High Sierra 2500;1560080; said:
No. Have you?
It is stupid to think that the oil makes the pump wear faster.
Hmmm - I guess to you - "oil is oil" and it's all the same. Good thinking, do you dump deep-fry oil into your crankcase? That sounds pretty silly to me. Either you are ill-informed, or your grasp of knowledge greatly exceeds mine and I simply cannot comprehend all this.
I have worked on several injection pumps that failed after longterm use of heated and filtered deep-fry oil from Mcdonalds et al. I know people that were running on waste oil back in the 1960s in Mercedes cars. Later pumps I've worked on with waste-oil use include one from a 6.2 GM, two from 7.3 Fords, one Diesel Kiki, and several from Bosch VE rotaries on Volkswagens. But, I can say the same for pumps run on pump-diesel. My first-hand experiences with such things are not scientific - since there are no "controls" involved. I cannot verify actual miles, fuel quality, etc.
"Word of mouth" about such things is often interesting and useless at the same time. Few people using watse oil and driving diesels know much about the internals of their injection pumps or the actual chemical content of the fuel being used. I worked as a pump rebuilder and a diesel mechanic for close to 40 years - and there's lots I don't know. That's why, to a degree, I rely on scientific testing done by large agencies. Yeah, they often have their own agenda and fudge things a bit - but there are some things they cannot lie about.
I don't know where you get your waste-oil - but I suspect you have little control over it's content. McDonalds is in the process now of changing their deep-fry oil chemical content. It is better of worse? Are you read up on it? Many types of bio-oils are better for lubrication than standard pump diesel - e.g. rapeseeds, soy, canola, etc. So, when someone talks about the pros and cons about any type of SVO, you have to know exactly what sort of blend is being discussed. Some SVO blends are very good and better for pump life than pump diesel-fuel. And others are terrible. Stanadyne is coming up with fuel additives - to put into low-sulfur pump diesel - made from bio-deriviatives e.g. rapeseed and soy.
Again - of all the pump designs - rotaries are the most intolerant to alternative fuels in regard to wear. That is an undisputed fact and easily verified. But, in regard to Stanadyne, they've had many problems with thin or certain low-sulfur diesel fuels right from the pump. The SVO thing is in addition to all that. I don't consider it a problem worth worrying about - since I do all my own repair work. And, even for someone that might have to buy a rebuilt pump every 100K - it's not necessarily a big deal. There is cost-savings potential for using waste-oil depending on how it's done and used. But, many times there is no savings at all - in the long run.
Here's a piece of an article about the postive benefits of some types of bio-additives - much of this from Stanadyne Corp.
.. "In the Stanadyne White paper on diesel fuels, it reports that "problems with increased wear have been encountered in both countries (Sweden and Canada). Wholesale introduction of the low sulphur fuel in Sweden had disastrous effects on diesel engine operation and resulted in a crisis situation for Swedish refiners and a European rotary fuel pump manufacturer. Swedish refiners are now using additives to prevent excess wear in fuel injection systems and their problems are apparently under control. Certain major Canadian refining companies are adding lubricants before delivering fuels to the customer."(11)
Fuel injection manufacturers have adopted the use of the High Frequency Reciprocating Rig (HFRR) to test the lubricating properties of diesel and have recommended that all diesel fuel meet a minimum limit of 460 micron maximum Wear Scar Diameter (WSD). For the HFRR test, a lower scar measurement indicates better lubricity in the fuel.
Stanadyne Automotive Corporation, one of America’s largest fuel injection manufacturers, has been testing Bio-diesel at varying concentrations as a fuel additive in both Number 1 diesel (kerosene) and Number 2 diesel (fuel manufactured to meet the 500ppm maximum sulphur content).
Their test results showed that for Number 1 diesel (kerosene) the addition of 2% bio-diesel reduced the HFRR wear scar diameter to 355 microns while the addition of 1% bio-diesel to Number 2 diesel, reduced the wear scar diameter to 321 microns.
Based on the HFRR tests conducted by Stanadyne, they issued the following statement.
"…we have tested bio-diesel at Stanadyne and results indicate that the inclusion of 2% bio-diesel into any convention diesel fuel will be sufficient to address the lubricity concerns that we have with these existing diesel fuels. From our standpoint, inclusion of bio-diesel is desirable for two reasons. First it would eliminate the inherent variability associated with the use of other additives and wether sufficient additive was used to make the fuel fully lubricious. Second, we consider bio-diesel a fuel or a fuel component-not an additive…Thus if more bio-diesel is added than required to increase lubricity, there will not be the adverse consequences that might be seen if other lubricity additives are dosed at too high a rate."
As we move from low sulphur diesel to ultra low sulphur diesel (which has a maximum sulphur content of 15ppm), the quality of diesel fuel will worsen, and all that will be necessary to counteract the associated problems is to elevate the level of bio-diesel.(12)
A recent research project funded by the Saskatchewan Canola development Corporation, to evaluate the efficiency of commercial and vegetable based lubricity additives found that Canola Methyl Esters (CME) and a Canola Oil Derivative (COD) preformed the best in these lubricity tests. The CME’s were effective at treatment rates as low as 0.1% (1000ppm) and were shown to be very cost effective.
The project concluded that, "The application of Canola based lubricity additives in both unadditized and commercial low sulphur diesel fuels has been shown effective in reducing engine wear by as much as one-half, thereby potentially doubling diesel engine life. Fuel economy gains of up to 13% have also been recorded… The engine wear reductions and fuel economy improvements appear to be directly related to diesel fuel lubricity.
Based on these encouraging research results, it is concluded that the Canola lubricity additives could extend diesel engine life and fuel economy when applied in hydro treated, low sulphur diesel fuels. It would seem prudent for refiners to more thoroughly investigate, and seriously consider the production and introduction of these effective Canola based lubricity additives to their future mid-distillate fuels."(13)
(11) Stanadyne White Paper on diesel fuel. Low Sulphur Diesel requires Additives to Preserve Fuel Lubricity
(13) Hertz, B. Extending Diesel Engine Life And Fuel Economy With Canola Based Fuel Additives. University of Saskatchewan.
(17) Advanced Combustion Research for Energy from Vegetable Oils, project FAIR-CT95-0627
(18) Beggs, R E. 1997. Renewable oil fuels and diesel engines as components of a sustainable system design. BES, University of Waterloo