Page 14 of 16 FirstFirst ... 410111213141516 LastLast
Results 131 to 140 of 155

Thread: The Imsides method

  1. #131
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    ลึก ประเทศอินเด&
    Posts
    1,983

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    Hi smithy,
    In keeping with the spirit of trying to clear up the many inaccurate and misleading posts you have made, I think this is a good point to clear up this amazing bit of misinformation you posted early in this thread.

    Quote Originally Posted by smithy View Post
    Anyway just to add, when I tried this method coming up to 3 years ago using Potassium Methoxide dried by using quicklime (CaO) the volume of glycerol recovered after processing was greatly reduced. Glycerol has a variable soap content depending on oil quality, methanol quality and type of catalyst used, but is in the order of 35%. With the dry methoxide there was virtually no potassium soap, so the glycerol volume was about 2/3 of normal.
    If this were true, which of course it isn't, that would mean that your byproduct layer (Glycerol) is about 92% pure glycerine.
    I have actually pointed this out to you several times over the years but it seemed to make no difference and you continually post these impossible results as being the truth.

    If you check the results of the test DavidS has just posted you will see that the byproduct/ glycerol Layer of the batch using dried methanol is actually slightly more than the non-dried batch. Also of interest is the fact that the yield is slightly more in the non-dried batch than the dried batch.
    Clearly, the tiny amount of water produced while making methoxide has very little affect on the reaction.

    Assuming you really did achieve the results you claim, why do you think your results were so different from DavidS results?

    HINT:
    While you pretend to be performing a single stage reaction on vegetable oil, you are really performing the second stage reaction on partially reacted biodiesel.


    PS:

    By the way, I think that DavidS designed a very good test to compare the imsides procedure which dries the methoxide with the a procedure that does not dry the methoxide. I believe his results are valid.
    I think both you and Wesley need to have a good close look at how DavidS designed his COMPARISON TEST for your future reference
    Last edited by tillyfromparadise; 26th November 2017 at 05:00 PM.

  2. #132
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    14

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    Hi Tilly,

    i will reply regarding my methoxide mixing a bit later today. I'm just going out to collect some oil.

    in fairness, I think if you look at my post #115 on this thread you will see that Dave (Smithy) actually suggested to me the way to run this test on new oil, using the same batch of methoxide and just changing one thing (addition of cement to the second test methoxide). Please give him credit for the scientific method that was applied to this testing.

    David

  3. #133
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    14

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    I calculated the mix for the methoxide as follows:


    Dr.Mark's bulk formula calls for 870lites of wvo to be reacted with a methoxide comprising 130 litres of methanol plus 13kgs of KOH.


    I calculated that to make 500ml of methoxide to the ratio above I would have to add 50g of KOH to 500ml of methanol.


    Once I had got all the KOH to dissolve, I used 150ml of this methoxide to react 1litre of new cooking oil.


    I then added cement to the remaining 350ml of methoxide as follows:


    Dr.Mark's formula requires 20kgs of cement to be added to a methoxide that contains 130litres of methanol. This calculates to an amount of 20000/13000=0.154g per millilitre. I multiplied this by 350 (the amount of methoxide left in my measuring flask) to calculate that I needed to add 54g of cement.


    I added 54g of cement to the 350ml of methoxide and kept giving it a good shake and a stir. I then left it to settle for 24 hours before decanting off 150ml of the clear methoxide from the top and proceeding with the second reaction on a further new 1litre of oil.
    Last edited by DavidS; 27th November 2017 at 04:58 PM. Reason: Typo

  4. #134
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    14

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    Hi Tilly


    You have asked me what I concluded from the test results.


    Both tests involved reacting new veg oil with a pretty massive overdose of KOH but an amount of methanol which almost starved the process. I understand from what I have read that consistently successful single stage processes often involve the addition of around 20% methanol, whereas Dr. Mark's formula only uses around 15%.


    I observed that the cement-dried-methoxide test produced no dropout and an instantly clear methanol phase during the 10/90 test. The control sample produced a minuscule amount of dropout in the 10/90 and caused the methanol phase to become and remain cloudy.


    I concluded from this that adding cement to the methoxide had an observable effect in terms of providing a more complete reaction ( all of course within the limitations of the 10/90 test- let's not start arguing about that again).


    I am, however, unable to explain why the control sample produced slightly more bio nor why the cement-dried-methoxide sample produced 12% byproduct and the control sample less at 10.4%.


    I would appreciate your thoughts please everyone.

  5. #135
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    14

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    Hello Tilly


    Leaving this test aside, if your assertion is correct that drying the methoxide has little benefit to the reaction, how come commercial producers and a fair few home producers in the UK swear by using ASM (anhydrous sodium methoxide) rather than mixing their own methoxide using the much cheaper sodium hydroxide in crystal form?


    Regards,


    David

  6. #136
    Join Date
    Dec 2016
    Location
    York UK
    Posts
    106

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    Originally posted by Tilly


    PS:

    By the way, I think that DavidS designed a very good test to compare the imsides procedure which dries the methoxide with the a procedure that does not dry the methoxide. I believe his results are valid.
    I think both you and Wesley need to have a good close look at how DavidS designed his COMPARISON TEST for your future reference
    -----------
    Originally posted by David S


    Hi Tilly,

    i will reply regarding my methoxide mixing a bit later today. I'm just going out to collect some oil.

    in fairness, I think if you look at my post #115 on this thread you will see that Dave (Smithy) actually suggested to me the way to run this test on new oil, using the same batch of methoxide and just changing one thing (addition of cement to the second test methoxide). Please give him credit for the scientific method that was applied to this testing.

    David

    ----------------------------------------------------
    Hmm, seems you have shot yourself in the foot with this one, Tilly!

  7. #137
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    ลึก ประเทศอินเด&
    Posts
    1,983

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    Hi David,



    Quote Originally Posted by DavidS View Post
    Hi Tilly,
    in fairness, I think if you look at my post #115 on this thread you will see that Dave (Smithy) actually suggested to me the way to run this test on new oil, using the same batch of methoxide and just changing one thing (addition of cement to the second test methoxide). Please give him credit for the scientific method that was applied to this testing.
    David
    It is heartening to see that smithy actually understands the concept of scientific testing.

    I give credit to smithy for advising you to use a scientific method in your test.
    I hope that in the future smithy will apply this same rigorous scientific method to his own testing and stops posting all the false and misleading information he currently posts.


    A few observations about your testing.

    I think your test results are valid.

    While I have never been terribly concerned with producing very high conversion biodiesel in a single stage using an absolute minimum of methanol possible, I have read of people achieving a pass on the 3/27 test using 16% methanol in a single stage reaction.

    It is interesting to see that your reaction went so far using 15% methanol.
    A few reasons that probably contributed to this-

    1. Your choice of oil was important.
      The stoichieometric amount of methanol for Rape/ Canola is not 12.5% as with most vegetable oil, it is actually only 11.3%. This means that you have a greater excess of methanol available when reacting rape/ canola than if you reacted almost any other oil using the same amount of methanol so the reaction will go farther.
    2. The oil was new.
    3. Testing I performed years ago showed that if you increased the NaOH in the reaction you could reduce the methanol and still achieve the same reaction results.
      I assume the same thing will happen when using a huge excess of KOH



    Leaving this test aside, if your assertion is correct that drying the methoxide has little benefit to the reaction, how come commercial producers and a fair few home producers in the UK swear by using ASM (anhydrous sodium methoxide) rather than mixing their own methoxide using the much cheaper sodium hydroxide in crystal form?
    I was basing my statement on your test results.
    As I recall the theoretical maximum yield by volume is about 104%
    Your non-dried batch achieved 103.9% yield.
    There does not seem to be a lot of room for more gain.

    You will need to ask the people who use ASM why they use ASM. I am sure they have a reason

    CONCLUSSION
    This procedure does seem to offer a benefit if you are attempting to produce high conversion biodiesel.
    It would be interesting to see what the results are when reacting WVO.
    I think it is amusing that the author of this procedure does not consider that conversion is important

    Well done on the test DavidS
    Last edited by tillyfromparadise; 27th November 2017 at 09:32 AM.

  8. #138
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Townsville, North Queensland
    Posts
    620

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidS View Post
    I calculated the mix for the methoxide as follows:


    Dr.Mark's bulk formula calls for 870lites of wvo to be reacted with a methoxide comprising 130ml of methanol plus 13kgs of KOH.
    Um that has gotta be a typo ..... correct?

    Otherwise 130ml of methanol would hardly even wet 13kg of KOH, let alone dissolve it.

  9. #139
    Join Date
    Oct 2017
    Location
    Uk
    Posts
    14

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    My bad. Apologies. I've now edited the post to read 130 litres.

    David

  10. #140
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Townsville, North Queensland
    Posts
    620

    Re: Reduced oil temperature in reactor ?

    Quote Originally Posted by DavidS View Post
    My bad. Apologies. I've now edited the post to read 130 litres.

    David

    No worries David. I thought you meant litres, and not ml.

    Had to get in before Tilly saw that LOL.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •