Emulsified diesel

[RLWP]

4 hours ago, Tony Brooks said:

Except that piece says it kerosene that I suspect most of us know as paraffin or 28 second heating oil. Be it rather less refined than ESSO blue etc. I bet its not identical to the 28 second oil or, come to that, the diesel we use.

I kind of lost track of that world after being involved in developing fuel systems for anti-misting kerosene. Jet fuel is diesel was near enough for me

 

I was trying to find out something about Winter Diesel, which I believe is the universal fuel used on the arctic for everything - aero engines included

 

Richard

 

MORE: which goes to show, I should read all the responses before replying:

7 minutes ago, DandV said:

 

Conversely only one fuel bulk is shipped to McMurdo, Scott Base in Antarctica for both aviation and compression engine use in power generation, plant and vehicles. It is basically Jet A1 with a lubricity additive for the diesels.

 

Only, I got the wrong end of the world

Edited March 9, 2020 by RLWP

[tree monkey]

11 minutes ago, RLWP said:

I kind of lost track of that world after being involved in developing fuel systems for anti-misting kerosene. Jet fuel is diesel was near enough for me

 

I was trying to find out something about Winter Diesel, which I believe is the universal fuel used on the arctic for everything - aero engines included

 

Richard

 

MORE: which goes to show, I should read all the responses before replying:

Only, I got the wrong end of the world

Anti misting kerosene, what's that then why would it mist?

[DandV]

4 minutes ago, RLWP said:

I kind of lost track of that world after being involved in developing fuel systems for anti-misting kerosene. Jet fuel is diesel was near enough for me

 

I was trying to find out something about Winter Diesel, which I believe is the universal fuel used on the arctic for everything - 

Winter diesel is the good stuff, Summer just gives them a chance to work off the diesel stock with a greater propensity to wax at low temperatures.

There are risks to supply companies in this approach.

Not in my area, fortunately, but our company supplied summer diesel, in summer, for using to heat a major hot house installation during winter.

The fuel waxed in a frost and entire crop was lost, resulting in compensation, bad publicity, and a change in company procedures.

[RLWP]

6 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

Anti misting kerosene, what's that then why would it mist?

Kerosene doesn't ignite easily, it has to be finely atomised to get it to go. Unfortunately, if you crash a plane and rupture the tanks, that causes atomisation and fire. Anti misting kerosene (AMK) was supposed to be a solution to that.

 

Unfortunately AMK had two significant problems:

 

It was a crap fuel, difficult to make work in gas turbines because of the small control holes in the fuel system, and:

 

It still burned if you crashed a 'plane

 

 

Richard

Edited March 9, 2020 by RLWP

[DandV]

7 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

Anti misting kerosene, what's that then why would it mist?

Misting is a hazy appearance. It can be caused by water, or solidifying wax, or even ice at low temperatures. Hence the inspection item to verify that fuel is clear and bright and free of foreign matter. Misting is a fuel fail.

Tawny Owl's explanation is probably correct as well, the same term for two different phenomena, perhaps why the first phenomena was more usually described as hazy

 

 

Edited March 9, 2020 by DandV

[Tony Brooks]

8 minutes ago, tree monkey said:

Anti misting kerosene, what's that then why would it mist?

Don't know what is in it but I think I read it has additives so in the event of an aircraft crash and the fuel system rupturing the impact is less likely to make the fuel form a mist that ignites more readily. Probably not a lot of good in a diesel engine because you want the finest mist possible from the injectors.

 

Richard got there first.

Edited March 9, 2020 by Tony Brooks

[tree monkey]

9 minutes ago, RLWP said:

 

 

Thank you

8 minutes ago, DandV said:

 

 

 

And thank you as well

7 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

 

 

Richard got there first.

Doesn't matter, thank you for the time and explanation 

 

 

Just to add, this is forum at it's best 

Edited March 9, 2020 by tree monkey

[RLWP]

4 minutes ago, Tony Brooks said:

Don't know what is in it but I think I read it has additives so in the event of an aircraft crash and the fuel system rupturing the impact is less likely to make the fuel form a mist that ignites more readily. Probably not a lot of good in a diesel engine because you want the finest mist possible from the injectors.

 

Richard got there first.

 

I got there by experience, you deduced why it wasn't really a good idea 

 

It was hoped that the HP fuel pumps would shear the long chain molecules making the fuel usable. Didn't work...

 

Richard

[Markinaboat]

On 08/03/2020 at 15:03, Keeping Up said:

Yes I used to worry about always having slightly cloudy diesel after starting to use an additive, but it seems that it is quite common.

Can't say I've not noticed this with 'Marine 16 Diesel Fuel Complete'.

[nicknorman]

There are modern planes with modern Diesel engines. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thielert_Centurion
 

They are run on forecourt diesel or jet A1.

 

Big difference between Jet A1/ diesel, and petrol, is that the former is much more hygroscopic. In aircraft, water invisibly dissolved in Jet A1 can freeze out at low temperatures, blocking filters etc. Hence when refuelling offshore (dodgy environment for transporting and storing fuel), we used water sensitive capsules and a syringe to sample the fuel both before and after the refuel. You could get a “positive” (ie presence of water detected) even though there were no visible droplets and the sample jar was “clear and bright”. On the AS332L we had ice traps upstream of the main airframe fuel filters, with an “Ice” warning light that would come on if there was a build up of ice crystals. With those, we could operate down to -45C (if memory serves, it was a while ago!)

Edited March 9, 2020 by nicknorman

[ditchcrawler]

20 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

There are modern planes with modern Diesel engines. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thielert_Centurion
 

They are run on forecourt diesel or jet A1.

 

Big difference between Jet A1/ diesel, and petrol, is that the former is much more hygroscopic. In aircraft, water invisibly dissolved in Jet A1 can freeze out at low temperatures, blocking filters etc. Hence when refuelling offshore (dodgy environment for transporting and storing fuel), we used water sensitive capsules and a syringe to sample the fuel both before and after the refuel. You could get a “positive” (ie presence of water detected) even though there were no visible droplets and the sample jar was “clear and bright”. On the AS332L we had ice traps upstream of the main airframe fuel filters, with an “Ice” warning light that would come on if there was a build up of ice crystals. With those, we could operate down to -45C (if memory serves, it was a while ago!)

And we use to draw some off from the bottom of the tank every morning before you took off and also from the delivery hose to check for suspended water and then kept the samples for a week in case you didn't get home again. It was a pain in the bum  trying to get a good delivery sample in horizontal rain

[DandV]

25 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

There are modern planes with modern Diesel engines. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thielert_Centurion
 

They are run on forecourt diesel or jet A1.

 

Big difference between Jet A1/ diesel, and petrol, is that the former is much more hygroscopic. In aircraft, water invisibly dissolved in Jet A1 can freeze out at low temperatures, blocking filters etc. Hence when refuelling offshore (dodgy environment for transporting and storing fuel), we used water sensitive capsules and a syringe to sample the fuel both before and after the refuel. You could get a “positive” (ie presence of water detected) even though there were no visible droplets and the sample jar was “clear and bright”. On the AS332L we had ice traps upstream of the main airframe fuel filters, with an “Ice” warning light that would come on if there was a build up of ice crystals. With those, we could operate down to -45C (if memory serves, it was a while ago!)

A check with the water capsules was part of the daily routine for all our branded Jet A1 dispensing installations. Keeping a supply of capsules within dates could become a bit of a logistical nightmare to avoid an audit, immediate corrective action required. It was the aviation industry's pedantism that I deferred to, when needing to ensure that other fuel quality critical installations could perform.

But getting back to boats, routinely drawing a bottom tank sample, checking and if required, removing more fuel and disposing is a smaller task then an engine oil change. Why not do it?

I think part of the reason is we are used to cars, where the fuel draw off, is the extreme tank bottom. The philosophy here is that the fuel line filters take care of the contaminants. These two different configurations demand different maintenance requirements.

Edited March 9, 2020 by DandV

[ditchcrawler]

33 minutes ago, DandV said:

A check with the water capsules was part of the daily routine for all our branded Jet A1 dispensing installations. Keeping a supply of capsules within dates could become a bit of a logistical nightmare  

The chopper company ues to bring them out for us when we requested them so not a problem.

[DandV]

53 minutes ago, nicknorman said:

 

 

Big difference between Jet A1/ diesel, and petrol, is that the former is much more hygroscopic. In aircraft, water invisibly dissolved in Jet A1 can freeze out at low temperatures, blocking filters etc. Hence when refuelling offshore (dodgy environment for transporting and storing fuel), we used water sensitive capsules and a syringe to sample the fuel both before and after the refuel. You could get a “positive” (ie presence of water detected) even though there were no visible droplets and the sample jar was “clear and bright”. On the AS332L we had ice traps upstream of the main airframe fuel filters, with an “Ice” warning light that would come on if there was a build up of ice crystals. With those, we could operate down to -45C (if memory serves, it was a while ago!)

For those of you interested in such things, the air accident report of the Brittish Airways 777 landing short at Heathrow makes interesting reading.

The flight was from Hong Kong to London, An initial long climb out of Hong Kong to very high altitudes to clear the Tibetan plateau in unusually cold conditions. Once up the entire flight remained at cruise power setting until the power reduction for a long uninterrupted descent until on finals when flap and wheel deployment required more power, but both engines failed to deliver and the aircraft barely cleared the fence before landing heavily well short of the threshold.

The enquiry showed the fuel loaded was in spec, there was, as always some dissolved water, but not above allowed levels. 

The long flight path in extreme cold meant the airframe and fuel tanks were completly cold soaked which allowed this minimal residual water to form ice crystals and  accumulate and partially block the fuel filters, not noticible at the low flow rates of cruise and descent but critical at landing power.

As a result of this flight plans require occasional altitude adjustments at climb power to shake any crystals through the filters and also a burst of power somewhat above finals to verify that the engines are still responsive.

 

 

 

[DandV]

13 minutes ago, ditchcrawler said:

The chopper company ues to bring them out for us when we requested them so not a problem.

Yeah, the problem was upstream when maintaining the stock was part of a job disestablished to meet staff reduction targets! There was some very unhappy managers when this failing was exposed by a colleague sent on an audit to another overseas operation of the company. Water capsules were well out of date.

[JamesFrance]

I have a friend with a motor yacht with large engines who had an attack of diesel bug out in the med.   You may find what he wrote about it interesting as of course the problem is much greater for sea going boats.

 

"
When we had our attack of diesel bug, I was advised by Marine 16 in South Wales to use the standard Marine 16 to kill the bug.
We just used a strong dose.
Interestingly, at the time I did a little test.
I took one of those large fresh water containers that you get from the supermarket and filled it with some of the sludge from our bug infested tank.
There was about a gallon of thick bug infested diesel in the water bottle.
Shook it up with a strong mix of Marine 16 and left it.
Overnight most of the growth had gone - after 72 hours all the bug had gone.
So, you see, I have a lot of time for this kind of biocide treatment like Marine 16.
Kill it DEAD - is what I say.
I'm not keen on fuel set - probably works as a preventative measure - but if you have the bug IMO it is useless.

During our treatment after the bug, Marine 16 suggested using their complete.
As you say, it is much the same price but you need a lot more to treat the same amount of fuel.
Anyway, we chose to treat a fresh load of 4000 litres with Marine 16 Complete.
They say that the Complete provides a more efficient burn and you will get more distance our of a fuel load with Complete than a fuel load without.
I do have some evidence that this was in fact the case but my main reason was to provide some treatment for my injectors and fuel pumps after they had been attacked by the bug.
I haven't added any Complete since that time but I do, religiously, treat every load of fuel that we take.
Believe me we DO use fuel.
Currently, our engine management system indicates that we have burned over 100,000 litres of fuel.
Since the bug, our fuel is crystal clear every time I test it."

[reg]

4 hours ago, JamesFrance said:

During our treatment after the bug, Marine 16 suggested using their complete.

Had a severe case of diesel bug a few years ago and did a shock treatment with marine 16 bug treatment after reading the article listed below. Needed two small bottles, approx 200 litre tank, to effect a full cure. Needed to wait a couple of days, Marine 16 suggest 72hrs, to get the full cure. Total success, well worth the money. 

Only mistake I made was to purchase the marine 16 complete initially when it was the marine 16 bug treatment I needed for the heavy duty job. 

https://www.pbo.co.uk/gear/12-diesel-bug-treatments-tested-43353

 

Just as an adjunct I have just purchased one of these to draw the water from the bottom of the tank. Very well made and substantial pump particularly happy at the price paid. When not in use it can be used as balancing ballast. Can't count the number of poorly made plastic syphon pumps I've purchased over the years. 

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/125cm-Oil-Barrel-Pump-Rotary-Hand-Action-Fuel-Diesel-Water-Transfer-Gallon-Drum/133230127850?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&redirect=mobile

 

Edited March 10, 2020 by reg

[Keeping Up]

There must be different varieties of bug. When we had our bug problem a few years back, Enersolve wouldn't kill it nor prevent its return after the system had been drained, cleaned, and polished; nor would Exocet, nor Fuelset, nor Marine 16 bug treatment. Samples went to each of those suppliers laboratories and their scientists all said the same, that it was just like normal bug but they couldn't kill it. In the end the only solution was to steam-clean the tank and replace everything else (pipes, filters, etc). Since then I regularly open the tap and drain some off, and I use Marine 16 complete at each filling; the diesel is still always a little bit cloudy though.

[Ex Brummie]

22 hours ago, RLWP said:

Kerosene doesn't ignite easily, it has to be finely atomised to get it to go.

As I understand it, it has a flash point of about 35oC. Certainly when used in vaporising burners, it lights very easily.

Going back to Buncefield a few years ago, I don't  think there was much pressure atomisation there. A match dropped into 35 sec (diesel), will get put out. A match dropped into 28 sec.(kerosene) will fire up immediately. Ask me how I know, when a match I was using to light an Aga snapped when I struck it, and landed in the drip tray I had used to empty the burner base prior to servicing.

[DandV]

6 hours ago, reg said:

Had a severe case of diesel bug a few years ago and did a shock treatment with marine 16 bug treatment after reading the article listed below. Needed two small bottles, approx 200 litre tank, to effect a full cure. Needed to wait a couple of days, Marine 16 suggest 72hrs, to get the full cure. Total success, well worth the money. 

Only mistake I made was to purchase the marine 16 complete initially when it was the marine 16 bug treatment I needed for the heavy duty job. 

https://www.pbo.co.uk/gear/12-diesel-bug-treatments-tested-43353

 

Just as an adjunct I have just purchased one of these to draw the water from the bottom of the tank. Very well made and substantial pump particularly happy at the price paid. When not in use it can be used as balancing ballast. Can't count the number of poorly made plastic syphon pumps I've purchased over the years. 

 

https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/125cm-Oil-Barrel-Pump-Rotary-Hand-Action-Fuel-Diesel-Water-Transfer-Gallon-Drum/133230127850?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&redirect=mobile

 

In my job I had to investigate quite a few diesel bug and other contamination issues and have viewed the contamination by microscope both living bug and the dead residues. Both states are equally capable of blocking filters.

Diesel bug infestations seem to be self limiting, and without the addition of further water tend to kill themselves, with their own toxicity?

However killing the infestation alone does not remove the dead residue.

Hence my priorities were always ;

Prevent the ingress of water.

Routinely remove water and contaminates from the bottom of storage, our minimum was three monthly, but more frequent for sites with a history of water ingress.

One of our oil industry  contractors was hospitalised  performing a tank dosing program for a competing company, initiated by their marketing department. He was diagnosed with damage to his central nervous system and toxicology tests identified  contact with the fuel dosing biocide.

This reinforced my dislike for dosing potions.

The hand dump pump as fitted to beta engines, with a length of copper tube on the suction, and used through the fill/ dip point would make an ideal tank sampling kit.

 

Edited March 10, 2020 by DandV
Added info about pump