Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #331   Report Post  
Steven Shelikoff
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump

Rich,

I appreciate that you seem to be an expert on filtering theory even
though you also seem to lack the practical experience of actually using
the TP or PT depth filters we're talking about. I realize you don't
think they work. Even so, I'd love to hear your expert opinion
(absolutely no sarcasm intened) on why my Racor 2uM filter has lasted so
long (2 years now and still not clogged) after installing a TP prefilter
when I completely clogged two of the same filters in 20 minutes each
before installing the TP prefilter.

Steve
  #332   Report Post  
Doug Dotson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump

Steve,

I like your system. It seems like a reasonable approach. One thing
I would like to be able to do is polish one tank while using the
other though. One point that Rich makes is that a recirc system can move
fuel much faster due to the the large effective pore size of the
depth filter. Placing a 2 uM filter after the TP filter does negate that
advantage. I was planning on doing exactly that as well because the
TP filter would seem to be susseptable to shedding. It sounds from
your experience that is not the case. Perhaps there is a little bit of
shedding
right at the beginning but anything shed would be quickly removed on
a subsequent pass or by the engine filters.

Doug

"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Rich,

I appreciate that you seem to be an expert on filtering theory even
though you also seem to lack the practical experience of actually using
the TP or PT depth filters we're talking about. I realize you don't
think they work. Even so, I'd love to hear your expert opinion
(absolutely no sarcasm intened) on why my Racor 2uM filter has lasted so
long (2 years now and still not clogged) after installing a TP prefilter
when I completely clogged two of the same filters in 20 minutes each
before installing the TP prefilter.

Steve



  #333   Report Post  
Doug Dotson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump

Steve,

I like your system. It seems like a reasonable approach. One thing
I would like to be able to do is polish one tank while using the
other though. One point that Rich makes is that a recirc system can move
fuel much faster due to the the large effective pore size of the
depth filter. Placing a 2 uM filter after the TP filter does negate that
advantage. I was planning on doing exactly that as well because the
TP filter would seem to be susseptable to shedding. It sounds from
your experience that is not the case. Perhaps there is a little bit of
shedding
right at the beginning but anything shed would be quickly removed on
a subsequent pass or by the engine filters.

Doug

"Steven Shelikoff" wrote in message
...
Rich,

I appreciate that you seem to be an expert on filtering theory even
though you also seem to lack the practical experience of actually using
the TP or PT depth filters we're talking about. I realize you don't
think they work. Even so, I'd love to hear your expert opinion
(absolutely no sarcasm intened) on why my Racor 2uM filter has lasted so
long (2 years now and still not clogged) after installing a TP prefilter
when I completely clogged two of the same filters in 20 minutes each
before installing the TP prefilter.

Steve



  #334   Report Post  
Doug Dotson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump


"LaBomba182" wrote in message
...
Subject: Fuel transfer/polishing pump
From: "Doug Dotson"


It never fails in a thread that lasts this long that the personal insults
start appearing. You haven't offered all that much useful anyway so
won't miss the lack of any further contributions from you.


That's an interesting take, considering you're the one who first implied

that I
had been drinking while responding to you.


I would say that you failed to take my comment in the spirit
that it was intended, that being a joke.

It seems you can't take a joke.


Seems that you can't either.

Not to mention your poor reading in context skills.


We all make mistakes. It was a mistake that you made that
led to this sillyness. I just tried to make light of your mistake.

As to useful information put forth, same to you. :-)


I started this thread to gather information.

Good luck with your "polishing" system.


Thanks. I think it will work well.

Capt. Bill









  #335   Report Post  
Doug Dotson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump


"LaBomba182" wrote in message
...
Subject: Fuel transfer/polishing pump
From: "Doug Dotson"


It never fails in a thread that lasts this long that the personal insults
start appearing. You haven't offered all that much useful anyway so
won't miss the lack of any further contributions from you.


That's an interesting take, considering you're the one who first implied

that I
had been drinking while responding to you.


I would say that you failed to take my comment in the spirit
that it was intended, that being a joke.

It seems you can't take a joke.


Seems that you can't either.

Not to mention your poor reading in context skills.


We all make mistakes. It was a mistake that you made that
led to this sillyness. I just tried to make light of your mistake.

As to useful information put forth, same to you. :-)


I started this thread to gather information.

Good luck with your "polishing" system.


Thanks. I think it will work well.

Capt. Bill











  #336   Report Post  
Rich Hampel
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump

You are correct !!!
Most folks dont realize that a filter isnt a 'screen door' .... it
can pass particulate LARGER than the 'rating'.
:-)

In article , Steven Shelikoff
wrote:

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 05:28:01 GMT, Rich Hampel
wrote:

In article , Steven Shelikoff
wrote:
Why not just always leave the polishing system in-line? Allow for a
bypass to change a filter or if it develops a vacuum leak, but other
then that, there's nothing wrong with always using "just polished" fuel.


My 'read' from your statment is that perhaps you miss the functional
point of a recirculation filtration system - which is using a filter of
LARGE pore/rentention size to eventually wind up with a fluid with very
few very small particles.

A recirc filter only removes a paltry few percent of the 'target' size
particles (for example 5% of 2uM particles.). A large pore size filter
will have very little resistance to flow, will have more permeability
(open space), will have more ultimate 'dirt capacity'. If you pass the
fluid 20 times through the filter, you will remove approximately a
value approaching 100% of the target particles. With the same pump, a
LARGE filter is be able to pass a LARGE volume very quickly, whereas
2uM filter will take longer (due to resistance to flow - pump slows
down or starts to slip and fluid begins to bypass the vanes, etc. ).


Actually, I do understand that it's best to recirculate fuel many times
through the polishing system. That is what I do. But the engine has to
draw fuel from somewhere and I don't see why it's not better to draw
fuel from the outlet of the polishing system and always leave it on
while the engine is running (most of the flow from the system goes back
to the tank to be recirculated anyway) then to draw fuel directly from
the tank. Doing it this way allows for the most fuel passes through the
polishing system since it's running more often and because you get that
"one last time through" that you wouldn't get if you draw from the tank.

For single pass filtration (and without knowing the particle size
distribution) one typically needs a prefilter of the same surface area
(or dirt capacity) that is 5 times the size of the final filter.
eg.: 10uM followed by 2uM, where the prefilter is used to prolong the
life of the final filter. This is somewhat simplistic. When you
design a filtration system with a prefilter or multistage prefilters
one typically attempts to make ALL the filters fail at the exact same
time - so maximum debris is removed and the cost of change is minimized
- and you dont throw away filters that still have some capture ability
left in them.


Well, since we're talking about a polishing system and not single pass
filtration, the above may not be applicable. But for a recirculating
polishing system on our own boat where we do the filter changes
ourselves, to make it most cost effective I'd design it not so that all
of the filters fail at the exact same time but that the cost of
filtering of each stage in a multistage system is the same. That is, if
your second stage filter element costs 10x the first stage filter
element I'd want that second stage element to last 10x longer before it
needs to be replaced to be as cost effective.

If you monitor each stage with independent vacuum gauges you won't be
throwing away filters that still have some capture ability left in them.

Steve

  #337   Report Post  
Rich Hampel
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump

You are correct !!!
Most folks dont realize that a filter isnt a 'screen door' .... it
can pass particulate LARGER than the 'rating'.
:-)

In article , Steven Shelikoff
wrote:

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 05:28:01 GMT, Rich Hampel
wrote:

In article , Steven Shelikoff
wrote:
Why not just always leave the polishing system in-line? Allow for a
bypass to change a filter or if it develops a vacuum leak, but other
then that, there's nothing wrong with always using "just polished" fuel.


My 'read' from your statment is that perhaps you miss the functional
point of a recirculation filtration system - which is using a filter of
LARGE pore/rentention size to eventually wind up with a fluid with very
few very small particles.

A recirc filter only removes a paltry few percent of the 'target' size
particles (for example 5% of 2uM particles.). A large pore size filter
will have very little resistance to flow, will have more permeability
(open space), will have more ultimate 'dirt capacity'. If you pass the
fluid 20 times through the filter, you will remove approximately a
value approaching 100% of the target particles. With the same pump, a
LARGE filter is be able to pass a LARGE volume very quickly, whereas
2uM filter will take longer (due to resistance to flow - pump slows
down or starts to slip and fluid begins to bypass the vanes, etc. ).


Actually, I do understand that it's best to recirculate fuel many times
through the polishing system. That is what I do. But the engine has to
draw fuel from somewhere and I don't see why it's not better to draw
fuel from the outlet of the polishing system and always leave it on
while the engine is running (most of the flow from the system goes back
to the tank to be recirculated anyway) then to draw fuel directly from
the tank. Doing it this way allows for the most fuel passes through the
polishing system since it's running more often and because you get that
"one last time through" that you wouldn't get if you draw from the tank.

For single pass filtration (and without knowing the particle size
distribution) one typically needs a prefilter of the same surface area
(or dirt capacity) that is 5 times the size of the final filter.
eg.: 10uM followed by 2uM, where the prefilter is used to prolong the
life of the final filter. This is somewhat simplistic. When you
design a filtration system with a prefilter or multistage prefilters
one typically attempts to make ALL the filters fail at the exact same
time - so maximum debris is removed and the cost of change is minimized
- and you dont throw away filters that still have some capture ability
left in them.


Well, since we're talking about a polishing system and not single pass
filtration, the above may not be applicable. But for a recirculating
polishing system on our own boat where we do the filter changes
ourselves, to make it most cost effective I'd design it not so that all
of the filters fail at the exact same time but that the cost of
filtering of each stage in a multistage system is the same. That is, if
your second stage filter element costs 10x the first stage filter
element I'd want that second stage element to last 10x longer before it
needs to be replaced to be as cost effective.

If you monitor each stage with independent vacuum gauges you won't be
throwing away filters that still have some capture ability left in them.

Steve

  #338   Report Post  
Doug Dotson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump

Rich,

What do you recommend for a depth filter rather then the TP ot PT
filters?

Doug

"Rich Hampel" wrote in message
...
You are correct !!!
Most folks dont realize that a filter isnt a 'screen door' .... it
can pass particulate LARGER than the 'rating'.
:-)

In article , Steven Shelikoff
wrote:

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 05:28:01 GMT, Rich Hampel
wrote:

In article , Steven Shelikoff
wrote:
Why not just always leave the polishing system in-line? Allow for a
bypass to change a filter or if it develops a vacuum leak, but other
then that, there's nothing wrong with always using "just polished"

fuel.

My 'read' from your statment is that perhaps you miss the functional
point of a recirculation filtration system - which is using a filter of
LARGE pore/rentention size to eventually wind up with a fluid with very
few very small particles.

A recirc filter only removes a paltry few percent of the 'target' size
particles (for example 5% of 2uM particles.). A large pore size filter
will have very little resistance to flow, will have more permeability
(open space), will have more ultimate 'dirt capacity'. If you pass the
fluid 20 times through the filter, you will remove approximately a
value approaching 100% of the target particles. With the same pump, a
LARGE filter is be able to pass a LARGE volume very quickly, whereas
2uM filter will take longer (due to resistance to flow - pump slows
down or starts to slip and fluid begins to bypass the vanes, etc. ).


Actually, I do understand that it's best to recirculate fuel many times
through the polishing system. That is what I do. But the engine has to
draw fuel from somewhere and I don't see why it's not better to draw
fuel from the outlet of the polishing system and always leave it on
while the engine is running (most of the flow from the system goes back
to the tank to be recirculated anyway) then to draw fuel directly from
the tank. Doing it this way allows for the most fuel passes through the
polishing system since it's running more often and because you get that
"one last time through" that you wouldn't get if you draw from the tank.

For single pass filtration (and without knowing the particle size
distribution) one typically needs a prefilter of the same surface area
(or dirt capacity) that is 5 times the size of the final filter.
eg.: 10uM followed by 2uM, where the prefilter is used to prolong the
life of the final filter. This is somewhat simplistic. When you
design a filtration system with a prefilter or multistage prefilters
one typically attempts to make ALL the filters fail at the exact same
time - so maximum debris is removed and the cost of change is minimized
- and you dont throw away filters that still have some capture ability
left in them.


Well, since we're talking about a polishing system and not single pass
filtration, the above may not be applicable. But for a recirculating
polishing system on our own boat where we do the filter changes
ourselves, to make it most cost effective I'd design it not so that all
of the filters fail at the exact same time but that the cost of
filtering of each stage in a multistage system is the same. That is, if
your second stage filter element costs 10x the first stage filter
element I'd want that second stage element to last 10x longer before it
needs to be replaced to be as cost effective.

If you monitor each stage with independent vacuum gauges you won't be
throwing away filters that still have some capture ability left in them.

Steve



  #339   Report Post  
Doug Dotson
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump

Rich,

What do you recommend for a depth filter rather then the TP ot PT
filters?

Doug

"Rich Hampel" wrote in message
...
You are correct !!!
Most folks dont realize that a filter isnt a 'screen door' .... it
can pass particulate LARGER than the 'rating'.
:-)

In article , Steven Shelikoff
wrote:

On Fri, 05 Dec 2003 05:28:01 GMT, Rich Hampel
wrote:

In article , Steven Shelikoff
wrote:
Why not just always leave the polishing system in-line? Allow for a
bypass to change a filter or if it develops a vacuum leak, but other
then that, there's nothing wrong with always using "just polished"

fuel.

My 'read' from your statment is that perhaps you miss the functional
point of a recirculation filtration system - which is using a filter of
LARGE pore/rentention size to eventually wind up with a fluid with very
few very small particles.

A recirc filter only removes a paltry few percent of the 'target' size
particles (for example 5% of 2uM particles.). A large pore size filter
will have very little resistance to flow, will have more permeability
(open space), will have more ultimate 'dirt capacity'. If you pass the
fluid 20 times through the filter, you will remove approximately a
value approaching 100% of the target particles. With the same pump, a
LARGE filter is be able to pass a LARGE volume very quickly, whereas
2uM filter will take longer (due to resistance to flow - pump slows
down or starts to slip and fluid begins to bypass the vanes, etc. ).


Actually, I do understand that it's best to recirculate fuel many times
through the polishing system. That is what I do. But the engine has to
draw fuel from somewhere and I don't see why it's not better to draw
fuel from the outlet of the polishing system and always leave it on
while the engine is running (most of the flow from the system goes back
to the tank to be recirculated anyway) then to draw fuel directly from
the tank. Doing it this way allows for the most fuel passes through the
polishing system since it's running more often and because you get that
"one last time through" that you wouldn't get if you draw from the tank.

For single pass filtration (and without knowing the particle size
distribution) one typically needs a prefilter of the same surface area
(or dirt capacity) that is 5 times the size of the final filter.
eg.: 10uM followed by 2uM, where the prefilter is used to prolong the
life of the final filter. This is somewhat simplistic. When you
design a filtration system with a prefilter or multistage prefilters
one typically attempts to make ALL the filters fail at the exact same
time - so maximum debris is removed and the cost of change is minimized
- and you dont throw away filters that still have some capture ability
left in them.


Well, since we're talking about a polishing system and not single pass
filtration, the above may not be applicable. But for a recirculating
polishing system on our own boat where we do the filter changes
ourselves, to make it most cost effective I'd design it not so that all
of the filters fail at the exact same time but that the cost of
filtering of each stage in a multistage system is the same. That is, if
your second stage filter element costs 10x the first stage filter
element I'd want that second stage element to last 10x longer before it
needs to be replaced to be as cost effective.

If you monitor each stage with independent vacuum gauges you won't be
throwing away filters that still have some capture ability left in them.

Steve



  #340   Report Post  
Rich Hampel
 
Posts: n/a
Default Fuel transfer/polishing pump

Please appreciate that I dont want to appear to be an arrogant
know-it-all after being in on and aroud critical filtration/separation
most of mworking life ... and yet give just enough information that
each can take and arrive a result that is based on current or
state-of-the-art results.

ANY filter media (including compressed pubic hair) thats used in a
recirculation polishing system will work ... its all a matter of
degree. Whats wrong with TP, etc. is that the material used to filter
is not bonded, can digest (make more particles) in the presence of
water --- thus to do the exact opposite of what you are trying to do.
If doesnt matter if rust, bacteria or broken up toilet paper fibers
blocks the final filter to your engine... expecially during an
emergency. Unbonded cellulose is notorious for unloading particles or
allowing the particles to migrate through the filter .... OK if the
main system is not drawing fuel thats OK as the recirculating slurry
will probably be recaptured; but, if all hell breaks loose and you have
a high fuel demand at the time when the TP decides to unload itself or
its already trapped debris .... the whole system can catastrophically
fail ....

My objection to TP - very poor efficiency, migrates particles, migrates
fibers, unloads at increasing differential pressure, larger first cost
due to need for larger diameter housing, no constancy of retention,
knife edge seals of 'cartridge' - very limited in retention and VERY
prone to bypass. Short life due to low surface area. TP will '
deform' - wrinkle into a smaller mass when heavily laden and
differential pressure is high (remember those knife edge seals) then
unload and bypass.

As far as experience ..... the high tech/high purity industry used such
devices for many years: loose fiberglass, Kotex pads, string wound
cylinders, TP, chopped cellulose ....... until after WWII the world
started using captured German technology: membranes, cartridges, etc.
If TP were any good, industry would still be using it. The last such
system I personally replaced/upgraded was in the mid 70s. ..... as a
cost cutting measure!!!!!

DO NOT depend on filters to remove the crud in your system. If they
plug it means that you are contaminated and need to clean your fuel
system. Such plugging clearly indicates a **symptom**, the filters
prevented the symptom from becoming an extremis situation. If your
system is plugging filters, they did do their job as they are supposed
to .... but now go back in and clean the system! Resident particles
form and agglomerate into more particles. Bacterial scums feed other
bacteria, etc. Your symptoms of plugging filters means your system is
contaminated.... a filtration system is a band-aid or a 'condom' to
prevent stoppage. Consider to thoroughly mechanically CLEAN the tank.


;-)

In article , Steven Shelikoff
wrote:

Rich,

I appreciate that you seem to be an expert on filtering theory even
though you also seem to lack the practical experience of actually using
the TP or PT depth filters we're talking about. I realize you don't
think they work. Even so, I'd love to hear your expert opinion
(absolutely no sarcasm intened) on why my Racor 2uM filter has lasted so
long (2 years now and still not clogged) after installing a TP prefilter
when I completely clogged two of the same filters in 20 minutes each
before installing the TP prefilter.

Steve

Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Problem changing out my fuel pump Derek General 2 July 3rd 04 01:50 PM
Engine dies- Putters when trying to plane- engine under under heavy load Bora Cider General 4 May 18th 04 04:12 PM
Can a single 72 gal per hour fuel pump run two 392 cu inch motors? Scott Downey General 4 October 19th 03 09:28 PM
Inboard won't run above 2800 RPM John M Murphy General 2 August 18th 03 05:27 PM
Fuel pump to carbs fuel line replacement Bob General 5 July 29th 03 05:51 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:42 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017