On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 07:40:38 -0500, Vic Smith
wrote:

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 08:06:46 -0400, "Roger Long"
wrote:


"Larry" wrote

Distilled water has none of these problems. What I can't figure out,
especially on power yachts, is why all that waste engine heat going up
the stacks isn't running engine-room-mounted distillers for fresh water
to drink.

You are spot on with this comment. When I was working at Woods Hole, in the
days before reverse osmosis, they had an engineer who knew how to tweak the
waste heat vacuum distillation units to the point that they got a gallon of
fresh water for every gallon of fuel burned; that's after the fuel had
pushed the ship or made electricity.

Take a look at the power draw for a reverse osmosis unit and then figure out
how much "fresh water" you have to carry in the form of fuel.

It a size/expense issue as much as anything else. Navy boilers
commonly used "economizers" to preheat boiler feed water, but
they were fairly massive units sitting in the stacks.
Evaporators aren't exactly mini me's either.
I think a look at the heat exchangers used to provide heated water
might give some idea on what's involved.
Heck, you already don't have space to use your engine crank.
It sure would be fun to tinker with. For a sailboat I'd probably look
at rain collectors, solar stills, and bottled water first.
I've sometimes wondered why IC engine designers haven't yet come
up with an engine that can't better utilize the BTU's in the fuel
instead of throwing it away via heat. Think of those millions of
engines out there wasting all of that energy from radiators, hoses,
heads and blocks.

The only distillation unit I've seen was one that used the engine to
heat the water also used the engine to drive a vacuum pump to lower
the pressure in the distillation chamber. and I suspect that is how
you would have to do it on a smallish boat. I wasn't primarily
responsible for maintenance on the damned thing but got lumbered with
working on it as I seemed to be the only one at the site that would
admit to understanding its theory of operation. Either I was the only
smart one or the only dumb one (for admitting I understood the beast).
When I left the project water was still a problem at that site.





Bruce in Bangkok
(brucepaigeATgmailDOTcom)

That is consistent with what I observed. The units were about the size of a
25 KW generator and required a lot of understanding and tweaking to function
properly. The reason it came to my notice was everyone's amazement that the
engineer was able to get more water out than even the manufacturer
(DeLaval?) thought possible.

This wouldn't be a current option unless someone were to produce a scaled
down unit for trawler yacht size boats. Even larger craft have gone largely
to reverse osmosis because they are less troublesome to run and manage.

--
Roger Long

"Roger Long" wrote in news:46cc4cf3$0$18928
:

Even larger craft have gone largely
to reverse osmosis because they are less troublesome to run and manage.



You can tell the Love Boat industry has gone to RO because of the number of
people who have been poisoned drinking it.



Larry
--

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 18:42:08 +0000, Larry wrote:

"Roger Long" wrote in news:46cc4cf3$0$18928
:

Even larger craft have gone largely
to reverse osmosis because they are less troublesome to run and manage.



You can tell the Love Boat industry has gone to RO because of the number of
people who have been poisoned drinking it.



Larry

Not necessarily so Larry, We had 3, 3,000 gal/day R.O units on oil
production barges in the Java sea for about 5 years. While I agree
that they require maintenance they were far easier to maintain then
the exhaust heater and vacuum chamber distillation plant I maintained
in Irian Jaya.

The installations we had were commercial units with detailed operation
manuals. We simply followed the schedule for back flushing and
cleaning the membranes and they produced drinkable water for the
entire period we used them. We know that as we took weekly samples
from the tanks and had them laboratory tested as part of our
contractual obligations with the client.

On the other hand, people who either don't know, or don't care what
equipment they have and how to maintain it shouldn't use it.


Bruce in Bangkok
(brucepaigeATgmailDOTcom)

wrote in news:8fqpc31amu1btj9jpfltdtuoo244e4b94h@
4ax.com:

We simply followed the schedule for back flushing and
cleaning the membranes and they produced drinkable water for the
entire period we used them. We know that as we took weekly samples
from the tanks and had them laboratory tested as part of our
contractual obligations with the client.


Wouldn't it be fun to try to look at the lab reports on RO water from a
cruise ship that's in port just long enough to pickup supplies and the next
load of suckers for the craps tables.

Larry
--

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 02:18:33 +0000, Larry wrote:

wrote in news:8fqpc31amu1btj9jpfltdtuoo244e4b94h@
4ax.com:

We simply followed the schedule for back flushing and
cleaning the membranes and they produced drinkable water for the
entire period we used them. We know that as we took weekly samples
from the tanks and had them laboratory tested as part of our
contractual obligations with the client.


Wouldn't it be fun to try to look at the lab reports on RO water from a
cruise ship that's in port just long enough to pickup supplies and the next
load of suckers for the craps tables.

Larry

Yes, it might well be enlightening. We did the lab testing because we
had to do it and report the results to ARCO on a weekly basis. One
assumes that they had some water problems in the past.

Another point was they we were 50 - 60 miles off shore and took our
water from roughly the depth of the barge. i.e., the intakes were in
the bottom of the one of the tanks so were feeding the thing with the
cleanest water available to us.

Interestingly the only major problem we had with the units, other then
sucking up a load of oily water before we moved the intakes, were the
seals in the high pressure pumps which were made in England. But as we
had a coupl;e of guys who crew changed to the U.K. we just had them
hand carry a bunch of seals back every time they returned from break.

By the way, I have a mate who is into the distilling business,
although he distills a mixture of sugar and water:-). What kind of
still are you using? A simple pot still or a reflux unit?


Bruce in Bangkok
(brucepaigeATgmailDOTcom)

On Thu, 23 Aug 2007 11:37:10 +0700, wrote:

although he distills a mixture of sugar and water:-). What kind of
still are you using? A simple pot still or a reflux unit?

Does yeast figure into this anywhere?

Casady

wrote in news:133qc3hf5f01d6al3o2io0j2ubvt81lu36@
4ax.com:

By the way, I have a mate who is into the distilling business,
although he distills a mixture of sugar and water:-). What kind of
still are you using? A simple pot still or a reflux unit?



http://www.waterwise.com/productcart...p?idproduct=24

a gift from a friend who bought a bigger one:

http://www.waterwise.com/productcart...p?idcategory=3
&idproduct=23

I was using a ceramic pot distiller someone had turned into a thrift shop
I'd bought for $5 because noone knew what it was for. I still have it
but it isn't near as efficient as this Waterwise countertop unit. The
lab one will distill continuously as it hooks to the sink faucet with a
special aeriator that has a fitting on it to seal the hose to and makes
about 12 gallons a day, if you need that much. It distills directly into
my 6" carbon column setting on top of a 5 gallon water jug for unattended
operation. But, it loses so much heat from its ceramic pot and I gave up
trying to insulate it for more efficiency after my friend gave me this
countertop unit which, other than the condenser fan outlet, hardly loses
any heat at all.

My friend got the biggest one, which runs itself in his garage, all
plumbed in to keep its exhaust heat out of his house in HOT South
Carolina. I makes water until its full, then shuts down until you use it
nearly up, with automatic feed like my lab unit has. It also runs on
220VAC with lots more power.

Larry
--