will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?

On 05/07/16 19:51, Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?

Not very well no.

heavily diluted its OK in oil boilers and diesel engines though



--
You can get much farther with a kind word and a gun than you can with a
kind word alone.

Al Capone

On 05/07/2016 20:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/07/16 19:51, Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?

Not very well no.

heavily diluted its OK in oil boilers and diesel engines though



Diluted with what?
--
Cheers,
Roger
____________
Please reply to Newsgroup. Whilst email address is valid, it is seldom
checked.

On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 21:10:40 UTC+1, Roger Mills wrote:
On 05/07/2016 20:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/07/16 19:51, Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?

Not very well no.

heavily diluted its OK in oil boilers and diesel engines though



Diluted with what?

Fruit juice of course. Honestly.


NT

In article ,
Roger Mills wrote:
On 05/07/2016 20:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/07/16 19:51, Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?

Not very well no.

heavily diluted its OK in oil boilers and diesel engines though



Diluted with what?

100 parts diesel. If you don't want to wreck your modern diesel car. Not
many left on the road that will be OK with vegetable oil neat.

--
*Microsoft broke Volkswagen's record: They only made 21.4 million bugs.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 05/07/16 21:11, Roger Mills wrote:
On 05/07/2016 20:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/07/16 19:51, Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?

Not very well no.

heavily diluted its OK in oil boilers and diesel engines though



Diluted with what?

The heating oil or diesel stoopid.


--
€œit should be clear by now to everyone that activist environmentalism
(or environmental activism) is becoming a general ideology about humans,
about their freedom, about the relationship between the individual and
the state, and about the manipulation of people under the guise of a
'noble' idea. It is not an honest pursuit of 'sustainable development,'
a matter of elementary environmental protection, or a search for
rational mechanisms designed to achieve a healthy environment. Yet
things do occur that make you shake your head and remind yourself that
you live neither in Joseph Stalins Communist era, nor in the Orwellian
utopia of 1984.€�

Vaclav Klaus

On 7/5/2016 7:51 PM, Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


How much are you trying to dispose of? It should burn fine in a
woodburner, I would be inclined to soak it up into sawdust / wood
shavings / shredded paper. Not sure if you might get more soot and/or
tar than from wood.

Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

In article ,
Chris Hogg wrote:
On Wed, 06 Jul 2016 14:22:12 +0100, pamela wrote:

On 21:22 5 Jul 2016, wrote:

On Tuesday, 5 July 2016 21:10:40 UTC+1, Roger Mills wrote:
On 05/07/2016 20:11, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 05/07/16 19:51, Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?

Not very well no.

heavily diluted its OK in oil boilers and diesel engines though



Diluted with what?

Fruit juice of course. Honestly.


NT

Any particular fruit or will any sort do? ;-)

Olive juice is quite good.

Wouldn't fruit juice cost more than diesel? What I'd call fruit juice
starts at about 2 quid a litre. Unless you have your own supply of
suitable fruit.

--
*Why is it that rain drops but snow falls?

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 06/07/2016 14:27, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

Always got the impression that the bible was full of burning vegetable
oil lamps. That was rather more Saint Peter than Blue Peter - and a very
long time ago.

--
Rod

polygonum wrote:
On 06/07/2016 14:27, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

Always got the impression that the bible was full of burning vegetable
oil lamps. That was rather more Saint Peter than Blue Peter - and a very
long time ago.


I wonder what sort of oil they used in those days? I've been down a few
of the Roman catacombs - some of my favourite places in the world - and
there are little shelves in the wall, so that they could work by oil
lamps (little more that wicks in dishes, really). I'm always amazed by
how people used to get stuff we can just buy, like turpentine, and mortar.

On 06/07/16 19:42, polygonum wrote:
On 06/07/2016 14:27, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

Always got the impression that the bible was full of burning vegetable
oil lamps.

Wasn't rapes seed though.

Actually more likely to be olive oil

That was rather more Saint Peter than Blue Peter - and a very
long time ago.



--
No Apple devices were knowingly used in the preparation of this post.

On 06/07/2016 19:52, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
polygonum wrote:
On 06/07/2016 14:27, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

Always got the impression that the bible was full of burning vegetable
oil lamps. That was rather more Saint Peter than Blue Peter - and a very
long time ago.


I wonder what sort of oil they used in those days? I've been down a few
of the Roman catacombs - some of my favourite places in the world - and
there are little shelves in the wall, so that they could work by oil
lamps (little more that wicks in dishes, really). I'm always amazed by
how people used to get stuff we can just buy, like turpentine, and mortar.

I always sort-of assumed it was olive oil - but I can't for the life of
me think why. Trouble is, we all make what later seem to be weird
assumptions. I always thought the Gaderene swine made some sense - until
I questioned why anyone in a middle eastern country in which eating pigs
is at least frowned upon would ever have been keeping pigs. So perhaps
they used rendered pig fat? Gadarendered swine?

--
Rod

"polygonum" wrote in message
...
On 06/07/2016 14:27, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

Always got the impression that the bible was full of burning vegetable oil
lamps.

And burning bushes too.

That was rather more Saint Peter than Blue Peter

Nope, long before his time.

- and a very long time ago.

Indeed.

On 06/07/16 20:30, polygonum wrote:

assumptions. I always thought the Gaderene swine made some sense - until
I questioned why anyone in a middle eastern country in which eating pigs
is at least frowned upon would ever have been keeping pigs.

Before Islam there was Judaism and lots of other stuff.

Lots of people ate pigs



--
Future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early
twenty-first centurys developed world went into hysterical panic over a
globally average temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and,
on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer
projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to
contemplate a rollback of the industrial age.

Richard Lindzen

On Wednesday, 6 July 2016 14:27:48 UTC+1, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

Imagime them designing a diesek that won't run on vegitable oil these days???

On Wednesday, 6 July 2016 19:42:15 UTC+1, polygonum wrote:
On 06/07/2016 14:27, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

Always got the impression that the bible was full of burning vegetable
oil lamps. That was rather more Saint Peter than Blue Peter - and a very
long time ago.

But Tesla is in living memory -just.

On Wednesday, 6 July 2016 20:30:52 UTC+1, polygonum wrote:
On 06/07/2016 19:52, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
polygonum wrote:
On 06/07/2016 14:27, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

Always got the impression that the bible was full of burning vegetable
oil lamps. That was rather more Saint Peter than Blue Peter - and a very
long time ago.


I wonder what sort of oil they used in those days? I've been down a few
of the Roman catacombs - some of my favourite places in the world - and
there are little shelves in the wall, so that they could work by oil
lamps (little more that wicks in dishes, really). I'm always amazed by
how people used to get stuff we can just buy, like turpentine, and mortar.

I always sort-of assumed it was olive oil - but I can't for the life of
me think why. Trouble is, we all make what later seem to be weird
assumptions. I always thought the Gaderene swine made some sense - until
I questioned why anyone in a middle eastern country in which eating pigs
is at least frowned upon would ever have been keeping pigs. So perhaps
they used rendered pig fat? Gadarendered swine?

Once they fell out of favour with god they were sent into slavery in Babylon. At the fall of Babylon slaves were set free to go where they wished but the original Palestinians were never removed, as far as we know. On top of that other nations were installed in Palestine by the Assyrians then the Babylonians to which only those who wished to return to the old land of Canaan were there when Alexander took them.

He was about to make them sacrifice a pig, so the story goes but was persuaded not to. So the choice of who were the Gadarene pig men is international.. They may have belonged to any of the nationalities that were Roman soldiers. The idea of just who is what when they come here and upset the Anglo Saxons and forced them to disassociate from Europeans.... Hot dog!

If you ever use lard for cooking you will realise that they wouldn't want it burning inside a house. It is about the worst stinking cjjd you could imagine but I was wondering if a paraffin stove wick would suck up waste vegetable oil or is there something about it that prevents that?

If it does then why isn't it used as candle lighting?
These days the fashion is for glass jars filled with wax that ends up leaving a thick ring of wax unburned.

Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Wednesday, 6 July 2016 14:27:48 UTC+1, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:
Weatherlawyer wrote:
will vegetable oil burn in paraffin lamps and stoves?


I remember in the days of power cuts in the 70s, on Blue Peter, they
showed how to make a lamp using a jar of vegetable oil, a cork, and a
wick. I actually tried it, because I was a bit of a pyromaniac; and it
was rather smoky, but I guess the design was less than optimal. Imagine
them showing that on children's TV these days :-)

Imagime them designing a diesek that won't run on vegitable oil these days???


I think I read somewhere that the first diesel was originally intended
to run on coal dust. The only problem was finding a suitable method of
carburation :-) Apparently, they'll run on anything flammable, if you
can get it into the combustion chamber regularly. I doubt it's that
simple, of course.

On Friday, 8 July 2016 00:21:40 UTC+1, Weatherlawyer wrote:

If you ever use lard for cooking you will realise that they wouldn't want it burning inside a house. It is about the worst stinking cjjd you could imagine but I was wondering if a paraffin stove wick would suck up waste vegetable oil
or is there something about it that prevents that?

it does, but that doesn't mean it will operate ideally or even practically usably.

If it does then why isn't it used as candle lighting?

cotton wick is used in candles

These days the fashion is for glass jars filled with wax that ends up leaving a thick ring of wax unburned.

Wrong wick size or wick trimmed too short. Or an irregular candle shape that can't practically be wicked correctly.


NT

On Friday, 8 July 2016 01:21:08 UTC+1, Dan S. MacAbre wrote:

I think I read somewhere that the first diesel was originally intended
to run on coal dust. The only problem was finding a suitable method of
carburation :-)

Carburation of dust is possible. But abrasive particles would be a problem.

Apparently, they'll run on anything flammable, if you
can get it into the combustion chamber regularly. I doubt it's that
simple, of course.


NT

On 7/8/2016 8:42 AM, Chris Hogg wrote:


My old company had a project for wet-grinding coal to make a
high-solids slurry that was used to fuel a diesel engine. The exhaust
was rather smoky and the project wasn't pursued, but I do remember the
chemical engineering lab being absolutely filthy for the duration of
the project.

Who was that then?

On 7/8/2016 5:02 PM, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 15:42:54 +0100, newshound
wrote:

On 7/8/2016 8:42 AM, Chris Hogg wrote:


My old company had a project for wet-grinding coal to make a
high-solids slurry that was used to fuel a diesel engine. The exhaust
was rather smoky and the project wasn't pursued, but I do remember the
chemical engineering lab being absolutely filthy for the duration of
the project.

Who was that then?

In those days it was the Cornish china clay company English China
Clays (think of the conical white sand-tips around St. Austell). You
might ask what a clay-mining company was doing grinding coal, but they
had particular expertise at fine-grinding white minerals, e.g. kaolin
and marble, for the paper industry amongst others. The grinding
process is known as sand-grinding or sand-milling. It's a wet milling
process, equivalent to ball-milling but on a finer scale, using sand
as the grinding medium rather than steel or ceramic balls, and using a
stirred pot rather than a rotating drum. The mills were quite large
(and noisy). In a two-stage process, centimetre-sized marble lumps
would be reduced to a particle size 100% finer than 5 microns
(0.005mm) at a rate of several tonnes per hour.

The company was always looking for other applications for its various
expertises, and grinding coal to similar particle sizes to the above
was one area they looked at. I think their conclusion was that such
fine grinding wasn't really necessary, and other technologies, cheaper
and widely used elsewhere, were just as good for what was wanted, so
there'd be no money in it.


How interesting! I was always slightly amazed how fine you can make the
"pulverised fuel" used in conventional coal fired power stations, given
that this is milled (dry) in ball or roller mills with rolling elements
a foot or so in diameter.

Mind you the *first* station I visited (Kingston on Thames) still had
chain grate boilers.

On Saturday, 9 July 2016 15:53:54 UTC+1, newshound wrote:
On 7/8/2016 5:02 PM, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 15:42:54 +0100, newshound
wrote:

On 7/8/2016 8:42 AM, Chris Hogg wrote:


My old company had a project for wet-grinding coal to make a
high-solids slurry that was used to fuel a diesel engine. The exhaust
was rather smoky and the project wasn't pursued, but I do remember the
chemical engineering lab being absolutely filthy for the duration of
the project.

Who was that then?

In those days it was the Cornish china clay company English China
Clays (think of the conical white sand-tips around St. Austell). You
might ask what a clay-mining company was doing grinding coal, but they
had particular expertise at fine-grinding white minerals, e.g. kaolin
and marble, for the paper industry amongst others. The grinding
process is known as sand-grinding or sand-milling. It's a wet milling
process, equivalent to ball-milling but on a finer scale, using sand
as the grinding medium rather than steel or ceramic balls, and using a
stirred pot rather than a rotating drum. The mills were quite large
(and noisy). In a two-stage process, centimetre-sized marble lumps
would be reduced to a particle size 100% finer than 5 microns
(0.005mm) at a rate of several tonnes per hour.

The company was always looking for other applications for its various
expertises, and grinding coal to similar particle sizes to the above
was one area they looked at. I think their conclusion was that such
fine grinding wasn't really necessary, and other technologies, cheaper
and widely used elsewhere, were just as good for what was wanted, so
there'd be no money in it.


How interesting! I was always slightly amazed how fine you can make the
"pulverised fuel" used in conventional coal fired power stations, given
that this is milled (dry) in ball or roller mills with rolling elements
a foot or so in diameter.

Mind you the *first* station I visited (Kingston on Thames) still had
chain grate boilers.

I vaguely remember seeing a picture of a very early diesel type machine that had a chamber housing the burning fuel. I am not sure how the equivalent of the firing stroke took place; just allowing air in on the downcycle I believe. So it would have been a two stroke designed on the steam engine principle in the days when waste oil from cotton seed was being considered for something better than agricultural waste.

Come to think of it it is more or less what Frank Whittle designed all over again 100 years later. Efficiency was not a consideration compared to potential and availability.

Needlessly complex engineering had yet to be thought of, as had light weight engines for motor transport smaller than ships. Up to then "small" had only been desirable for enabling a team of horses to deliver it.

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

On 09/07/16 21:52, Weatherlawyer wrote:
We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

Actually some of us have a very very good idea.


--
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is
true: it is true because it is powerful."

Lucas Bergkamp

On 09/07/2016 21:52, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Saturday, 9 July 2016 15:53:54 UTC+1, newshound wrote:
On 7/8/2016 5:02 PM, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jul 2016 15:42:54 +0100, newshound
wrote:

On 7/8/2016 8:42 AM, Chris Hogg wrote:


My old company had a project for wet-grinding coal to make a
high-solids slurry that was used to fuel a diesel engine. The exhaust
was rather smoky and the project wasn't pursued, but I do remember the
chemical engineering lab being absolutely filthy for the duration of
the project.

Who was that then?

In those days it was the Cornish china clay company English China
Clays (think of the conical white sand-tips around St. Austell). You
might ask what a clay-mining company was doing grinding coal, but they
had particular expertise at fine-grinding white minerals, e.g. kaolin
and marble, for the paper industry amongst others. The grinding
process is known as sand-grinding or sand-milling. It's a wet milling
process, equivalent to ball-milling but on a finer scale, using sand
as the grinding medium rather than steel or ceramic balls, and using a
stirred pot rather than a rotating drum. The mills were quite large
(and noisy). In a two-stage process, centimetre-sized marble lumps
would be reduced to a particle size 100% finer than 5 microns
(0.005mm) at a rate of several tonnes per hour.

The company was always looking for other applications for its various
expertises, and grinding coal to similar particle sizes to the above
was one area they looked at. I think their conclusion was that such
fine grinding wasn't really necessary, and other technologies, cheaper
and widely used elsewhere, were just as good for what was wanted, so
there'd be no money in it.


How interesting! I was always slightly amazed how fine you can make the
"pulverised fuel" used in conventional coal fired power stations, given
that this is milled (dry) in ball or roller mills with rolling elements
a foot or so in diameter.

Mind you the *first* station I visited (Kingston on Thames) still had
chain grate boilers.

I vaguely remember seeing a picture of a very early diesel type machine that had a chamber housing the burning fuel. I am not sure how the equivalent of the firing stroke took place; just allowing air in on the downcycle I believe. So it would have been a two stroke designed on the steam engine principle in the days when waste oil from cotton seed was being considered for something better than agricultural waste.

Come to think of it it is more or less what Frank Whittle designed all over again 100 years later. Efficiency was not a consideration compared to potential and availability.

Needlessly complex engineering had yet to be thought of, as had light weight engines for motor transport smaller than ships. Up to then "small" had only been desirable for enabling a team of horses to deliver it.

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:36:24 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 09/07/16 21:52, Weatherlawyer wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

Actually some of us have a very very good idea.

Why doesn't that surprise me?

Ah:
"In our post-modern world, climate science is not powerful because it is
true: it is true because it is powerful."

Lucas Bergkamp

On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:52:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

In fact I have no idea why he worked with paraffin.

On 10/07/16 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:52:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

In fact I have no idea why he worked with paraffin.


Exactly. You have no idea.

There are of course sound engineering chemical and physical reasons why
he did, but you don't know them.


--
"The great thing about Glasgow is that if there's a nuclear attack it'll
look exactly the same afterwards."

Billy Connolly

On 10/07/2016 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

Given the need to heat bunker oil in order to pump it around, some of
the reasons not to use it in an aeroplane engine seem (to me) patently
obvious.

--
Rod

On Sunday, 10 July 2016 10:23:30 UTC+1, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/07/16 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:52:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

In fact I have no idea why he worked with paraffin.


Exactly. You have no idea.

There are of course sound engineering chemical and physical reasons why
he did, but you don't know them.

Who told you that?

On Sunday, 10 July 2016 19:13:26 UTC+1, polygonum wrote:
On 10/07/2016 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

Given the need to heat bunker oil in order to pump it around, some of
the reasons not to use it in an aeroplane engine seem (to me) patently
obvious.

The need to cool certain parts of the engine was a problem at the time but of course, you didn't know that.

On 10/07/2016 10:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/07/16 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:52:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I
am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war
two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle
might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

In fact I have no idea why he worked with paraffin.


Exactly. You have no idea.

There are of course sound engineering chemical and physical reasons why
he did, but you don't know them.

Clearly you don't either:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3...heck_-_Bias.3F

"Whittle initially used petrol as fuel, before changing to paraffin"

On 10/07/16 22:22, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Sunday, 10 July 2016 19:13:26 UTC+1, polygonum wrote:
On 10/07/2016 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

Given the need to heat bunker oil in order to pump it around, some of
the reasons not to use it in an aeroplane engine seem (to me) patently
obvious.

The need to cool certain parts of the engine was a problem at the time but of course, you didn't know that.

And you still don't.


--
€œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€�

Dennis Miller

On 10/07/16 22:31, Fredxxx wrote:
On 10/07/2016 10:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/07/16 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:52:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I
am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war
two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle
might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

In fact I have no idea why he worked with paraffin.


Exactly. You have no idea.

There are of course sound engineering chemical and physical reasons why
he did, but you don't know them.

Clearly you don't either:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3...heck_-_Bias.3F

"Whittle initially used petrol as fuel, before changing to paraffin"..

....for sound engineering chemical and physical reasons


dick

--
Microsoft : the best reason to go to Linux that ever existed.

On Sunday, 10 July 2016 22:31:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:
On 10/07/2016 10:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/07/16 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:52:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I
am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war
two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle
might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

In fact I have no idea why he worked with paraffin.


Exactly. You have no idea.

There are of course sound engineering chemical and physical reasons why
he did, but you don't know them.

Clearly you don't either:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3...heck_-_Bias.3F

"Whittle initially used petrol as fuel, before changing to paraffin"

And?

On 11/07/2016 09:34, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Sunday, 10 July 2016 22:31:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:
On 10/07/2016 10:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/07/16 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:52:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I
am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war
two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle
might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

In fact I have no idea why he worked with paraffin.


Exactly. You have no idea.

There are of course sound engineering chemical and physical reasons why
he did, but you don't know them.

Clearly you don't either:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3...heck_-_Bias.3F

"Whittle initially used petrol as fuel, before changing to paraffin"

And?

Cheap: kerosene makes up a rather large fraction of crude oil.
Safe to handle: less toxic, doesn't ignite easily.
Higher boiling point.
Good lubricant for pumps etc.

In practice gas turbines can run on virtually any fuel.

On 7/9/2016 4:54 PM, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Sat, 9 Jul 2016 15:53:50 +0100, newshound
wrote:

On 7/8/2016 5:02 PM, Chris Hogg wrote:

In those days it was the Cornish china clay company English China
Clays (think of the conical white sand-tips around St. Austell). You
might ask what a clay-mining company was doing grinding coal, but they
had particular expertise at fine-grinding white minerals, e.g. kaolin
and marble, for the paper industry amongst others. The grinding
process is known as sand-grinding or sand-milling. It's a wet milling
process, equivalent to ball-milling but on a finer scale, using sand
as the grinding medium rather than steel or ceramic balls, and using a
stirred pot rather than a rotating drum. The mills were quite large
(and noisy). In a two-stage process, centimetre-sized marble lumps
would be reduced to a particle size 100% finer than 5 microns
(0.005mm) at a rate of several tonnes per hour.

The company was always looking for other applications for its various
expertises, and grinding coal to similar particle sizes to the above
was one area they looked at. I think their conclusion was that such
fine grinding wasn't really necessary, and other technologies, cheaper
and widely used elsewhere, were just as good for what was wanted, so
there'd be no money in it.


How interesting! I was always slightly amazed how fine you can make the
"pulverised fuel" used in conventional coal fired power stations, given
that this is milled (dry) in ball or roller mills with rolling elements
a foot or so in diameter.

Mind you the *first* station I visited (Kingston on Thames) still had
chain grate boilers.

Many years ago I visited a cement works at Beeding, in the Adur
valley, just to the east of Lancing, Sussex, now long closed and
derelict. See pic here http://tinyurl.com/hujjhjq . They mixed local
chalk slurry with a clay slurry in controlled proportions, dribbled
the resulting slurp into the cool end of a huge rotary kiln fired by
pulverised coal. The pulverising was done by massive hammer mills, and
the resulting coal powder blown straight into the hot end of the kiln.
The heat was terrific. The hot zone of the kiln ran at some 1450 -
1500°C. Peering through a spy-hole you could see the flame extending
some 15 or 20 feet down into the kiln. The coal dust was burning just
like gas.

Lovely picture!

One of the job offers I had when I left university in 1970 was to work
on flame failure detectors for oil fired power stations. As you say, PF
flames are spectacular (oil flames are similar). I forget the number of
burners in (say) a 500 MW boiler, there are quite a few, but we are
probably talking about 20 MW in each flame.

On 7/10/2016 10:23 AM, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/07/16 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:52:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I
am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war
two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle
might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

In fact I have no idea why he worked with paraffin.


Exactly. You have no idea.

There are of course sound engineering chemical and physical reasons why
he did, but you don't know them.


We can't all know everything, it would surely be more helpful to explain.

Paraffin has a fairly low viscosity, therefore is convenient to handle
(compared to bunker oil which is typically heated to 90 C). It's also
relatively pure, giving fewer problem with injectors. The sulphur in
bunker oil is also going to corrode stuff downstream, it is hard enough
finding suitable materials for gas turbine blades without making life
deliberately more difficult.

On 11/07/16 10:09, Fredxxx wrote:
On 11/07/2016 09:34, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Sunday, 10 July 2016 22:31:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:
On 10/07/2016 10:23, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 10/07/16 00:26, Weatherlawyer wrote:
On Saturday, 9 July 2016 23:52:17 UTC+1, Fredxxx wrote:

We really have no idea what went on in the dark ages before petrol.

You only have to visit Eastern European countries to see how
transport
is still by horse and of course coal fired steam engines were all the
rage, and indeed have a renaissance in the field of transport.

The point being exactly mine; one of practicality and availability. I
am pretty sure that if he had not been hamstrung by the pre-world war
two military complacency/lack of interest and investment, Whittle
might have investigated bunker oil for his jet.

In fact I have no idea why he worked with paraffin.


Exactly. You have no idea.

There are of course sound engineering chemical and physical reasons why
he did, but you don't know them.

Clearly you don't either:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk%3...heck_-_Bias.3F

"Whittle initially used petrol as fuel, before changing to paraffin"

And?

Cheap: kerosene makes up a rather large fraction of crude oil.
Safe to handle: less toxic, doesn't ignite easily.
Higher boiling point.
Good lubricant for pumps etc.

"There are of course sound engineering chemical and physical reasons why
he did, but you don't know them."

But you have quoted most of them.

There's a few more, like energy density.
I guess viscosity comes under 'Good lubricant for pumps etc.'




In practice gas turbines can run on virtually any fuel.



Indeed. And do run on many fuels. Most power stations are modified Rolls
Royce Trent turbines coupled up to alternators.



--
If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will
eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such
time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic
and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally
important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for
the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the
truth is the greatest enemy of the State.

Joseph Goebbels