Fuel additives - report

[Tony Brooks]

Background:

 

We often get questions about fuel additives and diesel bug and I often explain about the two different types of additive available. The brand name I mention may be taken as shorthand for all additives employing similar principles.

 

I had used Fuelset for about 12 years and when I sampled the bottom of the fuel tank I found no water but when RCR came across a funny waxy mousse I changed to Marine 16 as advised by RCR at the time. After a year I found water drops dispersed on the tank bottom so decided to change my additive regime to using Fuelset from first fill in spring until about mid August and then nothing until the last fill of the season when I added Marine 16. I reported all this in previous fuel additive topics.

 

Yesterday I did my annual spring "suck any water from the bottom of the tank" job and can report that there was only the merest hint of water droplets so the regime seems to be working. The fuel was nice and bright with no signs of cloudiness. As usual I extracted some hard black clumps of fluff and article like substances. I am sure this is just dirt and not bug. There was less than previous years.

 

Fuelset emulsifies water into the fuel while Marine 16 is a biocide and as far as I can see drives water out of the fuel.

 

For new boaters: the importance of keeping the fuel tank free of water is that a whole group of micro-organisms will grow in the fuel if water is present (known as fuel bug) and it can be a beast to remove. Removing any water at least once a year is in my view vital. The additive is an insurance to help keep bug away.

[Dave Payne]

So what would be the best way to remove this water from a sealed tank?

[patty-ann]

Wot gadget do u use?..Ive been looking but cannot work out how and what..well know the how I think

Thanks

[Athy]

So what would be the best way to remove this water from a sealed tank?

Well, there's a rather costly method called Fuel Polishing. Opinions on this treatment are diametrically opposed: for example Tooley's in Banbury say that it's really good for the fuel and the engine, whereas Springwood Haven reckon it's a waste of time (and, by implication, money). Both these views are from personal experience.

 

Come in, Mr. Brooks, your view would be appreciated.

[Slim]

I use my Pela oil extractor.

 

I suck out about 5 litres , can it and take it home for the garden bonfire. Does that count as domestic use????

Edited April 27, 2016 by Slim

[Athy]

I use my Pela oil extractor.

 

I suck out about 5 litres , can it and take it home for the garden bonfire. Does that count as domestic use????

Well it's not propelling anything, unless there were wee creatures asleep in the bonfire when you lit it.

[Tony Brooks]

Wot gadget do u use?..Ive been looking but cannot work out how and what..well know the how I think

Thanks

 

See Slims answer.

 

I removed the flexible black "down the dipstick hole" length of pipe and fitted an length of clear plastic and about 2 ft of thin copper pipe to suit the diameter of the plastic tube. The reason i used the plastic tube ins that the original plastic tube on the Pella is no longer clear enough to see what is coming out of the tank.

 

With most narrowboats you could put a container on the base plate and syphon from the bottom of the tank. If you do not fancy a mouth full of diesel you can buy syphon pumps for a very few pounds. Some people have added hose and pipe to the bottom of a sump oil drain pump.

 

 

 

 

Well, there's a rather costly method called Fuel Polishing. Opinions on this treatment are diametrically opposed: for example Tooley's in Banbury say that it's really good for the fuel and the engine, whereas Springwood Haven reckon it's a waste of time (and, by implication, money). Both these views are from personal experience.

 

Come in, Mr. Brooks, your view would be appreciated.

 

Personal I would rather institute procedures that minimise the risk of suffering bug so the question never arises. These include trying to keep the tank free of water (hard on boat with flush tank fillers), buying fuel form high volume outlets that will suffer more from supplying bad fuel that I would like hire fleets, trying to buy bio-free fuel wherever possible, trying to have a high fuel turnover in the tank, and finally the use of an additive. Oh - and doing my own filter changes so I can take time and see exactly what, if anything they have caught. That way I would get early warning of potential bug problems.

 

If I did get an attack of bug I hope that I would have caught it early so a course of biocide additive treatments would be sufficient. If it was a really bad attack then I would try fuel polishing from a reputable company first to include biocide treatments. If that failed I fear to would be a question of dumping the fuel, cutting the tank open and steam cleaning it, flushing the fuel lines with biocide, welding the tank back up and then keeping on with fuel additives.

 

I certainly would not have the fuel polished as routine but in hotter clime where bug growth would be faster the salt water boys seem top rate fuel polishing. It is really about using the right tools and procedures for an effective but economical job.

 

I am very sceptical about the "onboard" fuel polishing equipment being advertised. On the vast majority of engines the leak off pipe returns fuel from the injection equipment back to the tank so the fuel filter(s) will polish to a degree. I think it is vital that the feed pipe is fitted with a sedimentor AND agglomerator (this contains a filter) so if I did run minor bug problems I may well seek to get a much finer pore sized engine fuel filter and be prepared to change both filters very regularly until there were no more signs of bug but I would use a biocide as well.

 

Just because Mr Springwood has perhaps never suffered bug doe not mean there is no place for fuel polishing. We have members who have never suffered bug and who seem to take no special precautions. We have one member who suffered terribly with several attempts at fuel polishing not being effective until the bug was tested and found to be exceptionally virulent and a suitable biocide was used. These instances illustrate how personal experience can be coloured. In both examples it would appear to be fair to argue that fuel polishing is a waste of time but it will be cheaper than dumping a tank of fuel and paying for cutting and welding the tank and steam cleaning.

[dor]

I syphon out the water using a clear plastic tube cipped to a wooden rod. I do it about three times a year. I sometimes get a litre or so of water, other times virtually nothing. Also sometimes get black sludgy lumps coming over, other times nothing.

 

I've never reached the stage where the filter gets clogged. I do wonder where the water comes from and suspect the suppliers. It's not condensation in winter which is often cited as the reason.

 

So, in my experience, I would suggest syphoning out the bottom of the tank three or four times a year. Sames goes for the water trap underneath the first fuel filter.

[Athy]

Thanks for your reply, Tony. Tooley's fuel-polishing (which they did to our fuel a few years ago) is not done onboard - they have their equipment mounted on a four-wheeled trolley, the fuel is extracted from the tank and goes through the process, then the clean remaining fuel is returned from the trolley to the tank.

[Tony Brooks]

Thanks for your reply, Tony. Tooley's fuel-polishing (which they did to our fuel a few years ago) is not done onboard - they have their equipment mounted on a four-wheeled trolley, the fuel is extracted from the tank and goes through the process, then the clean remaining fuel is returned from the trolley to the tank.

 

 

That is as it should be BUT they should have gradually changed filters for ever decreasing pore size as the fuel was cleaned. If thy stuck with (say) a 30 micron filter it would not have been nay more effective than seem engine fuel filters.

 

 

I syphon out the water using a clear plastic tube cipped to a wooden rod. I do it about three times a year. I sometimes get a litre or so of water, other times virtually nothing. Also sometimes get black sludgy lumps coming over, other times nothing.

 

I've never reached the stage where the filter gets clogged. I do wonder where the water comes from and suspect the suppliers. It's not condensation in winter which is often cited as the reason.

 

So, in my experience, I would suggest syphoning out the bottom of the tank three or four times a year. Sames goes for the water trap underneath the first fuel filter.

 

 

Do you have a raised or flush deck filler fitting and how is your tank breather sited? As (Nick I think) has fund out those flush deck fittings are designed to let in water and need their seal changing annually and coating with silicon grease.

[Giant]

Fuelset emulsifies water into the fuel while Marine 16 is a biocide and as far as I can see drives water out of the fuel.

 

Interesting, I had assumed all these things were just biocides, it hadn't occured to me that they could actually be emulsifying the fuel/water mixture.

 

What do you mean by Marine 16 "driving water out of the fuel" though? Do you mean it acts as a de-emulsifier? Would that even be necessary if the fuel were not already treated with the likes of Fuelset? I thought that diesel and water normally separated pretty readily.

[dmr]

Some additives (Fuelset) "remove" water by emulsifying it. It then gets burned in the engine. Some people say this is bad as the water is still going through the injection pump and injectors.

Most other additives (like Marine16 complete) work the other way, they de-emulsify the water so it forms drops which get caught in the fuel filter/separator. I suspect with these it is wise to suck out the bottom of the tank from time to time, though this should be done anyway.

 

Advantages of this approach are that no water goes through the injectors and also you get to see how much water you have in your fuel.

 

Fuel set is a general purpose additive for petrol and diesel, whilst many additives are made specifically for diesel.

Morris Morendo, Stanadyne Performance formula and Marine16 complete (amongst others) are aimed specifically at diesel.

 

...................Dave

[bizzard]

I made myself a basic cheap polishing machine. I made it with an old 12V SU petrol pump and a filter aglomerator unit £30 ebay and linked together with plastic tubing with another from the filter unit into the bottom of the tank which I move about from time to time during the process. I also put a big funnel with a paper fuel element stuck in the bottom into the filler orifice, with the aglomerators return tube emptying into it and leave it running for an hour or so recycling. The SU pump doesn't seem to mind diesel fuel.

When in dry dock I also drain off a pint or two of fuel from the tanks drain tap whilst the boats on an even keel and not bow high so that any water should come forwards towards the tap. So far there's been no water and very little other muck come out, just a few tiny weeny specks of dirt.

I won't buy fuel from marinas during the winter but buy white derv from the garage in 20 litre cans. I don't use any additives apart from a squirt of engine fuel system cleaner now and then.

[Tony Brooks]

 

Interesting, I had assumed all these things were just biocides, it hadn't occured to me that they could actually be emulsifying the fuel/water mixture.

 

What do you mean by Marine 16 "driving water out of the fuel" though? Do you mean it acts as a de-emulsifier? Would that even be necessary if the fuel were not already treated with the likes of Fuelset? I thought that diesel and water normally separated pretty readily.

 

Not if there is a bio content in the fuel. Bio-diesel seems to be hygroscopic to a degree. Mabanaft (a German fuel wholesaler to fleets, supermarkets etc.) told me that they have to rest every batch of bio-diesel they buy because of the variable quality and water content.

 

The emulsifiers prevent bug because bug needs food and water, deny it water and it dies or can not breed.

[john6767]

 

Interesting, I had assumed all these things were just biocides, it hadn't occured to me that they could actually be emulsifying the fuel/water mixture.

 

What do you mean by Marine 16 "driving water out of the fuel" though? Do you mean it acts as a de-emulsifier? Would that even be necessary if the fuel were not already treated with the likes of Fuelset? I thought that diesel and water normally separated pretty readily.

This has been discussed on here before, my understanding from that is as follows; Fuelset is an emulsifier, Marine16 is a demulsifier. In addition I believe both are a biocide. So if you use Marine16 you should expect that there will be water in the bottom of the tank which you need to remove. With Fuelset the water should get burned off. The issue discussed before is that with biodeisel with a high water content, perhaps there can be too high a water content for Fuelset to emulsify and you could end up with "porridge". I have used both Fuelset and Marine16, at different times obviously, and there was certainly more water in the bottom of the tank when using Marine16.

[pearley]

We have 2 tanks. The conventional one across the stern has an upstand for the filler with a cap on top. I've always used Fuelset in this tank and dip it often with a water finding paste and never had any water over the 9 years of CCing since we had the boat.

 

The second tank feeds the generator and sits on the bottom plate. It is 7ft x 2ft x 8ins. We used Fuelset in this tank from new. This tank has a flush mounted filler on the gunwale. Because of its situation it is virtually impossible to dip for water. After 4 years the first filter was showing signs of black gunge but never enough to block the filter or cause any problems but as the amount started to increase we had the tank cleaned out. 18 months ago we had a major service done by the generator manufacturers but they omitted the first filter so it was about 700 hours before it was checked when I found a lot of black gunge again. At this point I stopped using Fuelset and swopped to Marine 16. I also started replacing the sealing o ring on the filler at every fill (as recommended on CWDF) So now a year on, there is still a small amount of gunge in the filter when checked every 200 hours but it is minimal.

 

I've carried on with the Fuelset in the engine tank but that is because I still had a lot in the bottle. Not made my mind up what I shall do when it runs out. Probably continue with Fuelset.

Edited April 27, 2016 by pearley

[Victor Vectis]

I think it is vital that the feed pipe is fitted with a sedimentor AND agglomerator (this contains a filter)

We have what I think is a WASP (water & sludge protection) filter on our boat between the fuel tank and the spin on fuel filter. Would this be a sedimentor and agglomerator? It has a metal bowl, ie opaque, with a drain plug. When servicing the engine I drain some diesel out and it has always been nice and clean.

I recently dipped the fuel tank with a dowel smeared with Kolor Cut (changes colour in contact with water) It looked like there was 3-4mm of water in the bottom. I'm thinking (hoping?) this isn't anything to worry about.

 

As an aside does having one of these WASP thingys mean I can extend fuel filter changes to 750 hrs?

 

And thanks Tony for starting an interesting and useful thread.

[churchward]

So what would be the best way to remove this water from a sealed tank?

Similar to Tony Brooks I check at least once a year for water on the bottom of the tank. To remove any I just use some plastic tubing taped to a stick and put this down the filler neck and syphon off as much water as I can. The tube fixed to the stick helps to be more precise where the tube is relative to the bottom of the tank. I also put Fuelset in the tank as a regular treatment. As yet I have never had any diesel bug issues.

 

One other benefit of using the fuelset I have found is that it has really cleaned up the upper cylinder and valves. A friend of mine has a Draper engine inspection camera (a sort of endoscope) and looking down into the injector hole and other places it looks very clean and free from deposits. When I first had the boat (2nd hand) we did the same and it was a bit coked up.

[dor]

 

 

That is as it should be BUT they should have gradually changed filters for ever decreasing pore size as the fuel was cleaned. If thy stuck with (say) a 30 micron filter it would not have been nay more effective than seem engine fuel filters.

 

 

 

 

Do you have a raised or flush deck filler fitting and how is your tank breather sited? As (Nick I think) has fund out those flush deck fittings are designed to let in water and need their seal changing annually and coating with silicon grease.

 

The atual filler is a typical brass one that stands up a few mm from the deck, and the deck has a small dropped section which I think is to comply with the BSS which would rather see your spilt diesel go into the canal than into your bilge.

 

However, the rubber sealing washer on the filler does tend to get a bit soft so you do have to be careful that it is seating properly and not getting squeezed up when you screw in the cap. I also renew it about once a year - they only cost pence and it does reduce the risk of leaking, i.e. letting water in through a gap. The breather is mounted on one of the rear dollies so is well clear of the deck.

[Tony Brooks]

We have what I think is a WASP (water & sludge protection) filter on our boat between the fuel tank and the spin on fuel filter. Would this be a sedimentor and agglomerator? It has a metal bowl, ie opaque, with a drain plug. When servicing the engine I drain some diesel out and it has always been nice and clean.

I recently dipped the fuel tank with a dowel smeared with Kolor Cut (changes colour in contact with water) It looked like there was 3-4mm of water in the bottom. I'm thinking (hoping?) this isn't anything to worry about.

 

As an aside does having one of these WASP thingys mean I can extend fuel filter changes to 750 hrs?

 

And thanks Tony for starting an interesting and useful thread.

 

The Wasp thing seems to be both units combined but I have doubts about the pore size in the filter/strainer part.

 

Any water in the fuel tank is an invitation for bug to grow but that does not mean that it will. My advice would be to syphon out as much as possible and then use Fuelset to remove the rest. I agree with John that mixing Fuelset with lots of water might lead o problems but have only anecdotal evidence so not really evidence at all.

 

I doubt Churchward will have any bug problems as long a she keeps using Fuelset because no water means bug struggle and die.

 

I think Pearly is doing the right thing in using Marine 16 but once the filters come out pretty much clear of black slimy stuff I would switch to my regime of Fuelset in spring and most of the summer, then nothing to clear and residue from the tank and then Marine 16 for the winter to actually kill any remaining bug. I could not easily dip my tank so I paid to have a 1.5" BSP nipple welded to the top with blanking cap. This is situated towards the back of the tank so it is easier to get at the bottom back end where the water should be as the boat trims down by the stern.

[john6767]

 

The Wasp thing seems to be both units combined but I have doubts about the pore size in the filter/strainer part.

 

Any water in the fuel tank is an invitation for bug to grow but that does not mean that it will. My advice would be to syphon out as much as possible and then use Fuelset to remove the rest. I agree with John that mixing Fuelset with lots of water might lead o problems but have only anecdotal evidence so not really evidence at all.

 

I doubt Churchward will have any bug problems as long a she keeps using Fuelset because no water means bug struggle and die.

 

I think Pearly is doing the right thing in using Marine 16 but once the filters come out pretty much clear of black slimy stuff I would switch to my regime of Fuelset in spring and most of the summer, then nothing to clear and residue from the tank and then Marine 16 for the winter to actually kill any remaining bug. I could not easily dip my tank so I paid to have a 1.5" BSP nipple welded to the top with blanking cap. This is situated towards the back of the tank so it is easier to get at the bottom back end where the water should be as the boat trims down by the stern.

Ours is a similar setup to Stuarts, WASP and then the Beta spin on filter. The WASP mesh does seem quite open I guess, but there is always a bit of crap in there, when I clean it out, did it last week. So it does seem to achieve something. I clean it out and change the spin on filter every year, so much more often then the 750 hours it is supposed to be. When we bought the boat it has done just over 750 hours and the fuel filter had not been changed, it was sprayed green from when Beta sprayed the engine, and when I changed it it was full of loose bits, I guess millscale etc from when the boat was built. The WASP was full of rubbish too. No seem a repeat of that since.

[pearley]

Tony, are you saying that those of us with Wasp filters would be better off using the paper filter-15 micron, rather than the stainless steel mesh one, which could be either 60, 100 or 300 micron.

[rustydiver]

Tony, are you saying that those of us with Wasp filters would be better off using the paper filter-15 micron, rather than the stainless steel mesh one, which could be either 60, 100 or 300 micron.

A few months ago I ordered a few filters from wasp was going to get the metal reusable ones but the man recomended the paper ones they do a better job.

I've still yet to fit them.

[cuthound]

Similar to Tony Brooks I check at least once a year for water on the bottom of the tank. To remove any I just use some plastic tubing taped to a stick and put this down the filler neck and syphon off as much water as I can. The tube fixed to the stick helps to be more precise where the tube is relative to the bottom of the tank. I also put Fuelset in the tank as a regular treatment. As yet I have never had any diesel bug issues.

 

One other benefit of using the fuelset I have found is that it has really cleaned up the upper cylinder and valves. A friend of mine has a Draper engine inspection camera (a sort of endoscope) and looking down into the injector hole and other places it looks very clean and free from deposits. When I first had the boat (2nd hand) we did the same and it was a bit coked up.

The reason for the cleaner engine is the use of biodiesel. It is quite an effective solvent for carbon. People who have run old diesels on pure bio have reported the need to change oil filters frequently until the carbon has been disolved. This is one reason why current diesel is only 7% bio, with plans to gradually increase the bio content.

[Tony Brooks]

Tony, are you saying that those of us with Wasp filters would be better off using the paper filter-15 micron, rather than the stainless steel mesh one, which could be either 60, 100 or 300 micron.

 

For the past 56 years, in fact since I joined the motor trade, commercial vehicles used a separate CAV sedimentor and agglomerator. The sedimentor took out about 80% of the water and the heavier bits of dirt while the agglomerate dealt with the rest. They were sized to do the job yet give reasonable service intervals. I have no reason to look to anything else. If the Wasp kit does the sedmenting first and then the agglomerating and has a sufficiently large filter paper area and sediment container then in my view the finer the better but its wasteful using a filter that is finer than the engine filter.

 

I have suspicions over both the capacity and filter paper area of the Wasp kit. The smaller each is the shorter the service intervals or the sooner it becomes clogged.

Edited April 27, 2016 by Tony Brooks