Glycol in Boiler

[Gerald Gardiner 1Participant @geraldgardiner1]

 In the article on the Alexandra he says "have now steamed Alexandra a number of times using Glynn Guest’s idea of putting 5% glycol into the boiler water to get a more visible steam effect on hot days. This works wonders and as Glycol contains a rust inhibitor and is also a lubricant, I think it can’t do any harm (please see Model Boats March 2008 for his ‘Hints and Tips’ piece)"

Has anyone else done this how does it work? Are there any ill effects?

Regards,

Gerald.

[Paul TParticipant @pault84577]

Hi Gerald

The addition of 5% glycol, apart from producing more easily seen vapour, helps to lubricate the engine which is very important especially to the steam novice.

However caution must be used when handling glycol (see the following COSHH info)

Stability

Stable. Substances to be avoided include strong bases, strong acids, strong oxidizing agents, perchloric acid, chromyl chloride. Protect from moisture.

Toxicology

Harmful if swallowed. May be harmful if inhaled or in contact with the skin. Skin and respiratory irritant. Severe eye irritant. Typical OEL 10 – 25 ppm. Reproductive hazard.

So when using neat glycol you must wear protective gloves and goggles and work in a well ventilated area.

Paul

[Gerald Gardiner 1Participant @geraldgardiner1]

With this under Toxicology

Harmful if swallowed. May be harmful if inhaled or in contact with the skin. Skin and respiratory irritant. Severe eye irritant. Typical OEL 10 – 25 ppm. Reproductive hazard.

I think I will NOT be adding it to my boiler as when running a public demonstrations I always have someone who wants to smell the steam.

Regards,

Gerald

[HHParticipant @hh]

I believe that the Glycol referred to in the article was in the form of car antifreeze solution.  Does the COSHH warnings mean that I ought to wear full protective clothing and breathing apparatus whenever topping up a car radiator?

This looks like another silly Health & Safety overreaction where potential danger and actual risk are misunderstood.  If you look around the average home, it contains many things much more dangerous than glycol.

 Hal

[Bryan HodgesParticipant @bryanhodges28732]

While I do not have any direct experience with glycol use in a steam engine, I’m not sure that it will provide adequate lubrication as noted in the original article by Glynn Guest. I also cannot recall if the article in question mentioned that steam oil was also used.

Glycol, as used in an automotive engine, rarely sees temperatures exceeding 225 F.  While it may see higher temperatures when directly contacting a gasoline engine’s cylinder walls and exhaust porting through it’s water jackets, the overall temperature will rarely exceed 230 F. 

As we know, steam engines can see inlet temperatures of over 350 F, dependant upon pressure. Boiler temperatures can also exceed 500 F. at the burner.

Additionally, the only moving part in an automotive engine that is "lubricated" by glycol is the water pump, which does not have critical surfaces such as cylinder walls, slide valves, or pistons to contend with. Most, if not all, water pump bearings are sealed units, and as such, do not allow glycol into the critical bearing surface. 

While I’m certainly not questioning Mr Guest’s integrity, and do applaud his willingness to try new techniques, I do think it would be wise to also forward the question to the steam engine manufacturers for comment. 

[Glynn GuestParticipant @glynnguest59245]

Agh!!

As Mr Hodges has not questioned my integrity, I will at least not question his.

However, no where in the original article did I, as he claims, comment on the lubrication effect of glycol in small model steam engines. The comment on glycol and lubrication was made in the second post of this thread.

Glynn Guest

[Bryan HodgesParticipant @bryanhodges28732]

My deepest apologies to Mr Guest.

I should have had the article in front of me before I wrote my post.  

I’ll review his original article tonight, and issue a new post in the morning in order to both clarify my comments, and remove any unintended inference that Mr Guest has recommended that glycol could provide any lubrication properties when used in a steam engine.

Please believe me that my post was not issued as a criticism, but rather as further comment on the use of glycol in a steam engine .

My background is in piston engines, particularily in high stress applications. Glycol in the oil supply of an engine, regardless of quantity, can cause enormous damage to bearings and bushings in high stress areas such as crankshaft main and rod bearing journals, and areas of sliding contact such as piston skirts and cylinder walls where the integrity of the protective film of oil is critical. While glycol and water may mix well, glycol and oil do not. 

  

[Paul TParticipant @pault84577]

Agh!!!   Agh!!!

I was not extolling the virtues of glycol as a pure lubricant only that the addition of 5% to the boiler water would increase the visible steam and have an added lubricating effect accepting the fact that the correct levels manufacturers recommended steam oil had been added to the system first.

Paul

[Gerald Gardiner 1Participant @geraldgardiner1]

I had posted originally as I wondered about ill effects with using Glycol. I have not experimented with it and probably won’t. As Paul notes in his post

"Toxicology Harmful if swallowed. May be harmful if inhaled or in contact with the skin. Skin and respiratory irritant. Severe eye irritant. Typical OEL 10 – 25 ppm. Reproductive hazard. "

Hal in response to

"This looks like another silly Health & Safety overreaction where potential danger and actual risk are misunderstood.  If you look around the average home, it contains many things much more dangerous than glycol."

If I operated my models privately and did not exhibit them at shows or venues where the Public was involved I might try using Glycol. Having a wife and two children who are asthmatic I know how little irritant it can take to trigger an attack. With this in mind and the frequent occurrence of young children (and some not so young) wanting to smell the steam, I feel the trace of steam oil is the only thing other than water vapour that I can expose them to.

Regards,

Gerald.

PS While the tendency of people launching Law Suite is not as prevalent in Canada as it is in the USA, that possibility also exists.

[Gerald Gardiner 1Participant @geraldgardiner1]

[Bryan HodgesParticipant @bryanhodges28732]

 

Good day gentlemen.

 

I apologize for the time lapse from my last post.

 

I submit the following as comments towards my earlier posts, and those of Mr. Guest, and Paul (the Fat Controller).

 

The clarifications and comments that I offer are not meant to be critical, nor argumentative in any way towards those who are either using, or recommending the use of glycol in a model steam plant.

 

These comments are offered as points of discussion, and as a method of gaining deeper knowledge and understanding of such use of glycol in this application. 

 

Clarifications

 

1. As noted in my post of January 06, 2009, I erroneously indicated that Mr. Guest’s article in the March 2008 issue of Model Boats recommended that glycol would be a suitable lubricant for a model steam engine.

 

I have reviewed the article, and have found no such recommendation.

 

Again, my apologies to Mr. guest.

 

2. The post of January 06, 2009 from Paul (the Fat Controller) does in fact note that glycol “will have an added lubricating effect” when used in a steam engine. Paul also notes that the engine manufacturer’s oil recommendations should be followed.  

 

Comments

 

During the past few weeks, I have discussed the following issues with, amongst others, chemical engineers and a specialty manufacturer of dedicated steam oils, and have added their comments and concerns to my own as follows:

 

1. Glycol as a lubricant in a steam engine.

 

By most accounts, the critical areas of lubrication in a steam engine are the cylinders (cylinder bores and piston skirts) and valve chests where friction between sliding components can cause galling. Compounded steam oil, as recommended for use by model steam engine manufacturers, is blended from various compounds in order to properly atomize and disperse in steam, or moisture, thereby creating an oil laden emulsion prior to entering those areas.  This emulsion forms a lubricationg film on sliding surfaces, reducing friction and resisting water washing effects.

 

Glycol has an affinity for water, but not oil. As such, it can prevent or displace the steam oil from emulsifying into the moisture carried by the steam inlet to the engine, thereby preventing proper lubrication. 

 

Ethylene Glycol (automotive coolant) was primarily developed as a coolant anti freeze, and a stable temperature enhancer. Not as a lubricant between sliding surfaces.

 

This displacement of lubricating oil can certainly lead to engine damage.

 

2. Glycol enhancing the visible steam discharge.

 

There would be little, if any, positive increase in the visual steam discharge when utilizing glycol in the boiler water.  Water boils at 212 degrees F at sea level and standard pressure, while glycol boils at 387 degrees F under identical conditions. Regardless of the percentage of the water/glycol mix, even under boiler pressures between 20 and 60psi,  the water component will boil and vaporize long before the glycol will.

 

There is a simple test for this. Fill a boiler with a 95% water – 5% glycol mix. Fire the boiler and build steam to 40 – 60psi. Run the engine until only 10 – 15% of the full boiler volume is left. Shut the fuel off, and allow the boiler to cool. Drain the remaining coolant and measure it with a hydrometer.

 

If the concerns noted above are correct, you will find that the original water/glycol mix of  5% has now increased to approximatly 20% glycol by volume.

 

3. Glycol contamination in the steam discharge to atmosphere.

 

As Paul notes in his post of December 31, 2008, glycol carries dangerous compounds.

 

As model steam plant operators are strongly encouraged to utilize water/oil condensing tanks in order to prevent oil from the steam exhaust from dropping on the lake or pond surfaces, why should glycol be exempted? 

 

If glycol does exit the engine with the steam exhaust as a vapor, there is nothing to prevent it from contaminating the water or surrounding land, regardless of the quantity.

 

Additionally, the standard practice of blowing down the boiler at low boiler pressure after a day’s sailing will certainly dispurse the remaing glycol to an even greater effect.   

 

4. Glycol contamination of the boiler.

 

Consistent use of a water/glycol mixture will leave a thin glycol coating on the interior surfaces the boiler, resulting in lower heat transfer rate from the burner to the boiler water. If in doubt, examine the interior surfaces of an automotive engine, or it’s radiator.

 

 

Summary

 

Most model steam plants are expensive, and therefore represent a large investment to the hobby owner. As such, careful consideration must be given before operating the engine, and plant, in a manner outside of the manufacturer’s recommendations. 

 

The points regarding contamination of the atmosphere, and land and water surfaces are certainly valid, and should be addressed appropriatly.

[Paul TParticipant @pault84577]

Good Morning Bryan

 

I have never seen such an in depth and detailed account of any subject as your latest posting…..it is superb and as a result I am reconsidering my use of glycol as a steam enhancer.

 

I fully appreciate your findings regarding the displacment of lubricant and will admit that, in the light of your extensive research, my comments were incorrect.

 

Paul

 

 

[Glynn GuestParticipant @glynnguest59245]

 

For anyone coming new to this thread let me first explain that in the March 2008 issue of Model Boats I described the idea of adding Glycol (in the form of automotive antifreeze) to the boiler feed water of a small model steam engine. My reasoning being that the “Fog Juice” as used in commercial Fog machines (widely employed in theatrical and entertainment areas) appears to be such a mixture. The hope was that it would produce a more persistent smoke effect when sailing my models. Initial tests revealed no operating problems and appeared to increase the smoke effect, but this was subjective opinion.

 

I had planed to carry out further tests, and hoped that others might try what I still believe to be a novel idea. Alas, with all the things that come from a busy professional and family life, plus a few unexpected things, I have had little chance until now.

 

In the meantime I was mistakenly criticized for suggesting that glycol would act as an internal lubricant for the steam engine. After reading the original article this was corrected. However, Mr. Hodges last posting contains many points which I find perplexing, I am tempted to say mischievous but I do not know Mr. Hodges character to make such an assessment.

 

1) Mr. Hodges states “Glycol has an affinity for water…” which is true as an open container of glycol will slowly absorb water from the air. If you pour glycol into water you will find that it is totally miscible with water (hence its use in automotive antifreeze).

 

He then goes on to say that “..it could prevent or displace steam oil from emulsifying into the moisture carried by the steam …”. I cannot find any thing to suppor200%”>This is an emotive cry,

[Glynn GuestParticipant @glynnguest59245]

Sorry about cutting the post in half, its the first time I’ve tried to paste from WORD.

 

5) Mr, Hodges asks if model steam plant operators are encouraged to use oil/water condensing tanks to prevent contamination of the water surface, why should glycol be excused?

 

This is an emotive cry, but one that fails to recognize any difference between oil and glycol.  Glycol, as stated many times, is miscible in water, oil however is anything but and leaves an obvious floating film on the.  The small amounts of glycol I propose using in the boiler feed water, even if all disolved into the sailing water, would be greatly diluted.  Add that glycol is an organic compound thus being subject to biodegredation and I do not think my little steam boat is going to cause environmental problems from my grandchildren.

 

6) Mr. Hodges claims that “constant use of glycol will leave a thin coating on the interior surface of the boiler”.  This will reduce the heat transfer rate and quotes the example of a car engine cooling system.

 

This has me puzzled for two reasons.  Firstly, as glycol is water soluble, if any were left on the surface then surely the next refilling would dissolve it?  Secondly, if it cuts down the heat transfer rate then why are we pouring glycol based antifreeze into our car cooling systems?

 

Adding glycol into the boiler feed water of small model steam engine to increase the visual effect of the steam exhaust was, I believe, a novel and untested idea.  There in lies the problem.  Mr. Hodges asked people about this and no matter how qualified, I suspect that none of them had ever actually tried it.  They gave their opinions on possible problems but could not back them up with actual results.

 

I quite understand that people who have spent the price of a decent holiday or even the price of a new car on a model steam plant and boat would not care to risk experimenting with their pride and joy.  But my steam model are simple and, being totally honest, cheap.  They are great fun to sail without the fear of damage or loss.  I also get great pleasure from solving problems and trying out new ideas, much more than any polishing of brass work could provide.  As I believe Sir Frank Whittle once said ” An Engineer can do for five bob what any fool can do for a pound”.

 

As for the dangers of poluting the environment with Glycol, I doubt if our little steam boats could match the volumes coming out of leaking car radiators.  Sometime I think that “Health and Safety” would make a good fifth addition to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse.

Glynn Guest C.Eng

[Glynn GuestParticipant @glynnguest59245]

Testing

[The Long BuildParticipant @thelongbuild]

HELLO  just wondering why this thread shows 13 replies but I can only see 6…???

[Paul TParticipant @pault84577]

Comments by Mr. Glynn Guest have been removed.

[Colin BishopModerator @colinbishop34627]

Not sure that’s true. there seem to be continuing problems with posts being visible on the Forum at the moment and there is no moderator on duty to actually remove them so it would appear to be a software glitch. I understend that the problem has been flagged up but won’t be addressed until after the weekend.

[HS93Participant @hs9317166]

The fat Controller

 

 

“””Comments by Mr. Glynn Guest have been removed.”””  

 

Can you tell us how ypu know this I did not think you where a moderator ???  or do you now run this site. it was only a fortnight ago that you left and removed a load of stuff

 

Peter

[Paul TParticipant @pault84577]

Hello Peter

 

Thank you for your comments and its nice to hear from you again.

To answer your first question I know this because I was directly involved in the discussions relating to this thread and whilst suffering from the occasional senior moment my memory is still fairly intact.

To answer your second question no I am not the moderator for as we all know this is Vinnies position, a job that he does very well and one that I would not want at any price.

The phrase “comments have been removed” is merely a short reporting of an event as I have no wish to speculate on why the postings have disappeared as it might be a personal decision by Mr. Guest, a man that I have the higest respect for.

And to answer your third point I have explained about my return to the site in a previous thread however I will add that having discussed the changes that have happened on both this and the Military Modelling with other long term members of both sites, the primary one being the apparent absence of our friend Vinnie, and that I still have concerns over the management and direction that both sites are now taking.

However as previously stated I do acknowledge that a change in ownership and the rebuilding of an entire infrastructure does take time.

[The Long BuildParticipant @thelongbuild]

The fact that the thread stats still show that there are 18 post to this thread but only about 12 visable suggests to me that the actual posts are still out there, lost in the void of the workings of the softeware . As when posts have been deleated / removed the reply count normaly drops, I would think.

 

I’m sure all will become clear in the next week or so.

 

Can not believe you do not want to be a Mod, The Fat Controller , gauranteed a few more grey hairs..!!

 

[Bryan HodgesParticipant @bryanhodges28732]

 

Good afternoon.

 

Further to my last posting of February 02, 2009, and later posts from Mr. Guest, I offer the following comments and clarifications. 

 

Hopefully, Mr Guest’s posts will reappear for clarification.

 

The subject matters noted below follow the same layout as my earlier noted post.

 

1. Glycol as a lubricant in a steam engine.

 

The comments that I posted on 02/02/2009, indicating that glycol in the steam could either prevent the steam oil from emulsifying with the moisture in the steam, or cause the oil to disassociate from the water/oil emulsion are valid, and in accordance to discussions with a manufacturer of specialty steam oils.

 

If, in fact, the oil does separate (disassociate) from the emulsion either in part, or in whole, the steam oil will not be able to provide an adhesive oil coating on the sliding parts. It will simply pass through the engine and exhaust as separated oil.

 

This concern can be verified by anyone who wishes to do so by placing a telephone call directly to any such oil manufacturer, such as I did.

 

Rather than influence the outcome of such a call by providing the name of the specific manufacturer that I consulted, I suggest that anyone who wishes to pursue an indepedant verification simply google “steam oil”, or “steam engine oil”, and place a call to any listed manufacturer in order to discuss the issue. 

 

2. Glycol enhancing the visible steam discharge.

 

Mr Guest’s most recent posts of February 05, 2009, questioned the validity of my comments detailing why little, if any, glycol would actually be carried out of the boiler in the steam discharge. He indication that this reasoning “appears to be based on a memory of distillation from school science lessons”, and also notes that “When two liquids are miscable then the resulting solution usually has properties that are markedly different from the seperate liquids”.

 

In point of fact, the principle of separating water from a glycol/water solution by heat is scientifically proven, well known, and is a common practice in industry.

 

For example:

 

The company I work for is a leading designer, manufacturer and supplier of, amongst other products, glycol dehydration equipment that is utilized in the process of refining and purifying natural gas.

 

Natural gas, when extracted from the ground, contains various impurities that must be removed prior to the release of the gas into public, or industrial markets. Most natural gas, when extracted, is water saturated. As such, the water must be removed through a dehydration process.

 

One of the most effective methods for this is the process of glycol dehydration, where the water saturated gas is passed through ethylene glycol which has a very high natural affinity for water. During this process, virtually 100% of the water present in the gas is absorbed by the glycol, permitting the now dry natural gas to be moved off into another part of it’s refining process.

 

The resultant glycol/water solution is then sent into a boiler, and heated to a temperature not exceeding 260 degrees F. As I noted in my earlier post, the water, having a much lower boiling point than ethylene glycol, vaporizes, and is drawn off as low pressure steam. The remaining liquid in the boiler has now reverted to near 100% glycol, and is then cooled, and cycled back into the dehydration process. The validation of the effectiveness of this process is the fact that the separated glycol rarely needs to be topped up, or compensated, for a loss of it’s original volume, or quality. 

 

The above process is, as I have noted earlier, scientifically proven.

 

It is also virtually identical to the operation of a model steam boiler.

 

When Mr Guest experiences a trace of glycol, either visibly, or by smell in the steam discharge of his boiler, it is likely due to “carry over”. Carry over is the result of turbulance in the boiler which occurs at the water surface. As a bubble is formed on the water surface, the outer surface skin of the bubble contains a film that includes glycol. This miniscule ammount of glycol is carried into the steam above the water surface when the bubble bursts.

 

This would also explain why doubling the ammount of glycol in the boiler does not appear to double the increase in the visible steam discharge. 

 

It should also be noted that ethylene glycol starts to breakdown, or decompose, when heated to temperatures of over 260 degrees F, which is why the temperature of the described dehydration process is limited.

 

If anyone wishes to examine the actual chemical process for the above, and the characteristics of water and glycol when mixed into a common solution, please note that there is an abundance of scientific data available on the web from various accredited sources. Simply google “natural gas dehydration”, dehydration process”, ethylene glycol”, etc.

 

3. Glycol contamintion in the steam dischage to atmosphere.

 

I believe my comments stand.

 

If a person googles “commercial fog machines”, etc., they will not only find descriptions of various fog generators, but also comments concerning the release of ethylene glycol into an

[Bryan HodgesParticipant @bryanhodges28732]

 

Sorry, looks like the post missed my last comments:

 

“….but also comments concerning the release of ethylene glycol into an enclosed room with people present.

 

In my own personal opinion, I question why anyone would deliberatly create and release a potential pollutant into the atmosphere for purely cosmetic reasons.

 

Summary

 

I originally started this chain of posts by questioning the validity of glycol as a lubricant in a steam engine, and by submitting addiional data in order for interested readers to examine the issue fully, prior to committing to such use.

 

it has since blossomed into a much more detailed review, and is now bordering on becoming argumentative, rather than informative.

 

I am not sure that I, or Mr Guest, want to project even more of our professional and personal time in furthering this discussion.

 

Perhaps someone else would like to do further research, and comment accordingly.

 

Best regards,

 

Bryan     

[Dr John BoothParticipant @drjohnbooth43899]

As a steam enthusiast I have conducted some further experimentation into the addition of glycol into the boiler circuit of a model steam generation plant as I wished to fully understand the processes involved.

I have examined all of the data presented on this thread and whilst it varied from a merely visual record to more complex account based upon commercial processes and have reached the conclusion that both Paul and Bryan have been working under a basic misconception. 

To me the obvious question was where did Paul get his Glycol from as in its natural state it is highly toxic and usually only available to specialist users. 

A quick pm to Paul revealed that he had been using a glycol based automotive coolant purchased from a local garage. I contacted the manufacturer for the chemical composition of this particular brand and found that it contained, amongst other elements, water, a blue dye and low proportion of glycol.  

I conducted some simple experiments involving a standard model steam engine and this brand of coolant and found that with the addition of 3.76% to the recommended process a denser column of steam vapour was produced.

This effect became more pronounced as I increased the proportion of coolant but ceased at 5.02% 

After each steaming I stripped the engine down and under magnification found no adverse effects on any of the bearing surfaces, however I did note a build up of condensate residue within the boiler which resolved to contain an emulsion of coolant and steam oil. 

My conclusion is that Paul’s original statement relating to the addition of 5% glycol was incorrect as he was working under a simple misconception regarding the chemical components of the automotive coolant.

The actual amount of pure glycol in Paul’s mix would have been 0.09% and would not have had any helpful nor detrimental effects on the engine or produce the change in the intensity of the visible aspect of the steam vapour that he observed.

It is in fact the emulsion of steam oil, and dye (held in suspension by the water and glycol) that produces this effect; I would further point out that whilst the effect was visible in the lab it was not so noticeable outdoors. 

At this point I should add that Paul has been a very helpful and willing participant in this research and that these findings have been posted with his full support.

Unfortunately I have to report that during our work Paul was taken ill again with his heart condition and is in quite a bad way so I am sure that we all wish him well and a speedy recovery.

 

 

 

 

[Gordon PannellParticipant @gordonpannell44455]

Having read (skimmed) the item discused, 5%glycol, my two pence worth would be to add to the test ingrediants for increased steam density may be to try J……… baby oil purely to increase the visability of the steam produced!!!

[Author]

Posts