PDA

View Full Version : Does gasoline remain dissolved in waste oil blend diesel fuel?



Jeffrey S. Brooks
16th February 2012, 10:48 AM
There seems to be some confusion as to the mechanism that distributes the components throughout the medium of a solution.

A demonstration of diffusion as used in blending waste oils into diesel fuel
Does gasoline remain dissolved in waste oil blend diesel fuel? - YouTube (http://youtu.be/gTktwNRFjjE)

tillyfromparadise
16th February 2012, 11:42 AM
Hi Jeffrey,I watched your video with interest. I am only going to comment on the portion concerning mixing petrol with WVO because I have no intrest or knowledge using WMO.

At time point 4:28 you add 200ml petrol to about a litre of WVO and you can clearly see the refraction distortions/turbulence that frequently occur when two liquids are mixed together.
At time point 5:16 you say "They seem to have gone one into each other and Ihaven"t even seen any turbulence and they are now uniform"
This is not a correct statement. From the point of your adding the petrol to the WVO you could see the "turbulence" caused by refraction distortion that often occurres when two liquids are mixed together. At time point 5:16 while you were making that statement you could still clearly see refraction distortions occurring in the bottle which is a sure sign that at that point the mixture was not uniform

At about time point 7:20 you said the mix had now sat for about 24 hours and there was no sign that the gasoline had separated from the Vegetable oil.
More importantly There was also no sign that the gasoline had ever thoroughly mixed with the vegetable oil. All that you would have had to do is tilt the bottle back and forth and check for the swirling refraction distortions.

At about time 7:56 you say it is a week later and "as we can see no emulsion layer has formed which means the gasoline and vegetable oil has not seperated and it did not require agitation to force the gasoline into solution with the vegetable oil"
Again, I have to question what you have said.
Why does the lack of an emulsion layer mean the Vegetable oil and Gasoline has not separated? Where would the emulsion layer have come from if the Petrol and Veg oil were not in solution.

You never demonstrated that the Petrol and WVO thoroughly mixed in the first place.

As I look at the bottle at about time point 8:00 it is very apparent that the liquid at the top of the bottle is lighter in colour than the liquid further down. That indicates to me that the petrol and WVO is not thoroughly mixed.  

Tony From West Oz
16th February 2012, 11:19 PM
Jeffrey,
One way to prove your assertion that the petrol has blended into the oil without agitation, is to take a sample at the bottom; a sample at the middle; and a sample at the top; of the container you have left sitting for a week and performing a simple viscosity test on each of the samples. With all samples at the same temperature, they should take exactly the same time to flow thru a viscosity cup. Any time difference indicates that the blend is not homogenous.

I would be interested to see the results of such testing.

I take offence to your statement that those who disagree with your statement that "gasoline blends without agitation" have either something to gain or have their own agenda.

Perhaps they do not agree because your tests do not actually test to determine that the blending has taken place. Looking at the diffusion of light due to different refractive indices of liquids is not a test of blending, just an indication that some mixing is taking place.


I look forward to definitive testing to verify your assertions.

Regards,
Tony

Jeffrey S. Brooks
17th February 2012, 04:08 AM
I take offence to your statement that those who disagree with your statement that "gasoline blends without agitation" have either something to gain or have their own agenda.The problem, Tony, that I have noticed with alternative diesel fuels forums is they tend to be run by people with little scientific training and a profound resentment toward anyone who blends. Blenders are thus commonly dismissed as idiots on these forums, and therefore systematically and cosnistently abused. In such an environmnet there is little ooportunity for blenders to express his or her successful experiences with blending, thus all we see on such forums is misinformation posted by people who are not blenders, and who resent blending, and often resort to character assassinations of blender. This forum is an example of that behavior.

I have provided a weekly video on blending on my YouTube channel, where I have done back flips to demonstarte that blending is the easiest and cheapest way to convert waste oils into diesel fuel; including spending hundreds of dollars on calibrated scientific instrumentats to back up my experiments and premises, in addition to having a 40 year technical career that included time in petroleum research for one of the largest petroleum companies in the world. However, none of that ever satisifies those who are invested in their beleif system that blending will not work. So, why should I continue to provide research for a group of people with absolutely no technical training at all, who will always find a reason to dismiss my work, and consistently resort to assassinating my character?

Blenders will find far more informed support for their blending activities on the follow two forums than anywhere else on the WWW

Beyond Biodiesel
BeyondBiodiesel.org - Index (http://beyondbiodiesel.org/forum/index.php)

vegetableoildiesel.co.uk
vegetableoildiesel.co.uk - Powered by XMB (http://www.vegetableoildiesel.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=77)

tillyfromparadise
17th February 2012, 08:20 AM
Scientific tests must be repeatable and reproducible.

Yesterday afternoon I repeated this test.
I placed a clean dry Dr Pepper bottle on the work bench.
Through a funnel I poured 1 litre of Clean WVO into the Dr Pepper bottle.
I then poured 200ml of unleaded petrol into the bottle through the same funnel and screwed the top on.

Observations
As in the video you could see very turbulent, swirling mixing in the top portion of the bottle. There did not seem to be much petrol penetration into the lower part of the bottle.
The general movement of the petrol seemed to be up.
This swirling continued on for several minutes with a gradual slowing down until after a few minutes movement pretty much stopped in the bottle.
After about 10 minutes I noted that there was a very discernible demarkation line in the liquid about half way down the contents of the bottle. This "line" seemed to be a change in refractive index between two layers of liquid.
There was not much difference in colour.
2 hours later I came back and noticed the demarkation line was still there.
I then gently tipped the bottle back and forth a few times and noted that there was the familiar swirling refraction distortion pattern one often see when two liquids of different refractive index are mixed together in the top half of the liquid.
I then set the bottle down to see what happens over time.

It is now the next morning- 18 hours later.
Looking at the bottle I see there is still the demarkation line.
I have just tipped the bottle from side to side.
In the top half of the liquid I see the swirling refraction distortion patterns you see when two liquids of different refractive index are mixed together.
There are no refraction distortion patterns in the lower half of the liquid.
There is very clearly two distinct layers of liquid in the bottle.

Conclussion
When first poured into the bottle, the petrol penetrated to about the mid point of the WVO.Some mixing of WVO and petrol occurred and separated to the top half.
Below the demarkation line is pretty much all WVO.
The Petrol and WVO in the top half is not thoroughly mixed together as demonstrated by the refraction patterns.

Captaincademan
17th February 2012, 09:48 AM
it would pay to assess the specific gravity of the two fluids. if there is a different SG (which there obviousely is if one sits on top of the other) then this will negate any "natural mixing", and it will at least require a mechanical mixing to form uniform solution (if uniform solution is possible). I cant see how the two fluids can mix at all on their own if they have different specific gravities.

even the air in our atmosphere which is constantly on the move will not thoroughly mix when it has differing densities, even though it has exactly the same molecular mix (leaving adiabatic lapse rates aside).

I think density (or specific gravity - express it as you wish) is the key factor that has not been explored in these "experiments".

tillyfromparadise
17th February 2012, 10:23 AM
Hi Cade,
Yes, the different SG's are the reason the petrol (sg around 0.75) and Veg oil (sg around 0.94) do not readily mix without stirring/aggitation.
I have already explained this to Jeffrey in an earlier post.

SUZUDDIS
17th February 2012, 01:10 PM
Jeffrey

I cannot understand how you can take offence to something someone said regarding a statement that isn't quaified.

While we all understand experience is important when determining an outcome , sometimes a new set of eyes can get a better / different outcome.
Also , on the note of Blending, to add a solution to another solution with differing 'SG's without agitation or mixing wouldn't equate to full Blend.

As I understand it , most people looking for a Blending solution would want a good product to work with , meaning they are going to want a complete blend. Why use a partial blend ?

Also these comments are not to be taken as critical or slander but simply input from members who care about what they do. If you have a solution that makes life simple , provide the detail. When that happens you will find you will get good positive feedback and most likely praise.

Kind Regards

Michael

Jeffrey S. Brooks
17th February 2012, 01:42 PM
Some people believe that differing specific gravities between two fluids in a solution will prevent them from miscibility. Here are 14 Videos that demonstrate the diffusion of various solvents into waste vegetable oil (WVO), which should collapse that belief system.

Blending Solvents with Vegetable Oil to make diesel fuel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=swedNqY23jk

Blending lacquer thinner with vegetable oil to make Diesel Fuel (WOBDF)
http://youtu.be/XbopU_Xo3mM

Blending MEK with vegetable oil to make Diesel Fuel (WOBDF)
http://youtu.be/ZyD0-oFeQYo

Blending gasoline with vegetable oil to make diesel fuel II
http://youtu.be/wVec28qRS-U

Blending Turpentine with vegetable oil to make diesel fuel I
http://youtu.be/GnUsbeVsSew

Blending Xylol (xylene) with Vegetable Oil to Make Diesel Fuel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mmf_rFU7v4E

Blending Toluol (Toluene) with Vegetable Oil to Make Diesel Fuel
http://youtu.be/4QnXI_PYvhA

Blending acetone with vegetable oil to make Diesel Fuel
http://youtu.be/Pqpo4SrVi6A

Blending Lamp Oil with vegetable oil to make Waste Oil Blend Diesel Fuel
http://youtu.be/h0kNrW7K0rE

Blending Coleman Fuel with vegetable oil to make Waste Oil Blend Diesel Fuel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MwmPvDLZUjs

Blending Naptha with vegetable oil to make Waste Oil Blend Diesel Fuel
http://youtu.be/iJMzTZoBCu4

Blending citrus oil with Vegetable Oil to Make Waste Oil Blend Diesel Fuel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHrSeMv-ibE

Blending paint thinner with Vegetable Oil to Make Waste Oil Blend Diesel Fuel
http://youtu.be/e9xfsDQ8JM0

Blending Kerosene with Vegetable Oil to Make Waste Oil Blend Diesel Fuel
http://youtu.be/Y5JpqUDRUW0

Captaincademan
17th February 2012, 09:20 PM
Jeffery, whilst I am not gunna watch all of those vids, the list of products you are willing to make fuel out of doesnt inspire me. There is no way known i would put acetone, thinners or other agressive fluids through my fuel pump. Just because something mixes with wvo, it doesnt mean its safe or mechanically sound to do so. Please dont champion these toxic brews as 'diesel fuel'. If you want mix things like kero, petrol, heater fuel, oils etc go for it, but fir goodness sake some newbie is gunna read this and think its a safe course of action as it is on a very respectable forum.

Tony From West Oz
17th February 2012, 11:18 PM
The problem, Tony, that I have noticed with alternative diesel fuels forums is they tend to be run by people with little scientific training and a profound resentment toward anyone who blends. Blenders are thus commonly dismissed as idiots on these forums, and therefore systematically and cosnistently abused. Jeffrey, you have no knowledge of my tertiary qualifications or my non-instutionalised learning on which to base yet another assertion.
which In such an environmnet there is little ooportunity for blenders to express his or her successful experiences with blending, thus all we see on such forums is misinformation posted by people who are not blenders, and who resent blending, and often resort to character assassinations of blender. This forum is an example of that behavior. Jeffrey, as a blender myself, and one who does In-Tank blending, I have just asked for proof of your assertions.
It does not matter to me that your "blend" is thoroughly mixed or not, I just don't do it that way. You however, are making statements without ANY proof, or any reasonable testing to show that your assertions are justifiable.


I have provided a weekly video on blending on my YouTube channel, where I have done back flips to demonstarte that blending is the easiest and cheapest way to convert waste oils into diesel fuel; including spending hundreds of dollars on calibrated scientific instrumentats to back up my experiments and premises, in addition to having a 40 year technical career that included time in petroleum research for one of the largest petroleum companies in the world. However, none of that ever satisifies those who are invested in their beleif system that blending will not work. So, why should I continue to provide research for a group of people with absolutely no technical training at all, who will always find a reason to dismiss my work, and consistently resort to assassinating my character?

If you can take the time to justify your statements instead of flying off the handle and accusing us of "character assassination", you may even earn some credibility. Once you achieve credibility, you then can earn respect. That is the way of society, not just this forum.


Blenders will find far more informed support for their blending activities on the follow two forums than anywhere else on the WWW

Beyond Biodiesel
BeyondBiodiesel.org - Index (http://beyondbiodiesel.org/forum/index.php)

vegetableoildiesel.co.uk
vegetableoildiesel.co.uk - Powered by XMB (http://www.vegetableoildiesel.co.uk/forum/forumdisplay.php?fid=77)

Thank you for the links. I have been on both of those sites in the past, but prefer a site which has relevance in Australia.
I have suggested a simple test which you can do to justify your assertion "that the gasoline will blend with vegetable oil without any agitation". You most likely already have the equipment to perform these tests
Thermometer Cup viscometer (or make your own from a pop bottle) stopwatch (all mobile phones have one of these ) Pencil and paper

Perform, these tests and publish your results, or accept that people WILL continue to challenge your unproven assertions.

Best wishes,
Tony

tillyfromparadise
17th February 2012, 11:18 PM
Hi Jeffrey,


The problem, Tony, that I have noticed with alternative diesel fuels forums is they tend to be run by people with little scientific training and a profound resentment toward anyone who blends. Blenders are thus commonly dismissed as idiots on these forums, and therefore systematically and cosnistently abused.In such an environmnet there is little ooportunity for blenders to express his or her successful experiences with blending, thus all we see on such forums is misinformation posted by people who are not blenders, and who resent blending, and often resort to character assassinations of blender. This forum is an example of that behavior.That may be the case on some forums but not this one. Many of us have a scientific background and routinely do blending. People who posts to this forum are judged solely on the quality of their input.




I have provided a weekly video on blending on my YouTube channel, where I have done back flips to demonstarte that blending is the easiest and cheapest way to convert waste oils into diesel fuel;From what I have read and seen, you seem to spend an inordinate large amount of your time routinely pulling out you injectors to clean them because they are always fouling. At my age I have no interested in doing this. To each his own.




including spending hundreds of dollars on calibrated scientific instrumentats to back up my experiments and premises,It is a shame you did not include any of your test equipment when you designed the above test.




So, why should I continue to provide research for a group of people with absolutely no technical training at all, who will always find a reason to dismiss my work, and consistently resort to assassinating my character?The problem is with the quality of your "research"
In the above video your test results are based solely on visual observation. What you are describing as occurring is not what is actually occurring in the video.
Also you make assumptions and claims that are not valid. For instance your statement that because you can not see an emulsion means that the gasoline and WVO have not separated is not valid.
Also you assume that if two liquids are miscible that means that once they are poured into the same container they will immediatly and completely blend together with no aggitation or mixing. This is also an invalid assumption.

Tim-HJ61
17th February 2012, 11:30 PM
The problem, Tony, that I have noticed with alternative diesel fuels forums is they tend to be run by people with little scientific training and a profound resentment toward anyone who blends. Blenders are thus commonly dismissed as idiots on these forums, and therefore systematically and cosnistently abused. In such an environmnet there is little ooportunity for blenders to express his or her successful experiences with blending, thus all we see on such forums is misinformation posted by people who are not blenders, and who resent blending, and often resort to character assassinations of blender. This forum is an example of that behavior.

I have provided a weekly video on blending on my YouTube channel, where I have done back flips to demonstarte that blending is the easiest and cheapest way to convert waste oils into diesel fuel; including spending hundreds of dollars on calibrated scientific instrumentats to back up my experiments and premises, in addition to having a 40 year technical career that included time in petroleum research for one of the largest petroleum companies in the world. However, none of that ever satisifies those who are invested in their beleif system that blending will not work. So, why should I continue to provide research for a group of people with absolutely no technical training at all, who will always find a reason to dismiss my work, and consistently resort to assassinating my character?


Jeffrey you are being disingenuous and unreasonable in your criticism of this forum. I remind you it was the owner and moderators of this forum that, after lobbying from yourself and other regular users, established the blending subforum. Free ranging discussion was allowed and encouraged and speaking as a moderator, I have no issue against blending in suitable vehicles. In presenting alternative fuel use to public forums as I do from time to time, I always include blending as a viable option. It is not suitable for all, just as a WVO in a two tank is not suitable for all vehicles, nor straight biodiesel. My 12h-t Direct Injection Landcruiser is not suited to high blends such as 85/15 commonly used where we are in Western Australia. Why, because it is a DI motor and a high blend increases the risk of oxidation in the injectors to a point that I am not prepared to try it. For DI motors, a proper two tank system is the best option, or biodiesel, or low blends.

Let me repeat and in bold Blending is a viable option that can be considered for some vehicles.

I see no evidence of blenders being dismissed as idiots, or systematically and consistently abused on this forum, nor is there any actions by the forum owner or moderators to stifle debate. Where we crack down is when postings get personal. This has not been an issue in this forum for several months, and it is important that it remains so. As Cade says, this is respectable forum, or I like to think it is. Some forum members also have a low tolerance for what Aussies describe as snake oil salesmen, bullxxit artists, or those who make far fetched or spurious claims. They are welcome to challenge those posters as long as the debate does not descend into personal criticism and the discussion stays on topic.

Any of us are free to continue to spend our time in any way we wish and can choose to contribute or not - you have chosen to rejoin the discussion, I have chosen to respond.

Referring to your video and the premise that blends with ULP Gasoline (by the way, I appreciated your use of dual measurement descriptions in your video) can do so without agitation, I cannot see the practical application of it. The blenders that participate in the local group I am in, always blend outside their tank, turnover the blend several times, leave it sit and then fill their tank. They all have extensive experience with blending and have no misadventure. Our friends from the Oliomobile site in Europe recommend turning over the blend 6 or 8 times to ensure proper mixing, in particular for vehicles with more vulnerable IP's to ensure there are no layers that can occur inside the tank. I don't think anyone here is disputing that once properly blended, ULP does not separate. What they ARE concerned about is to ensure the fuels are properly blended prior to going into the tank, and they do this by agitation. It would seem they, like others, do not experience the precipitation you are concerned about, and are trying to avoid when you are promoting the concept of no agitation blending. For all the blenders I know, it is an idea and concept that has no practical relevance.

Back to your video, please compare the images at 5:00 and 8:00. Whether the difference is caused by different lighting or camera angle, or by separation, there is clearly a difference in the appearance of the top of the samples. You can't blame forum members from being sceptical of your claims when there is a such a difference. From my humanities professional background, I am wondering if using a glass beaker instead of the plastic bottle with all it's bumps and lighting diffractions, and keeping the camera mounted in the same position with the same background lighting might resolve the problem, but as it stands, it looks for all the world to me like there is separation occurring. Unless you follow scientific principles of minimising the variables in experiments, you're not giving your proposition the best chance of being accepted.

Tim

tillyfromparadise
18th February 2012, 12:07 AM
Hi Jeffrey,
This is a miscibility test you can perform.
I assume you have purchased paint that requires mixing at the point of sale.
These types of paint are mixed at the shop with various squirts of colour tint added to a can of Base colour to achieve the exact colour you want. The colour tint is miscible with the base stock

Go to your local paint store and ask them to add two squirts of deepest black tint to a small Can of white base.
Leave this tin sit on the counter.
How long does it take for the black tint to thoroughly and completely mix with the white base with no aggitation or mechanical mixing.

Make sure you bring your lunch with you while performing this experiment

Jeffrey S. Brooks
19th February 2012, 01:21 AM
Back to your video, please compare the images at 5:00 and 8:00. Whether the difference is caused by different lighting or camera angle, or by separation, there is clearly a difference in the appearance of the top of the samples. You can't blame forum members from being sceptical of your claims when there is a such a difference. From my humanities professional background, I am wondering if using a glass beaker instead of the plastic bottle with all it's bumps and lighting diffractions, and keeping the camera mounted in the same position with the same background lighting might resolve the problem, but as it stands, it looks for all the world to me like there is separation occurring. Unless you follow scientific principles of minimising the variables in experiments, you're not giving your proposition the best chance of being accepted.

TimTim, there are some members of your forum who have hijacked this forum; whether you are willing to accept that or not. This has caused me to lose interest in responding to the inquiry of those members, because their comments reflect either a profound lack of knowledge of chemistry and physics, and most certainly do not reflect reality, and suggest strongly of lies.

To respond to your specific question regarding an apparent color change in my video, you will note that the sample containers that I am using are common disposable juice containers that are readily available to me free. However, they have differences in shape for visual appeal and strength that cause artificial color changes in the sample in the container. This is the explanation for the color change in the above video. If you examine the other 14 videos they all clearly show diffusion turbulence decreases over time in the blend sample, and there is no such diffraction differences observed after several minutes to 24 hours.

tillyfromparadise
19th February 2012, 08:29 AM
Hi Jeffrey,


Tim, there are some members of your forum who have hijacked this forum whether you are willing to accept that or not.I have had a look through this blending forum and I can see what you mean. There is one person who has far more posts than anyone else.


 
...their comments reflect either a profound lack of knowledge of the chemistry and physics, and most certainly do not reflect reality,After looking at a sample of the information they have posted I do agree with you.



 
...and suggest strongly of lies.No, I do not think they are lieing, just not competent in designing, performing and interpreting the results of tests.




To respond to your specific question regarding an apparent color change in my video, you will note that the sample containers that I am using are common disposable juice containers that are readily available to me free. However, they have differences in shape for visual appeal and strength that cause artificial color changes in the sample container. This is the explanation for the color change in the above video.Yes, the container you chose to do your experiment in was a poor choice. There are far too many lumps and bumps and shape changes to be able to clearly see what is happening inside the bottle.
That is why I chose to repeat your experiment in a smooth sided completely transparent Dr Pepper Bottle. I have none of the distortions or ambiguities that are apparent in your test.




If you examine the other 14 videos they all clearly show diffussion turbulence decreases over time in the blend sample, and there is no such diffraction differences observed after 24 hours.I do not think you actually know how to check for the refraction distortion.
After the liquid has stopped moving you need to rock the bottle so that there is a slight movement through the liquid to again see these distortions.
For instance, it has now been about two and a half days since I repeated your above test. A cursory look at the bottle of WVO/Petrol sitting on the shelf seems to show that it contains a uniformly blended liquid.
However, on closer inspection I can still clearly see the demarkation line caused by two liquids of different refractive index sitting one on top of the other.
Then when I picked the bottle up and rocked it back and forth I could see the swirling refractive distortions in the top half of the liquid that are caused by two separate liquids interacting with each other.
There were no refractive distortions in the bottom layer.

Jeffrey, I would be glad to explain how to design a meaningful test and help you interprete the information you obtain

tillyfromparadise
19th February 2012, 05:38 PM
Stacking liquids according to SG- Density column

From Dept Chemical engineering Utah university (http://www.che.utah.edu/community_and_outreach/modules/module.php?p_id=6)


"For this demonstration we compare liquids by stacking one on top of another using a difference in density. When a liquid with lower density is slowly poured onto a liquid with higher density, the two will not mix. We can continue to stack liquids by using a liquid with a lower density than the one before it.

Miscibility (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscibility) is a property of liquids to mix in all proportions. Ethanol and Water are said to be miscible as they completely mix. Oil and water are said to be immiscible as they do not mix into solution.Mass transfer is what determines the miscibility of two fluids, specifically diffusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion). Diffusion is the tendency for particles to move from areas of high concentration to low concentration.

Remember that liquids are made up of a massive amount of molecules moving around in space and binding forces between these atoms are what creates the liquid. When two liquids are close together, say water and ethanol, the water molecules will begin to move from the higher concentration of water molecules into the ethanol where there is a low concentration of water molecules. Ethanol will do the exact same thing into the water and the two liquids will eventually completely mix with a scattering of water and ethanol randomly throughout the solution.

In the density column, if we left it long enough (maybe years or decades)everything would eventually diffuse into one another except the oil and water.

From bottom to top the liquids are;
Honey
Maple Syrup
liquid soap
Water (with food colouring)
Vegetable oil
isopropol alcohol (with food colour)

http://outreach.chemeng.utah.edu/Modules/DensityColumn/title-image.jpg

Tim-HJ61
20th February 2012, 12:40 AM
Tim, there are some members of your forum who have hijacked this forum; whether you are willing to accept that or not. This has caused me to lose interest in responding to the inquiry of those members, because their comments reflect either a profound lack of knowledge of chemistry and physics, and most certainly do not reflect reality, and suggest strongly of lies.

To respond to your specific question regarding an apparent color change in my video, you will note that the sample containers that I am using are common disposable juice containers that are readily available to me free. However, they have differences in shape for visual appeal and strength that cause artificial color changes in the sample in the container. This is the explanation for the color change in the above video. If you examine the other 14 videos they all clearly show diffusion turbulence decreases over time in the blend sample, and there is no such diffraction differences observed after several minutes to 24 hours.

Jeffrey,

Speaking as a moderator, unless postings step over the mark into personalised comments; robust discussion is accepted on this forum. I understand some posters annoy you, and you believe they have highjacked the Blending forum. I do not agree. What I don't like to see is references to 'lies' which is crossing the line.

Moderator hat off. Interested observer hat on.
I understand completely that you have used the materials at hand, as often we all do. Simply telling me you are right does not convince me. An alternative response to me that would assist build confidence, would be to say - "Hey Tim, that's a good point. I can see how people could misconstrue the points I was making via that video clip because of the materials I used. I can see what you mean. I'll redo the test and video using better gear and I'm sure it will be a lot clearer."

I am also non the wiser as to the practical application of the principle you are espousing.

Tim

peter1
20th February 2012, 08:30 PM
Reading this thread the other day i decided to experiment myself this morning. I poured 2L of petrol into a 25L drum I had poured some oil out of.
I left it about 3.5 hours when I went out. When I came home I opened the drum and swished my finger on the top of the liquid.
Pretty amateur test but it was more than enough to show that there was a very high concentration of petrol sitting on the top of the oil.
I put the lid back on the drum, shook it up a bit and re examined it. mixed perfectly.
I poured it in the vehicle and was happy my IP was not going to get a belt of near pure petrol.

Sometimes I blend in the tank by pouring in half the oil, then the petrol then the other half of the oil. I usually bounce the car up and down for a bit for good measure to mix it all some more and I jerk the brakes when I go down the driveway to slosh the fuel some more .
No probs so far.

tbird650
21st February 2012, 07:02 AM
Just as Peter1 says.... I often adjust the mix concentration in the vehicle tank.
Pour a litre of ULP straight in. It appears to mix quickly enough.
The only time I was surprised was when JSB discovered that stale ULP didn't blend like normal.
So hats off to JSB for finding that. I'd never have given it a second thought.

tillyfromparadise
21st February 2012, 07:52 AM
Hi tbird650,
I am curious, what test do you use to determine that the petrol you add to the tank has thoroughly mixed with the rest of the contents of the tank?
Just as Peter1 says.... I often adjust the mix concentration in the vehicle tank.
Pour a litre of ULP straight in. It appears to mix quickly enough.

tbird650
21st February 2012, 04:39 PM
I don't do any testing. I add (usually ULP) till unwanted symptoms disappear.
My blends are almost always on the heavy side, and sometimes a little too heavy.

peter1
21st February 2012, 06:08 PM
Just to confirm, I do not believe petrol will mix in oil without agitation.I never expected it would. The test I did out of curiosity of what was said here confirmed my thoughts.
I think tilleys example of the paint not mixing is a perfect illustration.
I do find petrol and oil mixes easily with agitation, it just dosent do it on it's own.

Jeffrey S. Brooks
24th February 2012, 03:08 AM
Stacking liquids according to SG- Density column

From Dept Chemical engineering Utah university (http://www.che.utah.edu/community_and_outreach/modules/module.php?p_id=6)


"For this demonstration we compare liquids by stacking one on top of another using a difference in density. When a liquid with lower density is slowly poured onto a liquid with higher density, the two will not mix. We can continue to stack liquids by using a liquid with a lower density than the one before it.

Miscibility (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miscibility) is a property of liquids to mix in all proportions. Ethanol and Water are said to be miscible as they completely mix. Oil and water are said to be immiscible as they do not mix into solution.Mass transfer is what determines the miscibility of two fluids, specifically diffusion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diffusion). Diffusion is the tendency for particles to move from areas of high concentration to low concentration.

Remember that liquids are made up of a massive amount of molecules moving around in space and binding forces between these atoms are what creates the liquid. When two liquids are close together, say water and ethanol, the water molecules will begin to move from the higher concentration of water molecules into the ethanol where there is a low concentration of water molecules. Ethanol will do the exact same thing into the water and the two liquids will eventually completely mix with a scattering of water and ethanol randomly throughout the solution.

In the density column, if we left it long enough (maybe years or decades)everything would eventually diffuse into one another except the oil and water.

From bottom to top the liquids are;
Honey
Maple Syrup
liquid soap
Water (with food colouring)
Vegetable oil
isopropol alcohol (with food colour)

http://outreach.chemeng.utah.edu/Modules/DensityColumn/title-image.jpgI bet no one on this forum has tried this, because preventing miscible fluids from diffusing into each other is very difficult. My premises are that no one making a fuel blend is going to do the back flips necessary to keep their fuel blend from blending. Thus, I stand by my premises that any one who practices blending will notice that miscible fluids blend readily and do not need agitation to blend, and those blends will not separate except under fractional distillation. And, bringing this experiment up only shows how much emotional investment the poster has in undermining the free exchange of information between blenders.

Forum Mod: Do we really need an infinite number of pathetic attempts at hijacking this dialog by one deeply disturbed individual to prove his whole reason for exist on this forum is to hijack it?

tillyfromparadise
24th February 2012, 12:25 PM
Hi Jeffrey,
I bet no one on this forum has tried this, Yes, I did it several times when teaching science in school.





because preventing miscible fluids from diffusing into each other is very difficult.Tout au contraire monsieur Brooks. It is very easy. Pour some water on top of maple syrup.




My premises are that no one making a fuel blend is going to do the back flips necessary to keep their fuel blend from blending.You sure seem to have a lot of premises and hypothesis. It is a shame you do not have supporting evidence.








Thus, I stand by my premises that any one who practices blending will notice that miscible fluids blend readily and do not need agitation to blend,Your premise is not supported by simple experimentation or real life experience.

My premise is that you need to take more care when you design and perform your experiments so that they are actually testing what you want them to test.
My offer to help you design these experiments still stands




and those blends will not separate except under fractional distillation. If you do a google on separating miscible liquids you will find that there are other methods such as molecular sieves and centrifuges.



Forum Mod: Do we really need an infinite number of pathetic attempts at hijacking this dialog by one deeply disturbed individual to prove his whole reason for exist on this forum is to hijack it?Dear moderators. I do not mind helping this person who seems to want to hijack the blending forum to understand where he is making mistakes.

Tim-HJ61
24th February 2012, 04:09 PM
Playtime over. Thread closed.