I hate ASM!

[Oilybloke]

Oops! No, that's me, 180 litre, Alastair's old processor.

[Carrington]

Hi nick
When is the best time to call you tomorrow

[Oilybloke]

Any time Paul, do you still have my number?

[julesandtash]

I've tried three batch with AMS and had little success, I think most likely down to my process ... I'll post more later on the thread concerned.  I intend to percivere, though as I can see it has numerous advantages, even at its current price.

I believe the problems were due to water, but all the same I have a feeling the base of five, although Jules states it can be tweaked, is too high.   In playing with Dr Pepper tests and the other full size batches, despite them going wrong, I think the maximum base should be reduced to a maximum of 4 with a recommendation people try 3.5 and see how they get on.

Others seem to be using similar figures.  How does this fit in with the calculations you did, Jim?  While pondering this is it necessary to adjust your formula to account for alternative concentrations of ASM.  Most supplies here seem to be 30% at the moment, but others may happen along and anyone overseas using this catalyst may obtain different concentrations.

The base is 4.0 (as a starting value). The 'magic' number is 5

Therefore it is 5 (magic number) * 4 (or thereabouts - base figure) * litres.

If you used 5 as the base and the magic number then that will explain a lot of problems.

[Julian]

That's not what the wiki page says, it sates the following:


...A good starting point for the base figure is 5.0 although clearly the base figure is adjustable and can be tweaked to get as low as possible...


However I only used a base of five on the first of the three bathes and that worked, but for much 'soap' manifesting itself at the end of demeth.

I used a base of 4 on the second batch.  That went breasts up after only half of the first stage ASM, most likely due to water.

Third batch has proven to be OK despite my panicking, when I used a base of 3.5.


Hence the suggestion that the base on the wiki be reduced.

[1958steveflying]

That's not what the wiki page says, it sates the following:


...A good starting point for the base figure is 5.0 although clearly the base figure is adjustable and can be tweaked to get as low as possible...


However I only used a base of five on the first of the three bathes and that worked, but for much 'soap' manifesting itself at the end of demeth.

I used a base of 4 on the second batch.  That went breasts up after only half of the first stage ASM, most likely due to water.

Third batch has proven to be OK despite my panicking, when I used a base of 3.5.


Hence the suggestion that the base on the wiki be reduced.

Julian your first batch you said had 2700ml of ASM, that works out to a base of 6.75 on an 80 litre batch.

[RichardP]

I'm sure if your oil is dry then you can reduce the base lower. I was using 3.5 and getting less than 10% dropout after stage 1. Reduced it to 3 and still got just 10% dropout, with the same quality oil. Easy stage 2 pass with both base amounts.May try 2.75 next batch.

[nigelb]

I'm sure if your oil is dry then you can reduce the base lower. I was using 3.5 and getting less than 10% dropout after stage 1. Reduced it to 3 and still got just 10% dropout, with the same quality oil. Easy stage 2 pass with both base amounts.May try 2.75 next batch.

I dare say that's down to a quality glyc wash and a bloody good pump. Very impressive figures Rich.

[Julian]

That's not what the wiki page says, it sates the following:


...A good starting point for the base figure is 5.0 although clearly the base figure is adjustable and can be tweaked to get as low as possible...


However I only used a base of five on the first of the three bathes and that worked, but for much 'soap' manifesting itself at the end of demeth.

I used a base of 4 on the second batch.  That went breasts up after only half of the first stage ASM, most likely due to water.

Third batch has proven to be OK despite my panicking, when I used a base of 3.5.


Hence the suggestion that the base on the wiki be reduced.

Julian your first batch you said had 2700ml of ASM, that works out to a base of 6.75 on an 80 litre batch.

I was doing a titrated, two stage batch, so the titrated value was added to the base.

[Julian]

I'm sure if your oil is dry then you can reduce the base lower. I was using 3.5 and getting less than 10% dropout after stage 1. Reduced it to 3 and still got just 10% dropout, with the same quality oil. Easy stage 2 pass with both base amounts.May try 2.75 next batch.

I dare say that's down to a quality glyc wash and a bloody good pump. Very impressive figures Rich.

Surely the more you reduce the base, the less catalyst there'll be in the glycerine?

[nigelb]

..and those figures go along way in showing the benefits of the No Tit method and the failings of titrations. Strange isn't it that with both methods running side by side the catalyst usage is huge in one and quite skinny in the other

[nigelb]

I'm sure if your oil is dry then you can reduce the base lower. I was using 3.5 and getting less than 10% dropout after stage 1. Reduced it to 3 and still got just 10% dropout, with the same quality oil. Easy stage 2 pass with both base amounts.May try 2.75 next batch.

I dare say that's down to a quality glyc wash and a bloody good pump. Very impressive figures Rich.

Surely the more you reduce the base, the less catalyst there'll be in the glycerine?

Yep, that would be right. Do you see any issue with that?

[Julian]

I'm sure if your oil is dry then you can reduce the base lower. I was using 3.5 and getting less than 10% dropout after stage 1. Reduced it to 3 and still got just 10% dropout, with the same quality oil. Easy stage 2 pass with both base amounts.May try 2.75 next batch.

I dare say that's down to a quality glyc wash and a bloody good pump. Very impressive figures Rich.

Surely the more you reduce the base, the less catalyst there'll be in the glycerine?

Yep, that would be right. Do you see any issue with that?

Reducing the catalyst is prime, but won't it make the glycerine wash progressively less effective to the point of not being worth the effort?

[K.H]

Isn't the main benefit the oil drying and the reduction second? or will it be affected?

[RichardP]

Agree with Keith, as getting the oil as dry as possible will have the knock on effect of requiring less catalyst for the conversion.
Since starting with ASM, the amount of glyc that I've got has reduced in line with the reduction in base amount, I used to get out a bit less than the amount of meth used when using NaOH, now, it's way less.
160ltrs of oil in and dried using the venturi, vented to atmosphere, glyc wash, then 24-25lts meth total. Glyc out is now around 16 ltrs.
I also get an increase in the bio out, around 170 after washing.