armylifer
Well-known member
Lifetime Member
Equipment
BX1860, FEL, RCK54P MMM, BB1548 Box Scraper, Quick Hitch, Piranha Bar, BX6315
I know that the conclusions you posted conflict with my real world experience.The conclusions are in bold and are direct quotes and are quite clear. Go read the report - it's not my interpretation it's the authors exact words describing the measured performance they observed. I will repeat the results here:
The future goal as stated in the 2006 paper is to improve on both and reduce/eliminate the increased frequency of active regen by identifying the optimal operating conditions for a DPF when used with bio-blends. That seems pretty easy to understand. In post #5 I gave you some current data indicating that follow on R&D has made that goal a reality.
- Installation of the DPF caused PM emissions to drop by more than a factor of 10 for petrodiesel.
- Transient emissions tests show a 25% PM reduction for B20 without the DPF installed
- Use of B20 with the DPF produced an additional PM reduction of 67% below the petrodiesel+DPF level
- Filter regeneration rate measurements indicate that biodiesel causes a significant increase in regeneration rate, even at the 5% blending level
As to B100 its superior performance wrt to reducing PM is solidly documented including in that report. But it has other issues that make it problematic - most notably gelling. Interestingly other data has shown animal fat bio tends to perform better than vegetable fat bio.
Currently the use of bio blends in concentrations as high as B20 are Kubota approved.
Dan