Aircraft fuel.

Would the use of silica jell crystals to absorb moisture around fuel container be a good idea. I was just wondering as I have had moisture contamination more than once. Thank you Carl Anderson Delta B.C. Can.

Reply to
Carl Anderson
Loading thread data ...

You would have to hang the silica inside the jug for it to work, I would think. Even then, I don't know what would be more hydroscopic; the fuel or the sillica.

The key to long lasting, non contaminated fuel is to store it in a temperature constant place, and away from light, and in an airtight container.

I have stored fuel in the original gallon jug in my heated basement, that always stays at 79 degrees, +/- 3 degrees, and used it for more than 2 years.

Use your fuel from a small container, perhaps a quart, or larger if you have big models. The key is to not be opening your storage container but a few times in the life of the gallon. If you don't let air in, you don't let moisture in, to be absorbed by the moisture grabbing fuel.

I'll bet that you are using your fuel right out of the gallon, aren't you? Describe your typical fuel usage and storage patterns for us, if you would, please?

Reply to
Morgans

-----------------

My father, an uneducated, but wise man, once said, "Paper will lie still for anything". My father was a mountain man and lacked much formal education.

I said, "Whaaaaat?"

He explained that anyone can write anything they want to write whether it is, true, false, ridiculous, dangerous, etc., and the paper will not protest.

The older I get, the smarter my father seems to have been when I was young. He passed on in 92. Boy, I sure miss him.

I have seen jugs of fuel, that were left uncapped for a day or two, acquire moisture from the atmosphere that did not run in an engine worth a hoot. I have never seen such a quantity of fuel with that much moisture run normally.

Who am I to believe? A magazine article that says it makes no difference, or my own observations? I'll trust my own observations every time.

Ed Cregger

Reply to
Ed Cregger

Reply to
Ed Forsythe

We used to add a slosh of methanol to the fuel if it was looking "a little thick" wayy back when when we were kids! Mind you,.. we also ran straight gasoline in the old Testors engines just to watch them scream..& then melt.. ;) Kickin' my ass for that now!

Reply to
bart

It takes about 700 gallons of air at 75 deg F and 50% relative humidity to hold one ounce of water. Think about a gallon bottle part full of fuel. If the lid is leaky how long will it take for 700 gallons of air to diffuse into the bottle past the loose cap? A few years or more? Even if the cap is off the bottle as long as there is no forced air current past the top of the container it would be weeks before that much air got into the bottle, made contact with the surface of the fuel, gave up its water 100% to the fuel and diffused back out to the bottle so new wet air could get in.

Now, it turns out that methanol is much more volitile then water. So during the process of absorbing this ounce of water into the fuel how much methanol will evaporate? A quick calculation shows the methanol loss would be be close to a pint and a half.

In other words every time you absorb one ounce of water into your fuel at the same time you will evaporate about a pint and a half of methanol.

So ask yourself the question: Is it the absorbtion of one ounce of water that is the problem or is it the loss of a pint and a half of methanol that is the problem?

If your fuel container was half full when you started you just lost over 35% of the go power from your fuel. Do you think it will still work even if you do dry it with silica gel?

Remember, when you loose all that methanol you do not loose any oil so now your oil content is so high you are so over lubed the remaining methanol will not evaporate as fully in the engine either with the net result of the fuel being effectively even lower in methanol.

The whole water in fuel nonsense is brought about by those who have no clue at all about science and who are too uneducated to think and do three minutes worth of calculations.

My refueling container has a leaky cap. I store it in my shop which in the winter has a temp which ranges most days from a low of 45 to a high of 70 deg F depending on if I am in the shop or not. I heat my shop with a kerosene heater when I am in there. So there is no shortage of humidity even in the winter time. I have often stored half full containers under these less then ideal conditions all winter. I have never had any fuel problems come spring. I have also stored full, tightly capped containers of fuel for up to five years under those conditions. I have never seen the slightest loss of performance due to fuel degradation.

So who should I believe? Someone who is usually wrong on most issues involving technical things? Or my own observations and calculations based on science as well as published test results which show that small amounts of water actually improve engine performance?

I suggest that if you do not have so much water in the fuel that it is cloudy or has a layer of oil on the bottom you do not have any water problem at all. It is still possible you could evaporate enough methanol to cause a problem even if the fuel is not cloudy or with a oil layer on the bottom. Either way silica gel is not going to help you. But if you would be happier with a bag of silica gel in your fuel bottle it also will not hurt you. It will keep your fuel dry as it will absorb water from methanol. Molecular sieves would do a better job. Make sure they are bagged well enough that particles can not wind up in your engine. Silica gel can be regenerated by heating in your oven at 300 deg F. Most grades of sieves will not regenerate very well below 450.

Reply to
bm459

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.