that's still there days later.
I used to scoop it off the top with a child's fishing net.

[Dickjotec]

I think what we really need to try to find out is what 'they' are. Any ideas how we can test for the three possibles we have so far, HMPE, mono or fat? Has anyone got any other ideas to add to the three?
Dick

[1958steveflying]

I think what we really need to try to find out is what 'they' are. Any ideas how we can test for the three possibles we have so far, HMPE, mono or fat? Has anyone got any other ideas to add to the three?
Dick

Am I right in saying if they are mono or di then they should not pass a 90/10, I seem to recall Tony saying his passed !

[Jamesrl]

Am I right in saying if they are mono or di then they should not pass a 90/10, I seem to recall Tony saying his passed !

To the best of my knowledge its mono/di-glycerides that make a 10/90 cloudy yet show next to or nothing in drop out.

Anything less than a crystal clear 10/90 from the first to last drop of the 10ml bio sample indicates an incomplete reaction.

Mr GL said using deionized/distilled water in a 50/50 soap test will exposed mono's and di's as a creamy/white layer between the bio and water.     

[Tony]

Well let me add this into the mix.  I found the photo I took of the batch I did with 45l "HMPEs" and 80l WVO.

This is a 10/100 test with the resulting mix before reaction:



6.4/10 (dropout/sample size) = 80/125 (WVO/batch size).

It is cloudy on top, but I put this down to something in the WVO - perhaps actually it was the "HMPEs" or - as we now suspect - monoglycerides.

That might also explain why reprocessing worked so well - I must've converted all the monos to FAMEs.

I've also tried water washing a sample of HMPEs before and that just made a right mayo mess, even with heat there was always a large white middle band and the water a brown tinted colour.

[Dickjotec]

OK let's assume for the moment they are mono and/or di glycs. We know they drop out of cold bio. They are indicated by a cloudy 10/90.
We need to know if they are caused by an incomplete reaction or a reverse reaction on demething.
How about this for a test?
Take a sample while reacting at the 10/90 pass and chill it in the deep freeze. If fallout is present continue to react till no falout then test again during and after demething.
Then do the same with an acetone batch and see if it is any different.
We should then know when they are forming and perhaps the cause.
Dick

[1958steveflying]

OK let's assume for the moment they are mono and/or di glycs. We know they drop out of cold bio. They are indicated by a cloudy 10/90.
We need to know if they are caused by an incomplete reaction or a reverse reaction on demething.
How about this for a test?
Take a sample while reacting at the 10/90 pass and chill it in the deep freeze. If fallout is present continue to react till no falout then test again during and after demething.
Then do the same with an acetone batch and see if it is any different.
We should then know when they are forming and perhaps the cause.
Dick

I think it will be difficult to test while reacting as I think it will not act the same when chilled until the Meth is out !

[Jamesrl]

As a matter of interest, mon and di-glycerides are used as emulsifiers in the food industry.

From my experience the glycerides only seem to precipitate out in the presents of water, incomplete reaction leaves mono and di's suspended in the bio, water was and hey presto.

   

[Dickjotec]

OK let's assume for the moment they are mono and/or di glycs. We know they drop out of cold bio. They are indicated by a cloudy 10/90.
We need to know if they are caused by an incomplete reaction or a reverse reaction on demething.
How about this for a test?
Take a sample while reacting at the 10/90 pass and chill it in the deep freeze. If fallout is present continue to react till no falout then test again during and after demething.
Then do the same with an acetone batch and see if it is any different.
We should then know when they are forming and perhaps the cause.
Dick

I think it will be difficult to test while reacting as I think it will not act the same when chilled until the Meth is out !

Good point. Back to the drawing board.

[Dickjotec]

As a matter of interest, mon and di-glycerides are used as emulsifiers in the food industry.

From my experience the glycerides only seem to precipitate out in the presents of water, incomplete reaction leaves mono and di's suspended in the bio, water was and hey presto.

 

This could point to bubbling with damp air bringing them up? Perhaps it would be worth drying the air some how?

[nathanrobo]

As a matter of interest, mon and di-glycerides are used as emulsifiers in the food industry.

From my experience the glycerides only seem to precipitate out in the presents of water, incomplete reaction leaves mono and di's suspended in the bio, water was and hey presto.

 

This could point to bubbling with damp air bringing them up? Perhaps it would be worth drying the air some how?

Never had a cloudy 10/90 pass at 20 deg C, don't bubble, do water wash until a 50/50 clear, but it still drops out at sub-zero temps.  So probably nothing to do with bubbling.