Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Alcohol is an inexpensive, clean and renewable fuel source.

Moderator: Site Moderator

Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

I don’t believe a thorough search of the site will get me an answer to my question. I have searched everywhere, literally, and I have found nothing. Likely a stupid question but here it goes. A small bit of background.

I have garnered a TN Alcohol Fuel Plant Permit (well I have the letter from Commish of Sept of a revenue stating they are ready to issue). I will get a federal as well, shortly, maybe, unless the answer to this question is not in my beat interest, then I quit!

TN requires immediate denaturing at exit from condenser. Period! It has been argued with state attorney and the commissioner for two months now, Commish has spoken, he says TCA Title 60 is what it is. So for my pet project, an alternative feedstock AFP with a pet engine/vehicle for Hydrous Ethanol testing….. I need to denat at the end of a worm. TN record keeping is almost nil. Follow Fed Denat rules, keep track of volume produced and used for 3 years. No more than 1000 gal for my permit level. But that goes against the Fed rules big! Fed says collect, test for proof gallons, record, denat later when the ethanol is released from plant or don’t denat and use ethanol to feed plant. Very clear.

Now—— I have to put in a vessel, 2% or greater volume of gasoline whereby the ethanol distillate enters and mixes with the denat immediately. That’s the state rule. I asked “how the hell do I quantify proof gallons before denat, if I have to denat at the worm”?? TN reply- “ not our problem”. So- maybe I’m very confused and likely so/ on the operation of a certified proof hydrometer for alcohol. I have assumed (probably bad) that any solvent or other liquid except water would alter the SG of the distillate such that proof gallon count will be altered. Granted it is only 2-3 percent—— it’s still present! Using graduated cylinders (or scales since I am in the scale business serving the AG community) to measure total volume and then use TTB approved procedure with a proof hydrometer——- well will it be accurate with 2-3% gasoline in the vessel??? I see that TTB indicates high solid testing procedure as a separate process (must remove sugars and solids by secondary distillation), but there won’t be solids.

If I added acetone to ethanol at a rate of 10% by volume, would a proof hydrometer read with accuracy? If anything but an Alcohol was added (benzene, toluene, etc) would it operate properly??

That’s the thing that I can’t wrap my head around. SG of gasoline and ethanol are fairly close (in the .7xx’s. I just envision errors. I need a good chemist here to slap me for stupid or….. confirm my assumption and break my heart. Because else, I don’t see a way to make the state happy with immediate denat and then keep the Fed happy with record keeping.

My understanding is of hydrometers wholly, I.e., comparing a liquid to water. The idea of a calibrated hydrometer gaged got a given absolute (anhydrous ethanol) working in a polluted liquid——- I’m not dumb- sept fo dis one ting—-
I’m busting a Forrest Gump on this. And that’s probably demeaning to Forrest!!

Maybe I need to look up some info on Archimedes???

Wow/ rough first post. All for a combustion engine project/AG feedstock alternative! If it takes a lesson on hydrometers as a whole, then someone smarten me up. Please??? Many thanks in advance.

I have lurked a bit for the last year as my project idea began to take shape. I have searched the forum quite a bit and yielded some great info, some alternative perspectives and seen some character in members- all a good thing.

Best.

#1 ranking noob-
Mike in Memphis.
User avatar
bilgriss
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1690
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 2:28 pm
Location: Southeast-ish.

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by bilgriss »

I don't know the answer to your question, but perhaps building a parrot into the output side of your condenser is possible. Get a reading inline without violating the specifics of a poorly written law.
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

Bilgris- Early on with the law debate I conjured this up.
But the vacuum problem, is just that, a problem. So I dismissed. I was hoping for a variance but since crimes are attached to TN regs, no variance. But as you were typing, I was banging away crying the blues..... this potential cure......came to mind. Right in line with your thoughts.


See below:

I had time this morning to do some added research and it appears, unless someone chimes in with a new perspective, Im screwed.

Proof hydrometers are exclusively for "aqueous ethanol" measurement.
AQUA= WATER, not a blend of hydrocarbons plus some water.
Thats death blow #1

Blow #2, a densitometer is cost prohibitive, even an Anton Parr used unit..... im sure calibration is just as expensive. Has the caveat of death blow #3 as below.

#3 read the TTB again for very specific wording. See below 19.709, c, 3
This wording has killed the whole venture in regards to Tennessee which is absolute BS.
Gauging prior to denaturing, period.

It appears my work is over. I would move from TN happily if I could live somewhere without issues (NC and MO??)
AR, MS are non-starters.

Anyone have an ace up the sleeve on this??
Mike

PS>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> see below as an afterthought an hour later......


Build the condenser (which may be to my advantage) with an incorporated vessel, worm soldered to a vessel -----gravity fed.
That vessel is sealed (meaning to utilize the vacuum still, it must be at same atmosphere as the balance of the still)
The vessel is valved and soldered directly to an OPEN top vessel where "DENAT" can be added (measured with precision device)
The primary vessel may even have a ternary vessel (intermediate) where a "parrot" of sorts is used to test temp/proof to keep fed happy.
Then the contents (gravity fed) flow to the final DENAT vessel, then gravity fed via valve control to a storage vessel/quantification of total volume.

This may be complicated but as I attempt to make TN happy, I find that GAS ends up in the VACUUM system if commingled too early. Having an outflow from the FAT VESSEL END of the condenser, as described above, to a DENAT at room atmosphere, rectifies the GAS VAPOR in STILL issue under vacuum. I cant boil the GAS with the ethanol by accident.

To summarize:

Worm, feeds sealed bucket (makes vacuum system happy), feeds intermediate PROOF BUCKET (room atmosphere), feeds ternary DENAT bucket (room atmosphere), outflow controlled to STORAGE. Rube Goldberg for sure but does it not satisfy the demands from both?? All buckets CANT BE DETACHED readilly.




Here is the actual from TN R&R
and also except from TN TCA 60, CH3, 103(b)



1320-7-7-.02 DENATURING.
(1) Any person or persons distilling, manufacturing or producing fuel alcohol shall denature such liquid as required by T.C.A. §60-3-103 (b).
(2) Denaturing shall consist of exposing the fuel alcohol to any substance that will render the fuel alcohol unfit for human consumption, such as unleaded gasoline, methyl isobutyl ketone or any other substance approved as a denaturing agent by the United States Treasury Department, Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms.
Authority: T.C.A. §§60-4-102 and 67-1-101. Administrative History: Repeal effective November 1, 1979. New rule filed March 21, 1986; effective June 14, 1986.


 It is unlawful for any person or persons to distill, manufacture, or otherwise produce ethyl alcohol, methane alcohol, or other liquids to be used as a fuel or to be blended as a fuel for combustion engines or heating oil systems without denaturing such liquid no later than immediately following the distilling process by providing for flow of the liquid from the condensing apparatus into a container containing a quantity of the denaturing agent.



Actually read this excerpt from my TN Dept of Rev response letter:

Tenn. Comp. R. & Regs. 1320-7-7-.02 provides that any person or persons distilling, manufacturing or producing fuel alcohol shall denature such liquid as required by Tenn. Code Ann. § 60-3-103(b). Tenn. Code Ann. § 60-3-103(b) in turn states that fuel alcohol must be denatured “no later than immediately following the distillation process” by providing for the flow of the liquid from the condensing apparatus into a container containing a quantity of the denaturing agent.



The FED KILLERS below.

§ 19.709 Gauging.

(a) Gauging equipment and methods. A proprietor of an alcohol fuel plant must perform periodic gauges of the distilled spirits and fuel alcohol at the alcohol fuel plant. The procedures for the gauging of spirits set forth in part 30 of this chapter also apply under this subpart. In addition, the following rules for the gauging of distilled spirits and fuel alcohol under this subpart also apply:

(1) The proprietor must determine the proof of spirits by using a glass cylinder, hydrometer and thermometer;

(2) The proprietor must ensure that hydrometers, thermometers, and other equipment used to determine proof, volume, or weight are accurate;

(3) The proprietor may determine the quantity of spirits or fuel alcohol either by volume or weight;

(4) To determine quantity by volume, the proprietor may use a tank or receptacle with a calibrated sight glass installed, a calibrated dipstick, conversion charts, an accurate mass flow meter, or other devices approved by the appropriate TTB officer;

(5) Unless the proprietor chooses to do so, the proprietor is not required to determine the proof of fuel alcohol manufactured, on hand, or removed; and

(6) The proprietor may account for fuel alcohol in wine gallons;

(b) Verification by TTB. TTB officers may at any time verify the accuracy of the gauging equipment used.

(c) When gauges are required. A proprietor must gauge spirits and record the results in the records required by § 19.718, at the following times:

(1) Upon completing the production of distilled spirits;

(2) On the receipt of spirits at the plant;

(3) Prior to the addition of materials to render the spirits unfit for beverage use;
StillerBoy
Master of Distillation
Posts: 3387
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:27 pm
Location: Ontario

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by StillerBoy »

Immediately, in law, has a different meaning than what you consider it to be, have you considered that..

https://www.lawinsider.com/dictionary/immediately

Mars
" I know quite certainly that I myself have no special talent. Curiosity, Obsession and dogged endurance, combined with self-criticism, have brought me to my knowledge and understanding "

– Albert Einstein
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

You are a bad, bad, bad bitty!

I shoud have studied to be a lawyer.

StillerBoy may very well have opened my eyes..... looks like the Commish is going to get another letter ...... with my agreement to state terms/final request for the AFP.

StillerBoy, that is huge. No guarantees but its aweful good at this point.


So that there is a bit more o the project... sorghum, sweet sorghum, is mathmatically tantimount to sugar cane, except sugars are easier to extract.
Its short seasoned, Ill have 60-80 days to process the crop. 1/3 nitrogen of corn, no cooking, ready to ferment upon extraction.

India, Arizona, Purdue, Nebraska State, all have come before me in this with great success. But they went BIG and didnt keep it tiny.
I believe it is NOT scalable like corn squeezings are. The economy of scale with my math is inverted. It must be kept small. Many SMALL investments with MANY small plants, spreading the energy load across many, many acres of land. Its spreads the workload, rather than multiply the demand. It also distributes the labor load. Many hands (and stills) make light work!

I have the backing (not financial, but in crop support) of the NSSPPA (National Sweet Sorghum Processors and Producers Assoc).
I have a hurdle ahead of me, to attempt to generate $1/gal ethanol. I believe I have crunched the BTU numbers for one acre of sorghum and found some really out of the box heat systems to make it happen. Small scale, only, using vacuum to reduce heat demand. Here in Memphis, heat is free. Its cooling that is the issue. I believe water circulation twin venturi vacuum pumps will generate the needed vacuum and be the throttle for the still. High reflux, continuous fed, gravity fed at all stages, with electric/photvoltaic and solar heated water and the odd duck, a rocket stove burning the bagasse from the crop (5T/acre and ready to burn in 30 days). Even if I end up spending $2/gallon, im still ahead of Methanol by 400%. since the engine does what I tell it, water content can vary greatly and be tuned around. The water is my anti-knock compound, saves me from having a gas engine using water/methanol injection. A bit of top oil conditioner to lube the fuel system and voila, low cast fuel.

My desire is to develop the still system (its more than a still, its feedstock vessels, valves, controls, heat and cooling supplies, etc) such that a farmer ( I have made friends with an awful lot of them), might be inclined to pursue a system. Red diesel is proportionately expensive....!!! As for vehicle mods, well John Deere has Ethanol conversions and has for years. Its not about hugging a tree, thats not me. I eat seals and save babies if you know what I mean. Its more the idea of maybe returning to what the US and Germany had centuries ago. Germany had alcohol Co-ops pre WW1 and Hitler as I undertsand put the final smackdown on that. Imagine a co-op location of stills under one roof with the energy to run from the sun (for the most part). You FARM your SORGHUM field in addition to your FOOD CROP (not your ethanol corn crop), you haul the crop or maybe just the juice. CO-OP refines your crop into FUEL and hands you back your fuel minus some that stays to operate the CO-OP.
The Farmers Co-op is an amazing entity that I never knew existed until I changed where I live, my career and got some exposure to FARMS!

I understand that most ethanol at home is for human consumption, that is what it is, but that could change in a heartbeat. With a crop that can produce 4x the output/acre of the best GMO corn on 1/3 the nitrogen and not rape the soil, it sure seems like the clear winner. If I burn 2500 gallons of Ethanol in my 5 Fords (I have college sons, a wife, two Rangers than need quasi-booze in the tank) a year, well thats 2500 gallons less consumption at the pump and maybe in 10 years there will be a nice ROI. Maybe others will catalyze the process/system/crop and as a consortium, make some serious progress..... not for the GOVT, not for CLEAN AIR, but to keep many of us solvent as we make 1/4 mile passes at the local drag strip. Maybe China wont sell us Methanol. Maybe Ethanol will replace drag fuel (not Nitro/meth of course) and racing will benefit from it. Lots of maybes, utopian I guess. But I like to go fast, have a need and my necessity is the mother of all my inventiveness.

Im a zealot at this point, I know. Its utopian, I know. Please let me live in my little spazzed out world.

So "immediately" and its potential for a definition in law that is contrary to what I undertsand.... oh my gosh thats huge.

Best
User avatar
HDNB
Site Mod
Posts: 7360
Joined: Mon Feb 17, 2014 10:04 am
Location: the f-f-fu frozen north

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by HDNB »

you are wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy overthinking the problem.

do what everybody else does.

lie.

keep good records that are believable. denature what you want for fuel. in the unlikely chance they want to test something, give them that.

it's not like they gonna send a revenuer over to supervise your spirits runs.

as long as your records are solid and they add up to be within the government tolerances, you be fine.
I finally quit drinking for good.

now i drink for evil.
StillerBoy
Master of Distillation
Posts: 3387
Joined: Thu Dec 01, 2016 6:27 pm
Location: Ontario

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by StillerBoy »

Corerftech wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 2:09 pm So "immediately" and its potential for a definition in law that is contrary to what I undertsand.... oh my gosh thats huge.
When dealing with status of law, you have to think in the same context..
Simple when one become aware of it, that why there are law dictionary.. stillin is very much the same, awareness of vapor behavior and what effect them..

Enjoy the learning..

Mars
" I know quite certainly that I myself have no special talent. Curiosity, Obsession and dogged endurance, combined with self-criticism, have brought me to my knowledge and understanding "

– Albert Einstein
User avatar
bilgriss
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1690
Joined: Fri Feb 05, 2016 2:28 pm
Location: Southeast-ish.

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by bilgriss »

I would begin your build "immediately".
User avatar
Ben
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1292
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:13 am
Location: Colorado

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Ben »

Corerftech wrote: Sat May 21, 2022 2:09 pm Many hands (and stills) make light work!
This is an incorrect assumption. You need to look at how an ethanol plant actually works. It is far, far more economical to make huge batches and run continuous production than it is to make small batches. In a big distillery the still does the work, in a small one its a shit ton of labor, heat loss, and inefficiency. Ethanol plant's aren't centralized because transporting crops is cheap... Read up on here about how a continuous still preheats incoming mash to start getting scope.

Using excessive amounts of energy to make fuel makes very little sense.

You also need to look at what it's actually going to cost you in real terms. Chances are good you can by e85 for a fraction of the cost of what it's going to cost you to make ethanol fuel. Sit down with the numbers.


You are also making the dilution at the spout much more difficult than it needs to be. If you were going to use a hydrometer, and you knew the percentage of the denaturing agent you just do a little math with the specific gravity of the agent and temps to figure that out. Hydrocarbons are lighter than water, so your standard hobby distillers instrumentation can be compensated. Most likely the 2% of hydrocarbon is well within the range of error on a standard PT hydrometer.
:)
cob
Master of Distillation
Posts: 2691
Joined: Sun Jul 26, 2009 4:38 pm
Location: little puffs of dust where my feet used to be

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by cob »

From your intro. "Hydrous Ethanol is the game, azeotrope in the tank"

What are you using to achieve azeotrope?
be water my friend
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

Hopefully just high reflux distillation. Azeotrope is the target but simply any Hydrous from 90% up is acceptable. The water makes the engine happy in this case. Down the road when the second and later cars are modified, that may change a dynamic but for the two test engines, I need the excess water.

Hoping that was an on point answer.
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

I googled SG math (calculating the new SG of two known liquids) and it appears that if one knows the SG of denaturant at a corrected value (corrected to say the TTB specified environment) that one can derive easily the SG of the alcohol content. It adds two error factors rather than one, meaning the denat SG reading needs correction and reading it will have an error- then doing same with the combined liquid will have a correction for temp, and a margin of reading error that will stack one way or the other.

Ultimately- will it be tolerable? It seems that if I error on the side of heavy with two parameters- then I will be excessively denatured (that’s good), and logging excessively in proof gallons (keeping me from overproducing for my permit).

Can anyone speak to the tolerance of records for proof gallons for the Fed? I know they intend to have perfection. But there is always a factor of error.

I read the above thread replies and rather than lie or other form of potential deception- even if the facts are legitimate- I’d prefer to be able to get a viable proof gallon number. And if that is by measuring precisely the SG of denat, doing volumetric math, mixing at the worm per state, finding total SG and doing math backwards- well my internal moral compass seems to be happier with that.

I appreciate the suggestion of the math by the OP. It seems like it gets the job done and I still do my do diligence.

Letter to TN Commish goes out tomorrow- regarding the legal definition of “immediately”.
It will be my last inquiry, I am moving forward for the state permit. Once in hand I’ll apply for Fed.
Seems like the Fed is more nearly automatic (more like a shall issue).

I’m reading everything posted here and absorbing/processing. Gears are tuning.
User avatar
Ben
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1292
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:13 am
Location: Colorado

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Ben »

What is the margin of error? Even if it is 10% that is 10% of a 2% correction... Unless you are going to spend some serious money on testing equipment I don't see a way around it. You can run a check and balance by passing through a parrot and keeping notes on where the ABV takeoff changes in your volumes.

Simplify your process. Run the takeoff direct to the vessel, start off by adding enough denaturant to the collection vessel to make the total volume 2% hydrocarbon. You will then always be at or over 2%. Letter of the law seems to state even your tails (lower alcohol content runnings in this case) must be denatured, even if it is going directly through to the still. Since you are making fuel you don't care if there is hydrocarbon in the boiler.
:)
drmiller100
Rumrunner
Posts: 679
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by drmiller100 »

It is a LOT easier to measure the temperature of the vapor at the condenser.
172 at sea level is as good as it gets.
Now I know how you claim azeo so easy, it's based on a meat thermometer. :lol:
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

So folks after reading your posts repeatedly, then referring back to the TN R&R and the TN code, I have a great deal of clarity.
Again, preface, not an attorney.

There are 3 parts to the code that relates to denaturing, bringing to rest in TN and distribution of fuel. Part A is bringing to rest, if I do then the fuel must meet ASTM/API standards. But, being to rest means it wasn’t in TN to start with. Careful reading has offered me clarity there. I’m not importing into TN, I’m manufacturing.

Part B is worded identical. Expect is says “manufacture”, and covers denaturing. Denaturing must “follow” distillation “immediately”. Following a process means the former has concluded to allow the next to occur. There is no mention of simultaneous or the like. It has been my distorted reading of the code that closed the door for having the worm in a bucket, and when bucket is full, dump into a vessel containing denaturant. It can’t go to a vessel B in the middle, can’t go in a shelf, etc. Frkm the catch bucket to a vessel with gas. What happens for testing from the time it drops into the bucket and it’s flow into a denat vessel is up to me (testing).

So with new vocabulary (immediate as according to the law), I now have a considerable amount of tome to weigh and proof the run. As long as the product leaves the bucket to a vessel with gas appropriately, I’m good.

I held off on my reply letter. I marinated on the wording of the code, all of your responses, etc.

In an abundance of caution (fear, trepidation, lack of experience) I really did read the code and placed into it conditions that are not actually stipulated.

My letter originally addressed two step distillation. I also for a variance to allow for a stripping run. Sorghum is perishable, I would ideally need to process 3000 gallons an acre and a fast strip would preserve the integrity of the feedstock. That was addressed in my Commissioner’s reply. That would be a misdemeanor.

Someone did mention distilling with hydrocarbons present not being a problem. In theory I could two step if denat occurred in the first stage. But it would just be better if the still was two stage to start. A stripper run very hot and fast, maybe feeding a tall column.

Since I haven’t done anything but acquire stainless parts and material for fabrication, and I have no basis for building anything more than a fairly simple still—— I should learn to crawl before I attempt to sprint a 100 yard dash.

Just wanted to thank all of your for your replies as they have caused me to stop reading the code with sunglasses on. Planting my sorghum test plot on Saturday this weekend. It will likely be just to produce seed stock this season but I’ll be set with several acres of seed for the following season.
User avatar
Ben
Site Donor
Site Donor
Posts: 1292
Joined: Mon Oct 05, 2020 6:13 am
Location: Colorado

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Ben »

It would behoove you to research packed columns, and continuous columns. For instance a Bokabob is inexpensive to build and will give you very high proof of of a single run. It may not be the end all for your program, but would be a great place to start learning. Using a pot still for fuel making is going to mean running the product through many times to drive the proof to where you need it.
:)
User avatar
Yummyrum
Global moderator
Posts: 7653
Joined: Sat Jul 06, 2013 2:23 am
Location: Fraser Coast QLD Aussie

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Yummyrum »

Have you considered how much energy is going to be required to process 3000gal ? Distilling is a very energy sucking process .
To process 200litres of wash for a resultant 12litres of drinking product costs me approx $75 AUD in propane .
If I wasn’t doing cuts , I could end up with closer to 15or more litres . So that is costing me approximately $5/ Litre AUD in Gas . I can buy a litre of petrol fir around $2/L

Processing 200litres of wash to 95% ABV also takes me around 2000litres of water which needs to cool before it can be reused .

Batch distilling is going to be an energy nightmare for you .
You need to seriously consider at minimum , a continuous stripping still . They significantly reduce both water and heating requirements .

Can you burn the Sorgam waste ? I know of ar least one Sugar refinery around here that runs the while factory on burning the waste baggase . It also produces enough excess electricity to run the local town of around 50
houses .

So perhaps you could look at a small steam generator that will deal with your waste and offset if not supply enough energy to run the process
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

Below is to be read giving you folks the utmost of respect. It is not to be taken as an offense.
Please?

Maybe some missed the part in an early thread: vacuum distillation with alternative far out of the box heat sources. Just want to refresh that.

Bagasse output is 5T per acre. That’s 10,000 lbs of combustible material and bagasse has a predictable BTU yield that is far in excess of what the still needs. At 29 inches of vacuum, the 95 degree continuous day and night heat here in Memphis TN will provide nearly all the BTUs. It will NOT provide condenser and aggregation vessel cooling to prevent the-vaporization of distillate having left the condenser hopefully near azeotrope. There is a plan. I said several energy sources and it will take several sources to accomplish the low cast production that is anticipated.

Capitalization cost will be high- if one looks at it as a venture that is exclusive; Meaning each dollar is only assigned to the fuel project. I have the unique opportunity to move from my City home to a farm in the next 4 months. Increasing my acreage from little to 20 acres. This is forthcoming. I have the ability to put some home sale proceeds (gains) into a solar farm, both water and photovoltaic.

Considering that the demand for electricity is only during the last quarter of the year for Sweet Sorghum and for distillation (and arguably the hottest and sunniest), the energy systems become subsidized by life itself for 9 months of the year. One has to crunch the numbers for a 3 month production burst, not an annual process that never ends. Production volume is limited by energy window and crop viability. If I can’t open the energy window far enough, then my production will not be substantial. The vacuum is the key to energy reduction.

The proposed still will run almost exclusively on vacuum and vacuum will be the primary throttle for vaporization. An electrical term I spend much time with is “biasing”. Quiescent point is more accurate. This is hypothetical and I’m prepared for failure. It’s my money and time and land, burn it all in failure is my choice, but maybe I’ll have some fun doing it, right?

Biasing based on the daily ambient air temp of the vacuum depth will produce a specific temp/vac depth that will maintain vaporization. I understand that the gap between water and alcohol boiling point closes as atmosphere drops. I believe that at my ambient air temps, there will still be enough GAP to separate the fluids efficiently. So vacuum is the boiler. The second control is external heat. That heat will offer boiling point control number 2. It will incentivize the process. Control 3 is formed by the bias point temp (the air temp for the day) and that is the condenser temp. Active cooling of condenser water, dephlem water, aggregation vessel with temperature controls- not just cool tap water- offers executive control. Cold costs money. So in actuality the cold part is the hardest bit of energy to come up with. A solar field that is modest will run a refrigeration compressor easily.
I am looking for a 50 degree offset from ambient air temp at the surface of the compressor heat exchanger.

This is a non-issue. 95-50 is 45 degrees That is well above freezing. Literally all the heat removal can be accomplished by a 2 ton system AND a compressor of no larger size than is on your car in your garage.

All factors are flexible and controlled, vacuum, secondary heat, condenser temp, aggregate vessel temp.

If you only consider a single factor still: heat control- then it’s a failure. If you only live within earths atmospheric pressure,it fails. If you only accept a chiller water temp of tap water, then it fails. If you only assume that you can’t coproduce a waste energy to feed the still, then it fails. If you only accept cap costs not subsidized by the synergy of plant and home systems, then it fails.

If you use corn- it’s dead! If you use sugar——- or anything else except sugar cane and sorghum- it’s dead.

I have not just glanced at this project and based on anecdotal evidence and five minutes of calculation, decided that the project has merit.

You may ask how does the fermented feedstock get to the center of the continuous column? Gravity. I can’t pump it. But the initial thought is pump and pumps cost money in hardware and energy. In a vacuum system all nodes must be at the same atmospheric pressure or —- it doesn’t work. The whole damn system boils. Therefore just a vacuum won’t work, not will just heat, but a three point control system offers the remedy. Steady state vacuum with variable heat and cool zones- that’s the ticket!

There is a vessel that is the boiler that drives the “added heat” at base of the tall reflex column. That boiler under operation will begin to fill with water as feedstock is successfully evaporating alcohol off correct? As the vessel fills, it’s mass internally rises creating for an ever greater need for btu to boil the contents to generate the column heat. How does the vessel stay at a static water level to keep a more ideal volume in the boiler? An overflow vessel, also under vacuum equalization is the answer. This is a complicated assembly since it has 4 active components to manage, not just HEAT!

The “burner” in whatever form is chosen is always heating like you’re hot water heater. Mine is 80 gallons. The overflow is my shower head. Inbound water is the water that is lost from the column. 30 plates in the column should fairly effectively separate the water to reasonable purity by the time is has made its way to the boiler vessel so that alcohol is not being lost in the overflow output. Overflow to keep the boiler homeostatic simply runs over slowly into a vacuum vessel by gravity. I mention this to shed light on BTU reduction efforts. Potentially- the overflow, now heated, could be used to preheat the feedstock flow——- potentially- maybe not effectively. Anyway-

I didn’t mention the fourth control for the process: the feedstock valve. How fast stock is Fed to the Column. It also allows me to inhibit/cease operation as does the vacuum depth control. And if I really got stupid with parts and space, a vacuum reservoir can be maintained. I don’t need to wait for vacuum, I can overproduce and store, cheaply. Sounds an awful lot like the intake manifold on a car, LOL.

Heat sources as follows:
Heat exchanger used to preheat feedstock with solar water heater and potentially provide the primary “day time” heat source, per the solar engineers in New York.
Photovoltaic for immersion elements and vacuum pump water pump (paralleled Venturi type, not roots or vane type industrial direct driven)
Bagasse burner (rocket mass heat type), direct fired. It is illegal in Tennessee to utilize a boiler that is bagasse fired. The EPA has some rules as of 2016, cost prohibitive as well, unless I rube Goldberg some crap together to make a boiler myself. Why bother.

Cooling and heating alternative:
A good friend of mine is Dan Esslinger from Esslinger engineering. One of my ethanol test engines is a Ford 2,3L Lima engine. As I calculated BTUs needed I realized that the entire system could be supported by 2L of internal combustion engine. Based on gasoline and it’s energy value, a cast iron head Lima at an ideal RPM of 850 will produce in 20 minutes preheat time- all the waste energy I need for a compact system (hence my prior statements of limited scale).

I won’t bother with injector flow, HP output, torque at 850 rpm, AC and alternator system outputs at same rpm- suffice to say that a 2.3 Lima will produce the following:

Preheat
Direct boiler heat
Circulation pump for hot side
Refrigeration (2 Ton)
DC immersion heater current
Vac pump circulation pump current
Condenser coolant circulation

What did I miss?

The engine is efficient enough to reduce cost at $5.00/gallon of gasoline- to operate at $3.50/hour under my conditions.

How many gallons can I produce an hour? There is the question! How big is the still answers that and as big as I have capacity to heat and evacuate is really the true answer.

That’s cheaper than the TVA KWHs at .17/per and rising that I need to do it all- in any still-or with propane, natural gas, etc.

I have 3 Limas available for service.
Once the plant produces the ethanol, hypothetically it can run on its own fuel but a real recovery ratio would need to be found to prove that. Plus 35 percent high fuel flow will be needed to generate the BTUs and the engine rpm will rise to raise temps due to alcohol latent heat capacity. The engine will need flow restrictions to assist it in being “less efficient”.
Dan Esslinger has been doing the opposite for almost 50 years. This is not a big deal.

So for heat/energy: There are a number of hypothetical sources that Green Plains Energy in Rivers, TN can’t use, that I can. Obscure- yes. Ridiculous- likely.
Viable???? I think that most people consider “stuff” and attempt to do so working inside a box with typical constraints. How many of you are willing to go buy a farm (presuming you don’t already have one), to facilitate your endeavor? How many would spend $40k on a solar array? How many have the space and time to build a small building on that farm to house a running engine to perform still processing? How many have the capacity to pull an engine install a programmable efi system, build new fuel/air maps for AFRs at 20:1 where the engine runs so lean that it tends to overheat (helpful when you have excessive cooling!!!). How many will weld up two alternator brackets for the engine so that you can get 1200w of DC at idle and invest in 200A alternators? How about meet with the solar water engineers in NY to ascertain how many SQ feet of solar water array are needed, number of production hours, thermal output?

I have yet to produce a quart of ironed much less alcohol so it’s ALLLLL conjecture. Fantasy!

What I just typed is a far cry from “I’ll build a still and make some ethanol like everyone else does”. There seems to be a persistence of folks to put a concept in a box because that’s where it has always been.

I have a unique opportunity to move, farm as I have always desired, have property to go pull a trigger and make meat as I have always desired, use my California and now Tennessee capital gains to provide an interest free capital source to build an ecosystem of energy devices that work separately and in concert, to keep me warm, cool, showering nice and hot, cooking, seeing in the dark, watching TV, running my R&D vacuum tube electronics lab, my machine shop mill, lathe, surface grinder, tug torch. Etc——- and

Maybe keep me in enough ethanol fuel to feed the turbo Ford projects.

Please don’t take the above as an “we offended him” NOR “ he thinks he has all the answers” Folks I don’t know crap!!! Definitely not- I just wanted to truncate the obligatory “have you considered” questions, which NEED to be stated- so that some of the obvious ones don’t get reiterated too frequently.

I don’t mean to stir a pot.

I’m all ears and eyes. The above is a seemingly insane amalgam of Rube Goldberg engineering and it is! Patently insane. But does it have merit? A four layer control system using energy that is mostly from the sun. I don’t need enough ethanol to sell, give away, etc. just enough to do a quality burnout, and then a potent 1/8 mile pass a few times on a weekend. And maybe enough to affect a conversion of an older Ford gas tractor to ethanol! The reward is not necessarily (stated prior) in doing it perfect or uniquely or cheaply. There are others on earth that may see some
Concept and helpful and maybe do a NEW THING and the end result is someone else has grand success.

Since the cost per gallon seems to be the issue (cost per gal of ethanol that is)…..

If methanol is $8.00/gal and racing fuel is $12-14/gallon…… how much savings is required for me to come out on top? If my pump E85 is only 50% ethanol (and it is and highly variable), I’d rather waste all my free time Making a gallon of fuel than I would spend $5.00 buying someone else’s.
I’m just that stupid.

I designed an amplifier that at its power stage requires 700+!VAC Peak to Peak of signal to drive it to full power. That’s SIGNAL not output power!
Why would I do such a thing, when the same tube can put out full power at 24VAC peak to peak? Why complicate something that for the last 100 years has been the foundation of all ( and I mean ALL) deigns??

An exponential performance gain. And because for the last 100 years, sage wise folks said “it’s simply not possible” and won’t sound good! It does sound good- exceedingly good. It took 7 years to see the amp design to come to fruition in it’s complete conceptual format. It took WORK.

I’m always up for a challenge. Odds are clearly against me on this endeavor. But still my simple mind can’t let go of a 2400 Lb 1987 OBS turbo V8 Ford Ranger that exemplifies an alternative fuel, made at home, from a crop that is ignored, and produces wins at the trap??? I guess my EGO needs feeding. How many other competitors will simply pour more VP fuel in their tank from a $1000/ barrel drum …… and I just get another couple of mason jars out?? That would be a hillbilly site to see!

Lunatic fringe Mike in Memphis
drmiller100
Rumrunner
Posts: 679
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by drmiller100 »

Vacuum lowers the temperature but doesn't lower the energy required to distill.
Latent heat of vaporization of water is what you are fighting with a batch still. It takes a LOT of energy to boil a gallon of water.
Continuous is much cheaper. With continuous you use the energy to boil some water which releases the alcohol out of the wash. Much cheaper
Now I know how you claim azeo so easy, it's based on a meat thermometer. :lol:
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

Drmiller100,

Please expound on the concept of “vacuum lowers temp but doesn’t reduce energy required”, please?

If a substance boils at room temperature, say 70 degrees….. in a vacuum of X depth…..and the room and apparatus are equalized at room temp, how does extra energy appear necessary? If the vacuum is pulled below the vapor point, to maintain vaporization, at the room temp, where does the extra energy need arise?

Ignore the energy required to pull the vacuum, assume it is free and exclusive of the operation.

Where is heat/energy needed, For just the vaporization of the substance? If you prefer to use a water example, feel free.

I’ll use an example:
HVAC refrigerant lines are vacuum drawn to prevent latent water (humidity) in the lines from forming an acid when in presence of the refrigerant. A deep vacuum is drawn, water boils and is vacuumed out of the line via the pump. Line is effectively completely dry. If one was to cool the exiting atmosphere a fair margin below the vapor point at vacuum X the water would return to a liquid state as condensate.That may require substantial cooling but nonetheless, it would condensate.

No energy is added to the system at any time. Just the ambient line temperature maintains a rolling boil in the line until evacuated.

Please reply.
drmiller100
Rumrunner
Posts: 679
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by drmiller100 »

It takes a given amount of energy to raise the temperature 1 degree. Using water, and I'm old, let's call it a btu per pound of water per degree Fahrenheit.
So for a gallon of water is 8 pounds. To go from 70 to 190 is 120 degrees times 8 pounds is 960 btus

So now your wash is up to temp. How much steam does it make? Almost none. How much distillation is happening. Exactly none.

Now is when the work starts. You have to CONTINUE to add hear to get the liquid water to convert to steam. How much? A lot!!!

The measure of energy of turning liquid to steam is the latent heat of vaporization. Google shows us that is 970 btus per pound.
970 times 8 pounds is 7760 btus.

Back to your vacuum example. Yes you don't have to heat up the beer. But you do have to boil the beer.

Put a vacuum to the room temperature beer and the beer will boil a bit but the system will get cold and quit boiling. You can absolutely add heat by blowing room temperature air on it. A LOT of air.

I believe many rv air conditioner units are about 3000 watts. A very small home ac system is 5000 watts.
A window unit is 2000 watts. We are talking something like one of these. Not a fan blowing gently across the top of the bucket
Now I know how you claim azeo so easy, it's based on a meat thermometer. :lol:
User avatar
LWTCS
Site Mod
Posts: 12836
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: North Palm Beach

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by LWTCS »

In other words (especially if time is a metric of efficiency), the energy needed to vaporize a quantity of 10% beer remains the same no matter what system is being used. Notwithstanding heat loss inefficiency that is.

Can use a tool that requires less energy to function, but that does not change the energy needed to do the actual job from point A to point B.
Trample the injured and hurdle the dead.
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

I did some investigation on some terms and now understand that:
Latent heat of vaporization is NOT pressure dependent, it is constant regardless of pressure.
Pressure simply changes the point of phase change to one that is more convenient for a process.
Thank you for the physics lesson, genuinely.

The sun will have to do all the work for me with this understanding, potentially multiple solar methods.
User avatar
LWTCS
Site Mod
Posts: 12836
Joined: Mon Jan 26, 2009 6:04 pm
Location: North Palm Beach

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by LWTCS »

Corerftech wrote: Mon May 30, 2022 3:51 pm I did some investigation on some terms and now understand that:
Latent heat of vaporization is NOT pressure dependent, it is constant regardless of pressure.
Pressure simply changes the point of phase change to one that is more convenient for a process.
Thank you for the physics lesson, genuinely.

The sun will have to do all the work for me with this understanding, potentially multiple solar methods.
Ok cool.
So you really are on the tip of the spear here since this is not a fuel forum.

We as spirits enthusiasts (not speaking for everyone here) often get caught up with older technology because it represents a degree of authenticity with respect to spirits production. And it works.
Also, big fuel has been privy to ALL of the cutting edge technology for as long as big fuel has been a thing.
My outfit came up with a thing not long ago and we thought it was a new thing. We did the discovery on it and turns out big fuel already locked it down in 1937. Guess we weren't as smart as we thought we were.

Also, everything we do here is predicated upon flavor.
There are some pretty smart people here that have been focused in one direction really.
If you need to use the forum as a sounding board, that's fine. But please don't dismiss or become inpatient with anyone's point of view since this place is not really what you actually need.

I'd say let the geezers here marinate on what you're doing and see if they can add anything beyond what a real fuel forum would otherwise provide.

Anywho, best of luck.
Trample the injured and hurdle the dead.
drmiller100
Rumrunner
Posts: 679
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by drmiller100 »

Corerftech wrote: Mon May 30, 2022 3:51 pm I did some investigation on some terms and now understand that:
Latent heat of vaporization is NOT pressure dependent, it is constant regardless of pressure.
Pressure simply changes the point of phase change to one that is more convenient for a process.
Thank you for the physics lesson, genuinely.

The sun will have to do all the work for me with this understanding, potentially multiple solar methods.
Thank you for hearing me. I'm glad I was able to help.

Distillation is simple, except it isn't. If you are going to do fuel I really recommend you look at continuous distillation.

My design is talked about in this subforum and I'd be happy to help you build one. With my design I cheat and get around the lhov of water.

2 kwh per gallon of etoh.
Now I know how you claim azeo so easy, it's based on a meat thermometer. :lol:
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

LWCTS:
No attitude from me. I really did not know about pressure and vapor point in vacuum.
The only way to present my understanding (which was wrong), was to present my understanding and an example.
It was wrong. So, I am listening to all response, with an open (and empty as it may be) mind.

Somehow solar PV and water have to come through for the heat input. The sun must do the work in this case, or most of it.
Its already doing it in the feedstock, I need it to work for the boiler as well.

drmiller100, for sure on the continuous still.
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

So TN has begun issuing my permit. This weekend I need to apply for Fed permit.

I was asking about swimming pool as a condenser colant pond prior, but I did a search and there are many confirmations of suitabiity for that purpose. Anybody that read the pool questions, disregard!

On the subject of my first still to take baby steps with…. I see most still have a vertical boiler in line with the column. Is there an issue (to save height) with utilizing a horizontal tank (think short fat hot dog) with a bit of up angle end to end so that an immersion heater element could be end fed and stay immersed it’s entire length? Or be wood fired (in part) for that matter? Would a horizontal tank cause some vapor issue? It might get me two feet taller on the column without making the still overall taller.

I’d tig an elbow of greater than 90 degrees so that the elbow would give a completely vertical column.

I think I can find a surplus 25 gallon SS oblong tank to serve as a boiler, cheaply, rather than a vertical like a beer keg shaped boiler. It would give me more surface area to heat as well. But intentions are to have the column attached at the end not in the middle of the boiler.

I have collected a nice supply of food plant sanitary stainless pipe with flanges, gaskets, taps, etc. some mandrel elbows. Some is 4 inch, most is 2 inch and then 1.5.

Hoping from that 25 feet or so I can cobble a packed column of generous height above some boiler, preferred to be horizontal.
drmiller100
Rumrunner
Posts: 679
Joined: Wed Mar 11, 2009 9:13 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by drmiller100 »

Surface area of the boiler water is meaningless. For a given Wattage, or btu, you get a given rate of vaporization.

If you are running a reflux pot still then make your boiler any shape you want and have a pipe off it for the steam.

For continuous it only has to be deep enough the heating element never gets uncovered.

I would strongly encourage you to start electric. A STEADY heat source is VERY important for any kind of reflux still.
Now I know how you claim azeo so easy, it's based on a meat thermometer. :lol:
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

Drmiller100

I have reviewed the still you have vetted, described and drawn. It all makes sense, fully.
I don’t care about theoretical efficiency. I’ll take your word that you get the output with input factors that you state. At least it’s a starting point.

A few questions:

Your still appears to have a linear boiler section (I believe 3 inch due to bending issues).
Is there an advantage to having a narrow linear boiler rather than a larger boiler (I have a stainless steel water type fire extinguisher body that I was planning on welding a triclamp flange/reducer of 6 inch to 3 inch). It need not be operated full, and has the ability to have the discharge port added at any height. It will also take a direct wood fire very well (I’d like to experiment after electric success is had with a rocket stove burner). I envision feeding the heating element into the base of the fire extinguisher boiler nearly parallel with the length of the tank. The tank might sit at a similar angle to your boiler section simply to save height and that would give the element adequate coverage longitudinally, offer a tripling of boiler surface area for vaporization to occur, allow me to layer place a burner of one form or another and heat the length of the boiler tank rather than the 6 inch bottom diameter. Save some height too. It would hold significantly more water than your and I expect that infringes on heat efficiency as I’ll be heating more water than maybe absolutely necessary. Maybe the extinguisher becomes the overflow instead—— need to use that fire extinguisher for something other than putting out a fire! LOL
That’s Q 1.

Q2: I have a section of 4 inch SS tube in hand, 3 foot. I can adapt it to the boiler above and add a 6 inch to 4 reducer flange so that the boiler is serviceable and the 4 inch stripper section is as well. Is 4 inch too much? I have 36 inches of clean thin wall SS/4” to work with. Is 36 inch too short for just the stripper section??

Q3: I have in hand, about 20 feet of 1.75 ID SS and some 1.25 ID. I also have about 38 inch of flanged 2.75 ID. Is there an issue with narrowing the rectifier from 4inch to 3 (2.75 actual ID)inch? So 6 inch boiler tank @ (24 inch tall) which gives a broader surface area to emit vapor/heat), then at the top of the 3 foot/ 4 inch stripper, add the 3 inch rectifier? Or see alternative Q#5

Q4: thermal insulation of the stripper and the boiler? Any harm in conserving energy? There will still be a gradient in stripper especially at 3 feet (or 6 feet if both sections are stacked) so natural reflux will occur from the gradient. I have lots of rock wool available to insulate at least the boiler and the stripper if it will help.

Q5: I see a loss of heat and more internal friction/lower vapor speed if the column is split into two pieces (height savings attempt, although maybe not needed!)

So with that said, if the boiler gets the 3 foot/4” stripper (and the beer was injected at the TOP of the semi-packed stripper column), could/would the system operate similar in performance IF the rectifier column was adjacent (not in series vertically), center Fed (fairly massive height, maybe 6 feet) by an insulated stainless hard pipe interconnect?
I.e., Charles 803 (think that’s the right name), except instead of a boiler pumping into the column, the stripper/boiler combo is pumping sideways into a second separate column.

So basically- a high speed stripper running in continuous Fed fashion, feeding a passive rectifier, with a similar effluent basin and also having an overflow?

Or maybe this-
Primary boiler with 4-5kw element under the stripper column, top fed. An overflow pipe from boiler to overflow basin sending boiling waste to a second vessel at base of the rectifier, offset in height so that gravity keeps both vessels at operable levels, then a tertiary overflow for the second vessel (actual waste).


This (in my crude simpleton thinking without any experience) would keep the heat from heater elements in play feeding the stripper, the rectifier, and then the beer preheat exchanger (installed in the tertiary vessel).

That would give every bit of alcohol two opportunities to be extracted.

Last question:
Secret valve??? Will you identify the secret valve?
It seems since I am wanting to use sorghum juice fermented ( will have considerable fine solids even if sieved multiple times), a gate valve would be best. They flow better and are easier to relieve a blockage while in circuit by opening fully, then closing.

This is R&D and costs must be kept low. Nothing “patent” until proven. Use junk to cobble a prototype.

So as to not break the bank, I must limit my investment by using as much salvage and surplus parts as possible. I have access to SS tube at $1/lb. most common is 2 (1.75 actual)

Even if the system only strips fast (faster than I can recitify), that’s OK. Time and patience will allow me to observe the operation, learn how to tune variables and controls, and see what material I need to optimize the rectifier.

I believe my Stash of Materials has enough to make copper condenser coils of very significant length, a really excellent condenser, the heat exchanger, the boiler (I have a second fire Ex available on a phone call).

I TIG so flanges on Amazon are cheap and assembly is tinkertoys.

I don’t want to put myself in a box by changing diameters or being limited in height. My neighbors will likely watch, I will be permitted so there is no secrecy concerns. But I do need a starting place that is cost effective and I have a bit of material that might get me started without severe wasted effort.

Many thanks in advance for your time.

I’ll draw a diagram and post shortly showing the idea of a main boiler, use of the overflow as a secondary heat source for the rectifier, cascaded to the final true overflow vessel.

Typed while on break at work and edited later and still likely to have problems!
Corerftech
Novice
Posts: 30
Joined: Fri May 20, 2022 4:57 pm

Re: Specific Gravity, proof gallon quantification of ethanol/gas blends, will it work??

Post by Corerftech »

So the water levels are poorly drawn but suffice to say they will be arranged so that the order of flow and level is appropriate. Also the interconnect between the boiler and passive radiator (seemed like an appropriate name for it) would be intimately short to ensure lowest heat loss. Basically conjoined at a specific angle and part of a “structure” for the whole system. The third waste vessel might be best used for the preheat coils which could be pretty huge in surface area. If heat is good for the second column, then retention is mandatory. Preheat wouldn’t start until the passive rad vessel was overflowing with nearly full boiling water.

I am not an artist! If it was a schematic it would be vastly better.

PID will control boiler, I like using PID for everything. Lead pots, my heat treat kiln for casing gun parts, everything that gets hot!

I’d like to employ two added thermocouples at top of columns to be able to chart temps. May help return to a quiescent point faster of visualize a lack somewhere. I’d add more later too, never can have too much data.
66DD5641-E3E3-4727-A68F-920A9C415CB6.jpeg
Post Reply