regulated return system for van - Diesel Forum

sixiron · 07-21-2007, 10:23 AM

I thought I'd share the info from a phone call to ITP last week...
I want to pick everyone's brain a little..

My goal is to have something in place for biodiesel mixture I will be running...I sure that there is plenty of "deposits" that will be cleaned out ...

I stopped by and talked to Ryan Bean at Beans Diesel a couple weeks ago on the way home from BTS...we discussed regulated return fuel system and he suggested the ITP van specific for starters...In talking to Dennis at ITP ,he informed me that he is not going to offer the van system anymore...I agree with his reasons (too lengthly to post now)...so I am regrouping and want to get some ideas from you guys about what I intend to do...

First I am going to install the Racor 45P pre-pump filter I had on my older van..I am going to drop the fuel tank just enough to get a 3/8" line on the outlet port to the pre-pump filter...3/8" line to the stock pump...that's all I can do for now in the driveway...

Mixing chamber mod is on hold for now...but I do plan on "harpooning" the fuel inlet per "maddog's" post ..

I am pretty sure Ryan is thihking about modifing a truck regulated system for use on the van...we had discussed a Permacool 2mic filter/water seperator mounted on the frame (post pump) regulated return and eliminating the valley fuel filter altogether..

what say yall
bill

MADVAN · 07-21-2007, 01:18 PM

Bill

Well you allready know my feelings about the pump (push/pull).
The setup seems fine But on the 2mic (post)chassis mounted filter. I would go with a heated filter.(coolant or electric). The winter air crossing the filter housing at hwy speeds could cause an issue.(air/gel)

This has to be addressed
Winter needs---air removal,warming fuel.
Summer needs---air removal,cooling fuel.

Same above goes for the prefilter.
I sort of like the idea of adding a .020 restrictor in an added fuel return line(from both heads). This line would tap in before the regulator and would be mounted to be the highest point in fuel system. This line then would retap back to the return line after the regulator. This would allow any air to be forced back to tank under full pressure of pump. Its a induced fuel leak to remove air.
Just some thoughts.

Bill

sixiron · 07-21-2007, 04:39 PM

Thanks for chiming in Bill...
I am trying to think this out for the best (easiest) way to have a heated option too...I am researching the Racor R45P now as it did have a heated version offered...that would put an electric heater prepump...I am not sure if that would handle winter temperatures of 3-4 degrees at highway speeds or not...

I do know that the factory set-up is good at keeping the fuel supply warm in the winter being on top of the motor in the valley and with the fuel flowing thru the heads a lot of warmed fuel is returned back to the tank...Remove the valley filter assy and I am trying to answer this question...

how much does the regulated return effect the fuel flow thru the motor?

..if fuel flows faster then there would be less time for the fuel to warm inside the fuel rail...if the check valves in the heads limit the amount of fuel flowing thru the motor it would seem like there would be no change in the volume thru the heads and the fuel temperatures would remain the same vs stock system ie the same amount of heated fuel would be returned to the tank ..

I am trying to think this out to how it best suits me and the constant dogbox removal in changing filters blah blah...
talk with you later bill

MADVAN · 07-21-2007, 04:57 PM

Bill

Have thought about same.
Figured that a summer/winter return line valve would be needed.
Summer= return to tank
Winter= return to suction side of prefilter(perfered).But can use Post filter.
The air beed system would tap after valve so to bleed to tank while in winter mode.
I like the coolant method over the electric. Over the road trucks all use the coolant method.
It could be just all overkill [img]/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/shrug.gif[/img] I tend to go to far sometimes.

Bill

sixiron · 07-22-2007, 08:19 AM

I had thought about using the same idea that the WVO crowd does and wrap a coolant line around the post pump filter....they coil the line around the filter top to bottom...I could run the line right off the water pump with a shut on/off valve and the return could go up to the degas bottle or radiator...

still thinking this out...can't find a lot of old posts that I remember from the WVO crowd...

later, bill

Abbey · 07-22-2007, 09:19 AM

I have been running svo for 40 k miles with no problems in my 98 van .I have a 60 gal. tank mounted behind my back seat with a racore 1000 filter all heated from front to back and insulated. I removed the factory filter and mounted a spin on filter for the diesel next to the transmission. I have a after market pressure regulator mounted on the back of the block. I tried the electric fuel pumps but had to go to the mechanical pump because its the only one that can stand up to cold weather conditions

MADVAN · 07-22-2007, 10:26 AM

Bill

Something like this. Check fuel pro/filter pro in link. Its all fleetguard stuff. You have options of elect/coolant heat. The thing thats nice is you get to extract the most life out of the filter by seeing how high the fuel level is. Some of these units are quite large.

http://www.cumminsfiltration.com/en/..._fuelpro.shtml

Bill

bork · 07-23-2007, 09:26 AM

[ QUOTE ]
Bill

Well you allready know my feelings about the pump (push/pull).
The setup seems fine But on the 2mic (post)chassis mounted filter. I would go with a heated filter.(coolant or electric). The winter air crossing the filter housing at hwy speeds could cause an issue.(air/gel)

This has to be addressed
Winter needs---air removal,warming fuel.
Summer needs---air removal,cooling fuel.

Same above goes for the prefilter.
I sort of like the idea of adding a .020 restrictor in an added fuel return line(from both heads). This line would tap in before the regulator and would be mounted to be the highest point in fuel system. This line then would retap back to the return line after the regulator. This would allow any air to be forced back to tank under full pressure of pump. Its a induced fuel leak to remove air.
Just some thoughts.

Bill

[/ QUOTE ]
I like that idea of the high point air trap-return to tank idea. Is the fuel moving slow enough to allow air to rise up thru fitting or would a collection chamber be needed with bleed off fitting on top to have fuel velocity slowed? Also didn't you tell me the factory filter has this bleed off hole in the filter canister, towards top already? (highest point) which reminds me, I need to check that hole with the Q tip like you told me. But since the pre-pump 2 micron filter installed, I haven't changed my filter in a while. I hate the idea of taking things apart for just one thing.

MADVAN · 07-23-2007, 12:04 PM

Bork

Your van has the check valves with screens.
With the OEM fuel system (electric) if air makes its way to the heads the only way out is thru the inj. The change to th RR system helps. The use of a self induced fuel leak is the only way i have found that fixes crackel and helps with MPG. The hx,LL inj,RR ect none will cure the crackel 100%. Most of the problem is air. To fix i figured just have to find a way to remove air. With the leak its allway's purging air if any and dampening fuel pulses from the inj.

Bill

ddog · 07-23-2007, 12:51 PM

Bill,

Check Dennis website at ITP for his fuel cooler test results. They monitored return temps to tank stock, reg return without cooler, and reg return with cooler. IIRC all the tests were done on systems retaining the valley filter. They were done on a truck, but should give you some idea of return to tank temps. I know you want to warm the fuel, but that gives you an idea of whats happening with the reg return.

Some people have used a Duramax fuel cooler. In reality its a fuel temperature stabilizer since it uses engine coolant to keep the fuel temp constant. Its basically a heat exchanger.

The flow rate definitely increases with a reg return system. Enough that I remember discussion that it probably effects the stock valley filters filtering ability due to the increased rate (as well as its marginal water separating ability), and thus the need for a good prepump filter. Just some thoughts, recollections.

ddog

MADVAN · 07-23-2007, 01:03 PM

Off the top of my head somewhere in the 180/200*range is opt.
I have to check it out.
The RR and OEM systems return completely different. Oem will not flow thru heads. Just to the FPR and back to tank. Thus less heat. The RR will go thru the heads on its way back to tank.
I agree that if installing the RR. You should have a pre filter. I would toss the whole oem setup if RR was installed.
Have link to test?

IH/ford should of stuck with the mechanical pump system.

Bill

ddog · 07-23-2007, 11:33 PM

[ QUOTE ]
Have link to test?

[/ QUOTE ]

That was easier said than done. Couldn't find the link right off at ITP, so had to go through my posts to find the fuel cooler thread with the Test link in it.Link to test in thread still works though. So here you go....

Fuel Cooler Thread with Link to Test Results

Thats the first thread with a post by me with info from Rovers Euro Site. Points out the intent that not all fuel coolers "Cool" .There is also a second thread discussing the round two test results somewhere, and some earlier threads on fuel coolers and return temps when CPRx was all the rage.Too lazy to dig those up.

[ QUOTE ]
IH/ford should of stuck with the mechanical pump system.

[/ QUOTE ]

Or at least a modernized version of the same concept. I will say that 98 PSD van I drove in Michigan was silent. The rear end made more noise than the injectors.

ddog

MADVAN · 07-24-2007, 12:37 AM

Thanks Dog
The #'s i found were 140/160*. I have the temps but no data on why.

Bill

sixiron · 07-24-2007, 09:11 AM

ddog, thanks for the link to that thread by dennis on fuel coolers, temps...interesting reading...
bill

ddog · 07-24-2007, 11:42 AM

[ QUOTE ]
The #'s i found were 140/160*. I have the temps but no data on why.

[/ QUOTE ]

The now dead link in that thread (in my post) to Rovers (TD5 diesel) site put the fuel temp at 165 IIRC and is thermostatically controlled to maintain that temp pretty close. The why behind the actual temp value I'm not sure either, but I think the purpose of the constant temp is to improve injection event accuracy (Constant fuel temp=constant viscosity=Constant density,etc)and efficiency with emissions reduction as the primary goal.The more things you can keep constant, the better your ability to write engine management software with a known outcome. I'd have to guess the fuel temp selected must be some best compromise between pump/injector life, combustion efficiency and emissions.

That being said, not sure what temp would be optimal to maintain in a 7.3 apart from gel prevention, winter operation , etc. I think there was more discussion on it surrounding the various fuel cooler threads.

ddog