Photos of combustion chambers & injectors from 2 engines running WMO

[oddshot]

For what its worth.

Recently, I have been disassembling a LDT 465 to determine the cause of its broken cam shaft. Interestingly, this engine has been run for one year on a WMO blend. I have determined that this camshaft failed due to worn cam bearing and that its fuel did not enter into the failure at all. For more information about this camshaft failure please go to: http://www.steelsoldiers.com/showthread.php?130913-LDT-465-Multifuel-Andy3-s-Broken-Camshaft



Since I had it apart, I took pictures of the combustion chambers and the injectors. I also tested the break pressures and spray patterns of the injectors, both before and after rebuilding them. I thought that those using WMO might be interested in them.

Andy3's engine was built by White in 2-84. Andy3's M35A2 is a 1971 and has about 54,000 miles on it at the time of the failure, obviously this is a replacement engine but there is no way to determine the number of hours on it. There are NO rebuild tags on it, and, so far, I do not see any signs of anyone having been inside this engine. The inside of this engine is VERY clean, it appears to have had frequent oil changes and so far I find no sign of abuse, harsh treatment or evidence of overheating. Andy reports that the engine had been running well at the time of the failure.

Andy has told me, "I had the motor for almost a year. The highest I have run is up to 25% D2 with the balance being WMO and gas at a 80/20 blend filtered to 3 microns. The owner before me used to change the oil and pour it directly into the tank.". Andy also reports that the engine had been running well and strong until the cam failed. Andy will answer any other questions posted about his engine.

Therefore, these pictures show components from an engine with an indicated 54,000 miles that has been run for one year on a WMO blend, also having a history of SOME previous WMO fuel use. The swirl chambers on the pistons are black with use, but have no crusty build up. The cylinder heads DO show some crusty build up, but, based on my experience, I find the amount to be consistent with an engine having been operated 54,000 miles. There IS some build up in the holes the injectors feed into but not to the point that the delivery of fuel was impaired and much less than I expected to see.

 

[oddshot]

Attached to this post are photos of the injectors from Andy's engine.

The crust seen on the injectors has been untouched.

After I removed and photographed them, I set these injectors in a pop tester to check their spray pattern and break pressure. Despite the crust on the tip, all of these injectors gave good spray patterns. The break pressures ranged from about 2,000 to 2,800 psi.

These injectors cleaned up very nicely and all adjusted to 3,100 psi with no problems.

 

[oddshot]

Second engine

My own truck is a bobbed M35a2, built in 1968 by American General. It has a Continental engine in it. The truck has tags indicating it was reconditioned in 1990. This engine has a rebuild tag on it indicating it was rebuilt in 1990. When I purchased this truck, it had an indicated 13,876 miles on it, and its condition was consistent with the miles indicated.

I purchased this truck 3 years ago and have put over 14,000 miles on it. This truck is my daily driver. Since the purchase I have run this truck ONLY on various WMO blends. I have never put a full tank of diesel fuel in it. The WMO I have been getting is a real mixed, gungy bag of various petroleum products, from old motor oil to gear lube, REAL old gasoline ... you name it.

I am VERY careful about de-watering, filtering and blending my fuel. I use filter bags and go down to 5 microns. I do not (yet) have a centrifuge.

This truck has always started and run well. I am averaging between 8 and (high) 9 MPG's on a blend of about 80% WMO to 20% Jet A or pump gas. I live in the hilly country of north Georgia. When I run this truck on the flat interstates, the mpg's go up to just over 10 mpg.

I have modified this truck with the addition of a lightweight plastic cooling fan from Summit, and also with de-splined front hubs. My truck is running on 9.00x20 tires; I expect that the mpg's will go up after I switch to 11.00x20's. I will be very interested to know how the mpg's are impacted after I clean, rebuild and adjust these injectors (and adjust the valves).

Below are photos of the injectors from my own M35A2.

Because I have caught a nasty cold, I have not put these injectors on the pop tester. As soon as I do, I will update this post.

 

[RAYZER]

I've been driving my deuce tractor for 3 years (about 15,000 miles) on wmo mix and sometimes high concentrates of clean synthetic wmo, everything pre filtered to 3 microns.
When we pulled the heads at the Ga Rally this year for the head gasket job, the combination chambers looked simular to Andys although my injectors weren't near as crusty as the ones in your photos.
I recently pulled my injectors to have them tested and to my surprise they ALL went off at 3500psi with no leakage, all were in good shape with no ware (this engine had low mileage when I bought the truck).
I do have the fuel turned up and take some long distance trips pulling a 10,000 lb trailer and often pushing to redline so I may be running higher exsaust temperatures than Andy, this may explain less fouling on my injector tips.

 

[oddshot]

Ray, thanks for the info.

What kind of MPG's you getting?

Any modifications that might help the mileage?

 

[SCSG-G4]

Andy's pistons all but last one show some valve impingment. I wonder if that was a cause or an effect of the wear in the front?

 

[RAYZER]

Ray, thanks for the info.

What kind of MPG's you getting?

Any modifications that might help the mileage?

Had been geting around 7 miles per gallon pulling the trailer, not sure about around town.
I just installed an lds IP, that increased performance but haven't had the chance to check fuel economy.

 

[Beyond Biodiesel]

Thanks oddshot and others for your input. Knowing whether these engines had turbos will help a great deal, because in the reports that I have read from people claiming to burn WMO without trouble, the presence of a turbo, and direct injection, seems to make all of the difference.

 

[RAYZER]

Mine has a turbo.

 

[andy3]

My truck runs a C turbo. Oddshot & Rayzer thank you for the in-depth followup. Beyond Biodiesel, I have learned SOOOOOO much from your posts.

Thanks oddshot and others for your input. Knowing whether these engines had turbos will help a great deal, because in the reports that I have read from people claiming to burn WMO without trouble, the presence of a turbo, and direct injection, seems to make all of the difference.

 

[Terrh]

Maybe a little off topic since it's different but whatever, you guys might like the knowledge.

I've put over 100k miles on my '99 F250 Superduty 7.3L powerstroke truck running various WMO blends - everything from 95% WMO and 5% gasoline to straight diesel. I've put several thousand gallons of WMO through it. I tend to stay away from gear and hydraulic oils since they make the truck smoke and smell nasty. Clean synthetic WMO and WATF are by far the best fuels, especially when cut with a little bit of diesel or gasoline.

My brother has the truck now, it is running a little rough but I think it's a wiring issue, we're going to look at it this winter since he decided to park it for the winter and drive a 4x4 instead. It's got just shy of 400k miles on it now.

 

[Beyond Biodiesel]

Mine has a turbo.

Thanks, RAYZER, that is useful information

My truck runs a C turbo. Oddshot & Rayzer thank you for the in-depth followup. Beyond Biodiesel, I have learned SOOOOOO much from your posts.

I am glad I could help

Maybe a little off topic since it's different but whatever, you guys might like the knowledge.

I've put over 100k miles on my '99 F250 Superduty 7.3L powerstroke truck running various WMO blends - everything from 95% WMO and 5% gasoline to straight diesel. I've put several thousand gallons of WMO through it. I tend to stay away from gear and hydraulic oils since they make the truck smoke and smell nasty. Clean synthetic WMO and WATF are by far the best fuels, especially when cut with a little bit of diesel or gasoline.

My brother has the truck now, it is running a little rough but I think it's a wiring issue, we're going to look at it this winter since he decided to park it for the winter and drive a 4x4 instead. It's got just shy of 400k miles on it now.

Thanks, Terrh, this is useful information. Most of the people who I have read of running WMO for long periods of time with little trouble happened to be doing it on a 7.3L PSD. I do not happen to believe that there is any magic in the PSD design, other than it is a direct injected turbo diesel.

So, the Multifuel engine should run waste oil blends just fine, maybe even better than most engines, especially as long as it has a turbo. I have been running WVO-gasoline (80-20) blends in my deuce since I bought it a year ago. The engine seems to run year round on it just fine. I just started it on my fuel on a cold day, and the engine needed some long cranking to start, plus the manifold heater, but started and idled fine.

On the other hand, the crust on the injectors that oddshot posted above suggest that there is some coking from running WMO, but the engine breakdown suggests the coking is minimal, and does not cause a problem for the engine. However, I am concerned that increased ash due to burning WMO may cause increased engine wear.

 

[andy3]

I have a friend that is an SS member that services large generators. He will go out and do a PM on a CNG 1MW generator with 5-10 hours since last oil change of. These things do not produce soot. The oil looks just like new. I am hoping above all hope he can continue to get that stuff. The oil has been thru so few heat/oxidation cycles, no soot, minimal contamination and I would expect not acidic.

 

[gimpyrobb]

So, the Multifuel engine should run waste oil blends just fine, maybe even better than most engines, especially as long as it has a turbo. I have been running WVO-gasoline (80-20) blends in my deuce since I bought it a year ago. The engine seems to run year round on it just fine. I just started it on my fuel on a cold day, and the engine needed some long cranking to start, plus the manifold heater, but started and idled fine.

On the other hand, the crust on the injectors that oddshot posted above suggest that there is some coking from running WMO, but the engine breakdown suggests the coking is minimal, and does not cause a problem for the engine. However, I am concerned that increased ash due to burning WMO may cause increased engine wear.

That is not quite right. I have had both, turbo(m35) and non turbo trucks(m109). Both ran used oils just fine. It has been stated the used oils will wear your injection pump.

 

[RAYZER]

However, I am concerned that increased ash due to burning WMO may cause increased engine wear.

This has always been the speculation.
It seems that "IF" the increased ash in the wmo causes increased engine wear, it would be to the cylinder walls, rings, valve guides,hydraulic head plunger and mating surfaces, and injector tip internal machined plunger surfaces.
On the other hand, any of the engine internal bearing surfaces shouldn't be affected because they're not coming in direct contact with the wmo, although some small amount of extra ash will wind up In the crankcase oil just as it does when burning #2.
So, it would make sense that if exsessive wear was going to take place it would show up first in the fuel system IE the injection pump and injectors.
Now, after running various blends of filtered wmo for 3 years, I just replaced my injection pump due to an issue that I haven't figured out yet, but my injectors were all fine, in fact perfect.
So,Is 3 years and 15,000 of burning wmo blend as fuel enough time to cause exsessive wear?
Was my injection pump issue due to burning wmo? I don't know.
Did wmo have anything to do with my blown head gasket? maybe, but I don't think so.
Is the secret to burning some wmo as fuel "proper filtering" before dumping it into the fuel tank? Yes!

Disclaimer:I'm not a scientist and your results may vary.

 

[RAYZER]

I have a friend that is an SS member that services large generators. He will go out and do a PM on a CNG 1MW generator with 5-10 hours since last oil change of. These things do not produce soot. The oil looks just like new. I am hoping above all hope he can continue to get that stuff. The oil has been thru so few heat/oxidation cycles, no soot, minimal contamination and I would expect not acidic.

I get clean synthetic oil (about 10 gal per mo) from a generator guy, it just shows up on my door step in gal jugs!
This oil looks new and clean enough to dump right in!

 

[oddshot]

On the other hand, any of the engine internal bearing surfaces shouldn't be affected because they're not coming in direct contact with the wmo, although some small amount of extra ash will wind up In the crankcase oil just as it does when burning #2.
So, it would make sense that if exsessive wear was going to take place it would show up first in the fuel system IE the injection pump and injectors.
Now, after running various blends of filtered wmo for 3 years, I just replaced my injection pump due to an issue that I haven't figured out yet, but my injectors were all fine, in fact perfect.

You've taken away some of my thunder. Except for the heavy use you put on your truck, the miles and fuel are nearly identical to mine. I fully expect that when I check the injectors Ive pulled from my truck, even though there is a bit of crud ON them, their leak down and spray pattern has NOT been degraded by anything in the WMO.

That would total 3 sets of injectors, one set short term, 2 sets long term. You (Rayzer) are the icing on the cake, between you and I, we total 6 years of daily use and about 30K miles.

So,Is 3 years and 15,000 of burning wmo blend as fuel enough time to cause excessive wear?
Was my injection pump issue due to burning wmo? I don't know.
Did wmo have anything to do with my blown head gasket? maybe, but I don't think so.
Is the secret to burning some wmo as fuel "proper filtering" before dumping it into the fuel tank?

Yes!

De-water, filter, thin and GO.

 

[RAYZER]

To clarify, I stated "my injectors were perfect",I didn't mean the tips had No crud on them, just not very much comparatively.
The pop off pressures (3,500 psi) and functions were fine.

 

[Terrh]

I posted that pretty late at night and didn't mention a very important thing:

I filter /everything/ with 1 micron dust filter bags that I buy on ebay. They're dirt cheap and each one lasts around 100-150 gal before I'm too imptatient for how long it takes to filter. You could probably wash them out but at the price they are why bother.

I've also ran WMO blends in a cummins 5.9 (50/50) summer only and in an old non-turbo diesel 1.6L VW.

I don't dewater anything because I don't have a setup to do it, but anything I get with water in it I bring to dump for recycling.

I have seen some guys shear pump shafts on mechanical stuff, mostly seems to be from getting greedy and running fuel that is just too thick to pump.

I know in my truck if my fuel mix is too thick it just won't rev or make any power. And that even 2 gals of gasoline in 30 gals of WMO is enough to thin it significantly.

I still have my whole setup and I still filter oil but I haven't been using it much lately, my current diesel truck is a duramax and they don't like oil apparently - and my DD is a gasoline car that gets 70 MPG so no need to cheap out on fuel with it.

 

[oddshot]

On the other hand, the crust on the injectors that oddshot posted above suggest that there is some coking from running WMO, but the engine breakdown suggests the coking is minimal, and does not cause a problem for the engine. However, I am concerned that increased ash due to burning WMO may cause increased engine wear.

What is needed are photos (NOT personal testimony. Without pictures, it didn't happen.) from engines that have run #2 diesel EXCLUSIVELY for comparison.

My bet is that wmo fuel that has been filtered and thinned properly does not produce much more ash (aka coke, "crust" etc. in the local idiom) than is produced by #2 diesel fuel.

Certainly not in the amounts that the anti-wmo fuel folks predict.

Hopefully, I will get an opportunity to examine IP's and etc. from both wmo and straight diesel burning engines.