Initial limited compatibility test with Ethanol base for those interested. There are two parts to the chemistry of the product I am testing for; however the only one I will discuss is Part 1 which is 100% Ethanol. Although the final chemistry is different from something like E-85, the alcohol base is the same as far as I know.

The raw material samples were milled to 1” x 2” x ½” and weighed accordingly. Each block was partially immersed in Part 1 of fuel at 70 F for 4 hours then weighed and measured. Then each block was partially immersed at 150 F for same time frame and checked. This was to determine if the material absorbed fuel and changed proportion due to swelling or deteriorating at normal temperatures or elevated temperatures. (Seals were tested over a few weeks by customer in a piston style pump at various temperatures.)

So far Stainless is the material of choice, I have the 6061 samples now, I will update with those results. This initial test was really only done as a preliminary method to gage some cost analysis magnitude for the machine line I am designing. I am just also using this testing for my own information and letting others draw their own conclusions from it instead of speculation.

Raw materials tested:
CRS 1018 = harsh film, pitting, failed
304/303/316 SS = passed
Teflon (PTEE) = passed
Delrin = passed, shows discoloration, more time study needed
Nylon = passed, shows discoloration, more time study needed
UHMW = failed, as expected due to absorbtion
6061 Type 2 clear anodized = corrosion, pitting/deterioration of Al.Oxide surface
6061 Type 3 hard anodized = durable in short term, long term?
6061 Type 3 hard lube anodized (With PTFE) = durable in short term, long term?

Fasteners:
Standard steel = failed, due to excessive corrosion
18/8 SS = pass
A2-70 SS = pass
316 SS = pass
Zinc plated = failed, Zinc plating is a known issue with compatability

Seals:
Buna = Deteriorated
Viton = Deteriorated
Urethane = Deteriorated (although they don’t recall the grade)
EPDM = held tolerance, serviced weekly
Teflon encapsulated = held tolerance, serviced weekly

Just though I would share due to some discussions in other threads in the AM forum.

-Jamie


UPDATE: 8-14-08

I have completed my aluminum testing and added the results to the above. The aluminum was tested over a 2 day period. Let's discuss the difference in the anodizing tested.

The difference between anodize(Type 2) and hardcoat anodize (Type 3) is that the hardcoat anodize process takes place at lower electrolyte bath temperatures and requires greater DC current. Under these conditions, the most dense, durable, aluminum oxide coating is grown. The density of hardcoat anodize results in the coating being less porous and less receptive to dye, but dramatically increases wear resistance and corrosion protection versus conventional anodize.

Instead of more typing about alcohol and how water plays a role in all this, I found this source which explains it well that I would like everyone to read if interested. Pay special attention to the last paragragh regarding "What is Required to run Ethanol Fuels in a Racing Application?".

http://www.drivingethanol.org/....aspx

This will conclude my testing for now. Please use this information to your benefit making sure you understand what you are working with before just filling up at the pump. Aeromotive does carry a line of fittings specifically designed for Methanol and Nitromethane use that are NOT made of aluminum like the rest of their fittings. Why?

-Jamie





Modified by FST GSR 1 at 7:23 AM 10/8/2008

 

Wow.

Thats some pretty extensive testing.

Very Good info for anyone looking into E85, as you stated the base is the same.

to you sir

 

Thanks for posting some of the results.

If possible could you post you pics of the test samples.

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by mar778c &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">Thanks for posting some of the results.

If possible could you post you pics of the test samples.</TD></TR></TABLE>

In for more info. Thanks again for doing the testing

 

"machine line I am designing"

intresting

 

king

 

I am SO FREAKING HAPPY that these two threads have been made before I built my block....without this recent testing I would've been screwed. Thankyou so much!

 

GGW Test.

College co-ed soaked with ethonal for a an hour.... denim and nylon (spandex )completely disappeared.

Prodigal Son Fo da Win!!!!

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Master of the Universe &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">GGW Test.

College co-ed soaked with ethonal for a an hour.... denim and nylon (spandex )completely disappeared.

Prodigal Son Fo da Win!!!!</TD></TR></TABLE>

It was Nylon 12. Different chain?

 

 

Subscribed

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by FST GSR 1 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

It's really just a complete custom "lights out" robotic manufacturing solution because of the "Class 1 Div.1" requirements of the product. Although i think I may have this classification reduced due to some logical circumstances.


</TD></TR></TABLE>

You can get down to Class 1 Div 2 just with some environmental controls (ventilation, reduced line size/pressure, etc).

Good work on the compatibility testing!

 

maybe im not the quickest, but what all does this mean? what materials is a honda fuel system made from?

im about to run e85 in my car, and im not sure how to interperet the results of this test...

 

<TABLE WIDTH="90%" CELLSPACING=0 CELLPADDING=0 ALIGN=CENTER><TR><TD>Quote, originally posted by Paul_VR6 &raquo;</TD></TR><TR><TD CLASS="quote">

You can get down to Class 1 Div 2 just with some environmental controls (ventilation, reduced line size/pressure, etc).

Good work on the compatibility testing!</TD></TR></TABLE> Yes I know, but I think I can reduce it further. To get to Div 2 you just need to remove one element which would be Fuel source (vapors), since Ethanol vapors are heavier then air they will settle on the floor.

 

I think I was working with Butanol at the time and I believe the vapors are lighter. You can get away with some interesting stuff the way the code reads. Not sure if you can reduce it unclassified though unless you have some serious controls to prevent release!

 

UPDATED: Please see original post.

 

wow, so this means i CANT use e85? i am running a walbro intank pump, -8an feed lines to an anodized fuel rail, to an aeromotive regulator, and then -6an return line....i have anodized alum at every joint, and also teh regulator......i hope i am interpreting this right...

 

I am not willing to make a blanket statement by what I have done. If you are uncertain, call the manufacturer and ask or test it for yourself.

 

lol its not like im going to hold you liable for any damage that occurs! you tested the materials that are found in a honda fuel system so i just want your opinion on if using -an fittings and anodized fuel rails is a no-no? do these things fit under the hard anodize catagory? i would like to make an educated guess on if i should use these things or not based on your testing (thanks for sharing btw if i havent said that already!) but im not sure where my parts fit into your testing, so thats why im asking if im interpreting your results correctly. no big deal, you can shoot me a pm if you dont want to post it for the whole world to see

 

 

*side note- I just tore apart two N/A setups that were running e85. Both of which are mint and show no different signs of wear on any of the internals. Beyond the funky smell of corn oil, the wear seems average. The fuel systems are also still mint. One car runs standard stainless lines and fittings along with an AEM fuel rail with a blox regulator. The other car runs standard rubber fuel lines on a golden eagle fuel rail with a fuel lab regulator and fuel filter. So far so good.

 

Were the tests done with straight ethenol or actual e85?
I quickly scaned the orig post....if I missed it I DO appologize!

My thought is that the 15% of petroleum fuel would have some sort of protection factor... Think of it as a lubricant or protective film....

I might be off base with that assumption.....

 

Yes, it was not E85 or E98. Ethanol has no inherent lubricity, but this wasn't a fricton based test. FYI, all ethanol is denatured in some way to be legal for sale commercially.

 

back from the dead, found this thread in a search. I must be dumb today and I did not understand these results, pm me if you like but are you saying E85 is a no-go?


So you seem to have the same success I do and my good friend, I leave E85 in my tank for months at a time and I have not 1 issue EVER! I run dual Walbro's, an annodized fuel rail and RC 1000cc Injectors (which now have 20k miles of corn run through them, and I have them cleaned and flowed and they are perfect)

My friend left E85 in his tank from November of last year until October of this year and when we popped his pump cover off and drained the tank, the inside of the tank was perfect, same with his OEM rubber lines and all his banjo bolt fittings, might I add he was using a 2+yr old OEM Fuel Filter and its still fine also, after marinating in stagnant E85 for 11 months........

 

The information was provided as an informative test I conducted for something similar. I never told anyone what to use or what not to use, nor will I .