Lister Engine Forum

Alternative fuels => Waste Motor Oil => Topic started by: sanchez on October 22, 2007, 10:49:00 PM

Title: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: sanchez on October 22, 2007, 10:49:00 PM
Hi,

I PERFORMED A TEST USING WASTE MOTOR OIL, THINNED WITH 40% KEROSENE AND FILTERED TO 2 MICRONS. AFTER 500 RUNNING HOURS WE DISASSEMBLED THE ENGINE, THE RESULTS WAS:

1) PISTON TOP WITH A CROASE CARBON DEPOSIT, JUST THE NECESSARY TO TOUCH THE CYLINDER HEAD.
2) PISTON GROOVES CORBONIZED.
3) EXAUST VALVE VERY CARBONIZED.
4) SOME MINOR CYLINDER LINER SCRATCH.

TALKING ABOUT THE ENGINE PERFORMANCE AND FUEL EFICIENCY, WHEN USE DIESEL THE EFICIENCY (WITH A RESISTIVE LOAD OF 80%) IS 12.5 KW-H PER GALLON, WITH THE WASTE ENGINE OIL BLEND ITS DECREASE TO 9.5 KW-H/GAL.

I PERSONALLY, DO NOT RECOMEND THE USAGE OF WASTE ENDINE OIL AS FUEL, IS CHEAP, BUT THE INTERNAL ENGINE CONTAMINATION DO NOT PAY FOR THE COST/PROFIT RATIO.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: JMW on October 23, 2007, 12:19:50 AM
That's interesting testing.

Can you tell us more about the temperatures in and around the engine while you were using this fuel.
Did you add any additional heating?
Did you start from cold on this fuel?
How is your cooling system configured?
What are your climate conditions?

Sorry for all the questions. I'm just trying to work out if this fuel is usable, if used slightly differently.

Mark
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: rcavictim on October 23, 2007, 12:27:59 AM
Sanchez,

That more or less tracks my own experimental findings only I was using used oil that was mainly ATF with some used motor oil added for color.  Not by me.   :D   My discovery was that my VW engine injectors (my stationary genset) would coke badly despite filtering through long time settling, then 10 micron then a 2 micron caterpillar filter.  In my case the engine would get sick in less than an hour.  Increasing the content of clean diesel as an adtive did not eliminate the fouling but rather it allowed longer run time by exactly the same amount as the mix ratio had changed towards clean diesel.  Vacuum distillation would work but is a lot of trouble and expense.  Short of that a centrifugal system may be of benefit.  I have not explored this yet due to the difficulty and time in making a centrifuge.  I am in the process of making a very long (6 inch diameter x 8 foot long PVC pipe) kitty litter/fuller`s earth filter that ought to be way more effective than the 2 micron cat filter.  Too many irons on the fire and this project has been slow in getting finished.

I will of course share my design and findings with the list once done.

Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: rcavictim on October 23, 2007, 12:42:32 AM
It's funny how some people will say that used oil is nothing but trouble and other people have reported no issues at all. We all agree that you have to heat the motor oil up in order for this to work but why do some people have all kinds of issues and others are happy campers ....

Jens

I guess some people just don`t like camping.   :D
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: rcavictim on October 23, 2007, 01:32:45 AM
Moteling is just way too easy ....

Jens

Yeah, but just don`t get caught with pirated moteling software!   ;D  Yah know, like towels and stuff.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: MeanListerGreen on October 23, 2007, 02:04:46 AM
I'd like to recommend mixing 1 oz of turpentine to every gallon of waste oil along with your kerosene.  The turpentine will add cetane which should give a more complete burn thus lowering coking.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: ronmar on October 23, 2007, 05:16:25 AM
Sanchez
   I have the same questions as JMW. 
Did you startup/shutdown on the WMO? 
What kind of preheat did you use and what was the temp of fuel at the injector? 
What was the typical engine temp at the cylinder head(coolant outlet temp from the head)?

Thanks

Ron 
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: craig c on October 23, 2007, 05:52:05 AM
Hi ,
     Raise your compression ratio to at least 18/1 , 20/1 better more combustion temp the better it will burn fuel , that is why some people do not have so much carbon and some do, because they  have higher compression ratio than others , you have to physical check it to know what the compression ratio is .
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: rcavictim on October 23, 2007, 05:56:13 AM
I'd like to recommend mixing 1 oz of turpentine to every gallon of waste oil along with your kerosene.  The turpentine will add cetane which should give a more complete burn thus lowering coking.

I tried to submit this question half an hour ago but the list was slower than a siezed engine.  Do you have experience doing this?  Would even better results occur by adding higher concentrations of turpentine?  Is this anything like adding acetone?  Is turpentine OK on pump seals and rubber hoses?

I had a mishap trying acetone.  It gives otherwise attitude free heavy fuel oil a VAPOR PRESSURE!  This caused a two gallon spill on my shop floor from a poorly situated tank vent which never gave a problem with diesel or thick oils in the tank.  I suggest loose fuel tank caps if you try the acetone or any other additive that will give the fuel a vapor pressure.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: Doug on October 23, 2007, 06:41:29 AM
Propane might also help with the coking some people say ( also Agree with graig that compression ratio might be a factor since you may avctualy be lower than 17:1, did you check? ).

Another question are you sure the scratching was caused by stuck and scuffing rings not a little sand or grit from India?

And these are diesel not waste oil engines so its probably a case of need to do things like thin more, heat and perhaps increase the compression ratio a point of two....

Doug

Craig, I have a question for you. I know you have milled and modifed Petteroids to burn veg oil, have you ever considered a combustion chamber modification like machining the dish to be more like multy fuel M chamber?

Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: craig c on October 23, 2007, 07:18:05 AM
Hi Doug ,
             Yes I looked at piston bowl shape like elsbett shows , but would have to get blank piston to start with or bowl would have to many cc's in it and be to low in compression ratio , I will be rasing compression ratio to 20/1 on my petteroid and on my friends 6/1 as egt are still not hot enough , getting 33 amps 230 volts 50 hz out of my 10 hp petteroid and runs sweet as , and  smooth as and only sits on the ground not bolted down just rubber foot mounts that came with gen set .
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: Doug on October 23, 2007, 07:23:29 AM
Can you post some clips?

I'm now into my 2nd generation intake and heater ( this one is flame ) and second generation thermostat housing ( this one is mounted between the intake and exhaust ).

I've made an injector line heater and fuel warmer from a glow plug along the lines you did

I'll email you pictures.

Doug
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: johnny williams on October 23, 2007, 12:49:16 PM
Try mixing the WMO with RUG. I am running about 2/3 WMO to 1/3 RUG and works good for me. Your mileage may vary.

Johnny
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: rcavictim on October 23, 2007, 05:02:47 PM
Try mixing the WMO with RUG. I am running about 2/3 WMO to 1/3 RUG and works good for me. Your mileage may vary.

Johnny

If you get used motor oil mixed up with a RUG you will never be able to wash it out, or perhaps you are saying to put UMO in your hair instead of Brylcreem?  Ewwwwww..

Just an idea, how about either using acronyms that are commonly known, or go the extra effort and spell them in the interest of communications clarity.  Thank you.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: ronmar on October 23, 2007, 06:24:06 PM
RUG:   Regular Unleaded Gasoline???  Never seen that one before.

Ron
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: rcavictim on October 23, 2007, 07:05:22 PM
RUG:   Regular Unleaded Gasoline???  Never seen that one before.

Ron

Maybe it is fuel for flying carpets!   ;D
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: Doug on October 23, 2007, 07:57:02 PM
No your thinking of AVGAS now....
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: johnny williams on October 23, 2007, 09:56:11 PM
Sorry I have saw the term RUG used in several threads on this site. Sorry for the inconvience. Also in advance, spelling is not my strong point, passing gas is.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: mobile_bob on October 24, 2007, 02:32:29 AM
is your engine DI or IDI?
what is your injection pressure?

a couple more factors to add to the pile, when considering why one guy burns wmo and another guy has problems

bob g
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: Doug on October 24, 2007, 02:49:23 AM
Bob, any quick and dirty ways to set an injector let off presure?

Can I make up something using some hi presure hydraulic gauges?

Doug
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: draganof on October 24, 2007, 03:34:31 AM
Most of the people using WMO are blending it with Diesel. Does this make a difference vs blending with Kerosene? Funny how it works for some and not for others.  I still haven't given up on it yet. Theres just to much free WMO to let it pass.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: clytle374 on October 24, 2007, 05:04:29 AM
Bob, any quick and dirty ways to set an injector let off presure?

Can I make up something using some hi presure hydraulic gauges?

Doug
Some of us Mercedes guys, use a grease gun and a pressure gage to test pop pressure and spray pattern.
How to connect a injector line to the grease gun line is the trick, forcing together mismatched threads with JB weld is the common approach.  Also why I'm waiting on a welder to connect the two.

We all know that fuel at these pressures will seriously hurt you, RIGHT?           
                           
Questions http://www.cmki.org/LMHS/Chapters/13i-Injection.htm
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: rcavictim on October 24, 2007, 05:05:11 AM
Bob, any quick and dirty ways to set an injector let off presure?

Can I make up something using some hi presure hydraulic gauges?

Doug

Doug,

It is possible to make your own injector pressure tester out of a hydraulic bottle jack and yes a high pressure hydraulic gauge and appropriate line and fitting to the injector.  You pump up the liquid pressure and watch the gauge to tell you the pressure at the point the injector lets go.  The pressure setting inside the injectors themselves are often shims against a spring.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: Ian on October 24, 2007, 09:09:35 AM
Guys, Sanchez has made an excellent post. It is a good post because it gives some details. We have read what he did and the results that he obtained. He then concluded that UMO was not good for him. Then the idea subsequently formed that it did not work.

Like in most areas, interpretation of the method and results will lead to different conclusions across a population.

MY interpretation of the findings is that IT DID WORK. Maybe it is not perfect but, apparently, UMO managed to power a Listeroid without major problem for 500 hours at 80% loading.

Now for some more assumption on my part...

* It is unlikely that fuel filtered to 2 micron would cause cylinder scratching so this can probably be discounted to normal wear and tear.

* Coarse carbon deposit suggests poor vaporisation of fuel or burning of crankcase or valve well oils. Likely that the ring groove carbon is from the same source.

* Lister required a decoke on or before 1000 hours running. Is it not expected that there will be some, quite considerable, carbon deposits after 500 hours ?

Whilst I do occasionally run UMO, please do not see this as a defence position. I have no axe to grind either way.
Great post Sanchez.

Regards,
Ian
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: Doug on October 24, 2007, 03:01:41 PM
I have a spare injection pump so is it safe to say I realy only need a way to depress it and a special line and hydraulic guage then?

Doug
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: dieseldave on October 24, 2007, 03:29:05 PM

    I believe that one of the main problems with UMO is a poor spray pattern due to viscosity. Type of oil,eg: Is it from a trucking yard where they might only be using 40 wieght and some gear oil?  What about hydrualic oil?  Oil from a drive thru lub shop would apt to be 5-30 and some ATF.

    In any case the oil should be heated with some kind of a heat exchanger. If one is not using the waste heat to help heat a house,what about this:   Get a rad from the wrecker out of an automatic transmission car. Used the ATF cooler in the lower tank to heat the oil.  The oil should be heated before it goes into the injector pump anyway. From the pump to the injector exhaust gas could be used to heat the fuel.   Dont forget that even if you heat the oil to above engine temperature that there will be some cooling effect once it gets to the injector as the coolant temp is around 200 F.

    Compression ratio is another issue. Probably needs to be higher.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: sanchez on October 24, 2007, 03:34:35 PM
hi guys,

sorry for my absence, I am at the caribbean, more than 85 degrees ferenheit all year. I do not use a fuel pre-heater, the engine start directly on WMO, some minutes, before reach operational temperture, the smoke is some white, not much, after 2 or 3 minutes the engine burn clean, as clean as using diesel. my issue is with the engine contamination and the poor fuel efficency when I use my blend.

here at my country:

1 gallon of diesel is US$3.85 and the eficiency is 12-12.5 KW-H/GAL. then is 30 cents per KW-H.

1 gallon of blend is US$1.82 and the eficiency is 8.5-9.75 KW-H/GAL. then is 19 cents per KW-H.

TO USE THE BLEND IS CHEAPER, BUT THINK IN YOUR ENGINE USEFUL LIFE, IT IS GOING TO BE LIMITED, THE CONTAMINATION AND CARBON DEPOSIT WILL WEAR THE LINER AN PISTON PREMATURELY.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: Doug on October 24, 2007, 04:09:23 PM
I'm going to threw out this idea.....

I worked in a cracking plant, very small we could process a few thousand gallons a day.

High heat low presure, process heat was our own fuel run threw modified home heating oil burners so the next logical step would be to make a single burner stainless cracking pot and monitor the temperatures.

First problem to resolve is tar, we used chemicals and a centrifuge to spin out the tar but I don;t think amny people here are going to want to deal with hydrazine.

Seconed problem is tar disposal, no idea where your going to go with that.

Carbon and ash cake from the bottom of the pot will contain some heavy metals.

There must be someone here who worked in a big boy refinery with some thoughts?

We could do a real nice job with light lubricationg oils but anything above 40 becomes a real problem.

Tar and injection pumps are a serious problem that needs to be solved. But I think it could be scaled down.

If the fuel is the problem make a better fuel from the feed stock.
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: cujet on October 24, 2007, 05:38:24 PM
Sanchez,

Thank you for the tear down report. I run UMO from time to time. It is good to know what type of problems you are having.

I believe you should consider heating the fuel before injecting it. The injector spray is SURE to be poor with such thick fuel. Thin fuels atomize better. This is why diesel engines smoke white when starting up on a cold day. The fuel is not atomized well.

It is likely that a well heated blend will produce less carbon. Also consider some form of carbon disolving chemical (Yamaha has an effective product) and use it from time to time.

Chris
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: dieseldave on October 24, 2007, 06:06:07 PM

    I still maintain that if it is heated correctly,it will burn efficiently!!  Along with a good filtering system and removal of moisture.

    Are there any different injectors out there that would give a better spray pattern?
Title: Re: inspection results after a long test using WMO.
Post by: vwbeamer on October 24, 2007, 06:27:12 PM
My plan is to use 100% UMO with propane injection. The oil will be from a local lube shop, so mostly 10-30.

The motor will start on #2 until the coolant gets to 195. it will then preheat the UMO/RUG mixture thru a heat exchanger and pump it thru a 2 micron filter.

The propane will be controlled off a Hoof type governor operating an adjustable pressure regulator. I want to calibrate it where it is injecting 15% propane by volume. so i will burn 15 gallons of propane to 85 gallons of UMO.