When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
It's a more expensive version of this, https://www.accuratediesel.com/6-7l-...pair-2017.html which I replaced on my truck after I broke my OEM hose barb while installing my S&S kit. It looks a little nicer and blends in better; not sure if it's worth the extra money.
I have the traditional plastic kit and I just received this aluminum one.
the only concern I have with the aluminum one is the metal retaining clip. I think the metal clip localizes the fuel pressures on a much smaller area of the flange of the fuel fitting which is plastic….could break off parts of the flange .
the plastic cover be does a better job of spreading the stress to a wider percent of the fitting flange.
if you use the plastic one with the guard…it’s a pretty sting arrangement. I tried to break mine off and I couldn’t .
Accurate Diesel does stock the OEM style fitting like mine has. I have been on the site before and have seen that fitting before but never thought much of it before... Probably didn't realize it was that easy to break I guess.
Accurate Diesel does stock the OEM style fitting like mine has. I have been on the site before and have seen that fitting before but never thought much of it before... Probably didn't realize it was that easy to break I guess.
I think SPE just released one as well for 50 bucks
My intake gaskets came in. I'll take a pic and post up when I get a chance. I've been working a schit ton of overtime so haven't had the chance to think about the truck. Hopefully soon I'll get this stuff in the truck...
Have an upcoming oil change which means it's time to do the fuel filters which it would be nice to get the S&S kit in soon or shortly after the oil change/fuel filter change. I'm debating about either buying that SPE fuel filter fitting or ordering one from Accurate Diesel (the OEM one) to have either here as a spare if that small nipple breaks. Mr. Murphy is always lurking around the corner to say "I told you so."
Corrosion in Systems Storing and Dispensing Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD), Hypotheses Investigation
Final Report
Executive Summary
Severe and rapid corrosion has been observed in systems storing and dispensing ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) since 2007. In addition, the corrosion is coating the majority of metallic equipment in both the wetted and unwetted portions of ULSD underground storage tanks (USTs). To investigate the problem in an objective manner, multiple stakeholders in the diesel industry, through the Clean Diesel Fuel Alliance, funded this research project. The design included the identification of retail fueling sites and the development of an inspection and sampling protocol to ensure uniform and thorough inspections of USTs. Fuel, water bottoms, vapor, bottom sediments, and scrape samples were taken from six sites: one that was not supposed to have symptoms (but did to a much lesser degree) and five that were to have the severe corrosion. Then, samples from the inspections were analyzed for genetic material and chemical characteristics. These data, in combination with information on additives, have allowed Battelle to draw conclusions with respect to three working hypotheses.
Specifically, the hypotheses are:
1) Aerobic and anaerobic microbes are producing by-products that are establishing a corrosive environment in ULSD systems;
2) Aggressive chemical specie(s) (e.g., acetic acid) present in ULSD systems is(are) facilitating aggressive corrosion; and
3) Additives in the fuel are contributing to the corrosive environment in ULSD systems.
All of the sites inspected contained microbes, although at different abundances. The dominant organism identified from three of the sites, Acetobacter, has characteristics pertinent to the corrosion observed in all of the sites, such as acetic acid production, ethanol utilization, low pH requirements, and oxygen. Although geographically on opposite sides of the country, from different fuel suppliers, and of relatively new construction materials, the presence of the organisms was relatively uniform. The traditionally expected hydrocarbon degrading organisms were found in insignificant abundances. This indicates that the inspected ULSD USTs are selective environments for these specialized, acetic acid producing organisms. Of note from the chemical analyses is that acetic acid was found to be ubiquitous (water bottoms, fuel, vapor, and scrapings) in all of the sites inspected. In addition, ethanol was unexpectedly identified and measured at five of the six sites. Components necessary for the organisms identified to proliferate were analytically determined to be present in the majority of the samples: trace amounts of ethanol, low pH, oxygen, and water were present in the diesel USTs inspected. Finally, although additives could play a role in the corrosive environment, it is unlikely that they are the primary cause of the observed corrosion.
This project was designed to objectively investigate multiple hypotheses as to why ULSD USTs have been experiencing severe and rapid corrosion. The in-depth site inspections were performed on a limited number of sites and therefore may not be representative all of systems experiencing this phenomenon. Although it cannot be stated with statistical significance, ingredients necessary for the observed and chemically determined corrosion in this environment were present at the inspected sites. The most obvious issues causing this problem were the focus of this research and the development of corrosion at different sites could also be influenced by other factors (environmental, geographical, seasonal, etc.) not discussed in this report. The project final hypothesis for this investigation is that corrosion in systems storing and dispensing ULSD is likely due to the dispersal of acetic acid throughout USTs. It is likely produced by Acetobacter bacteria feeding on low levels of ethanol contamination. Dispersed into the humid vapor space by the higher vapor pressure (0.5 psi compared to 0.1 psi for ULSD) and by disturbances during fuel deliveries, acetic acid is deposited throughout the system. This results in a cycle of wetting and drying of the equipment concentrating the acetic acid on the metallic equipment and corroding it quite severely and rapidly.
We all know why they went to ULSD; to reduce the pollution. What I want to focus on here is the BAD that came with this change to diesel fuel. From the main article:
The Bad: Changes in Fuel Chemistry
Removing sulfur contents from diesel fuel has been shown to greatly alter the lubricity and overall chemical composition of the fuel. Refineries use severe hydrotreating to remove sulfur. This is a process which also happens to decrease diesel’s natural lubricity, lower energy density (fuel economy), and increases overall production costs.
While hydrotreating does increase the fuel’s cetane level, most of the side effects of hydrotreating are less than desirable. Fuel economy of ultra low sulfur diesel is estimated to decrease by 1% and, according to the EPA, severe hydrotreating also increases fuel production costs by 5 to 7 cents per gallon. However, these costs may be significantly higher depending on the market, distribution, and other production factors. Lower fuel lubricity is known to contribute to increased engine wear which can also increase maintenance and repair costs for equipment that consume ultra low sulfur diesel.
The Rusty: Corrosive Effects of ULSD
In 2007, pollution awareness and prevention were on the rise as emission mandates came into full effect. Since then, tank corrosion has hit an all-time high for both gasoline and diesel storage. A recent study suggests this may be symptomatic of fuel tankers participating in switch loading where tanker trucks might transport ethanol-based gasoline one day only to haul ultra low sulfur diesel the next.
Alone, ultra low sulfur diesel has a higher affinity to water than traditional diesel. Water is known to be one of the main contributors to tank corrosion while also fostering rapid microbial growth in diesel. It has been shown that mixing ULSD with small amounts of biofuel, such as ethanol, may accelerate tank corrosion. This due to the microbes in the diesel fuel digesting trace amounts ethanol, creating high-enough levels of acetic acid to cause significant corrosion of the surrounding tank.
In conclusion, the benefits of ultra low sulfur diesel are undeniably noble but, as with many significant changes, there will always be trade-offs to consider.
Addressing Reduced Lubricity & Fuel Economy
As previously mentioned, hydrotreating diesel fuel to remove sulfur does reduce overall lubricity and energy density (fuel economy). To effectively address these problems, one can adopt a fuel additive, possibly addressing both issues with a single bottle. Using a fuel additive does require the individual to regularly dose their fuel supply upon fill-up, but the benefit they receive from doing MAY exceed that of simply restoring what was lost during the hydrotreating process.
Preventing Corrosion & Unplanned Downtime
Accelerated tank corrosion is no doubt a serious issue, especially for companies storing large volumes of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) for backup power applications. ULSD’s high affinity to water and the practice of fuel switching are two factors contributing to this alarming problem. Luckily, there is a solution to this in the form of regular fuel filtration.
Water in diesel fuel has long been an issue leading to tank corrosion and rampant microbial growth (“the diesel bug”).
When microbes proliferate in the fuel, they begin to produce a sludge byproduct which prematurely clogs onboard filters of connected equipment like backup power generators. The clogging of these filters can lead to unplanned maintenance and downtime, a serious issue for mission critical facilities. In addition to producing sludge, these microbes will break down trace amounts of biofuels, producing acetic acid. This acid, alongside water, contributes to accelerated tank corrosion.
By regularly filtering water out of the fuel, one can prevent accelerated tank corrosion from occurring. Without water, microbial contamination cannot occur, and without microbial contamination, acetic acid cannot be produced from the trace amounts of biofuel often found in ultra low sulfur diesel.
So one may ask, how is it that water continually finds its way into the fuel and how do I regularly filter water out of the fuel?
To answer the first question, water is always present in fuel to some degree. This presence is usually higher in ultra low sulfur diesel and biofuels due to their chemistry. Through tank condensation, water is continually reintroduced into the fuel supply as warm days turn into cooler nights.
While they are talking about diesel fuel storage tanks, this still applies to truck owners. As those tanks are where we get our fuel from. Just FYI...
Last edited by Overkill2; Jul 23, 2021 at 05:43 AM.
Reason: edit post
Many analysis methods were performed on the matrices sampled during the inspections. Some of the results that are more relevant to the hypotheses under investigation are presented below in Tables 9 through 11 and all of the results are presented in Appendix F. Table 9 shows results from the analyses performed on the fuel samples taken at each inspection site. Acetate (a form of acetic acid) is not expected in diesel fuel but was measureable in four of the six sampled fuels. Ethanol was also unexpectedly identified; therefore, a separate analysis was conducted to estimate the ethanol concentrations of both fuel and water bottoms. This was accomplished by comparing the instrument response to the responses of fuel spiked with ethanol. These results indicate that ethanol could be contaminating ULSD as four of the six fuels contained it.An acceptable NACE analysis result is a requirement for fuel to be transported via pipeline and is not traditionally performed for fuel transportation via barge, truck, or directly dispensed from a terminal. In this case, three of the six samples failed this test, indicating that the corrosion inhibitor that may have been added at the refinery was consumed by the time the fuel reached the retail sites. According to the Federal Trade Commission requirements and ASTM D975, biodiesel is allowed to be added to ULSD at up to 5% of the composition. These results indicate that two samples had detectable levels of biodiesel, and only one was close to the 5% at 3.55%. This sample was also the only one that contained formate and had the highest composition of water, both of which are related to the presence of biodiesel. This could be due to the degradation of biodiesel. Finally, since the corrosion started to be reported after the lowering of sulfur content, the sulfur results for these sites ranged from 5.9 to 7.7 ppmv, which is well below the 15 ppm maximum.
Corrosion in Systems Storing and Dispensing Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD), Hypotheses Investigation
Final Report
Executive Summary
Severe and rapid corrosion has been observed in systems storing and dispensing ultra low sulfur diesel (ULSD) since 2007. In addition, the corrosion is coating the majority of metallic equipment in both the wetted and unwetted portions of ULSD underground storage tanks (USTs). To investigate the problem in an objective manner, multiple stakeholders in the diesel industry, through the Clean Diesel Fuel Alliance, funded this research project. The design included the identification of retail fueling sites and the development of an inspection and sampling protocol to ensure uniform and thorough inspections of USTs. Fuel, water bottoms, vapor, bottom sediments, and scrape samples were taken from six sites: one that was not supposed to have symptoms (but did to a much lesser degree) and five that were to have the severe corrosion. Then, samples from the inspections were analyzed for genetic material and chemical characteristics. These data, in combination with information on additives, have allowed Battelle to draw conclusions with respect to three working hypotheses.
Specifically, the hypotheses are:
1) Aerobic and anaerobic microbes are producing by-products that are establishing a corrosive environment in ULSD systems;
2) Aggressive chemical specie(s) (e.g., acetic acid) present in ULSD systems is(are) facilitating aggressive corrosion; and
3) Additives in the fuel are contributing to the corrosive environment in ULSD systems.
All of the sites inspected contained microbes, although at different abundances. The dominant organism identified from three of the sites, Acetobacter, has characteristics pertinent to the corrosion observed in all of the sites, such as acetic acid production, ethanol utilization, low pH requirements, and oxygen. Although geographically on opposite sides of the country, from different fuel suppliers, and of relatively new construction materials, the presence of the organisms was relatively uniform. The traditionally expected hydrocarbon degrading organisms were found in insignificant abundances. This indicates that the inspected ULSD USTs are selective environments for these specialized, acetic acid producing organisms. Of note from the chemical analyses is that acetic acid was found to be ubiquitous (water bottoms, fuel, vapor, and scrapings) in all of the sites inspected. In addition, ethanol was unexpectedly identified and measured at five of the six sites. Components necessary for the organisms identified to proliferate were analytically determined to be present in the majority of the samples: trace amounts of ethanol, low pH, oxygen, and water were present in the diesel USTs inspected. Finally, although additives could play a role in the corrosive environment, it is unlikely that they are the primary cause of the observed corrosion.
This project was designed to objectively investigate multiple hypotheses as to why ULSD USTs have been experiencing severe and rapid corrosion. The in-depth site inspections were performed on a limited number of sites and therefore may not be representative all of systems experiencing this phenomenon. Although it cannot be stated with statistical significance, ingredients necessary for the observed and chemically determined corrosion in this environment were present at the inspected sites. The most obvious issues causing this problem were the focus of this research and the development of corrosion at different sites could also be influenced by other factors (environmental, geographical, seasonal, etc.) not discussed in this report. The project final hypothesis for this investigation is that corrosion in systems storing and dispensing ULSD is likely due to the dispersal of acetic acid throughout USTs. It is likely produced by Acetobacter bacteria feeding on low levels of ethanol contamination. Dispersed into the humid vapor space by the higher vapor pressure (0.5 psi compared to 0.1 psi for ULSD) and by disturbances during fuel deliveries, acetic acid is deposited throughout the system. This results in a cycle of wetting and drying of the equipment concentrating the acetic acid on the metallic equipment and corroding it quite severely and rapidly.
We all know why they went to ULSD; to reduce the pollution. What I want to focus on here is the BAD that came with this change to diesel fuel. From the main article:
The Bad: Changes in Fuel Chemistry
Removing sulfur contents from diesel fuel has been shown to greatly alter the lubricity and overall chemical composition of the fuel. Refineries use severe hydrotreating to remove sulfur. This is a process which also happens to decrease diesel’s natural lubricity, lower energy density (fuel economy), and increases overall production costs.
While hydrotreating does increase the fuel’s cetane level, most of the side effects of hydrotreating are less than desirable. Fuel economy of ultra low sulfur diesel is estimated to decrease by 1% and, according to the EPA, severe hydrotreating also increases fuel production costs by 5 to 7 cents per gallon. However, these costs may be significantly higher depending on the market, distribution, and other production factors. Lower fuel lubricity is known to contribute to increased engine wear which can also increase maintenance and repair costs for equipment that consume ultra low sulfur diesel.
The Rusty: Corrosive Effects of ULSD
In 2007, pollution awareness and prevention were on the rise as emission mandates came into full effect. Since then, tank corrosion has hit an all-time high for both gasoline and diesel storage. A recent study suggests this may be symptomatic of fuel tankers participating in switch loading where tanker trucks might transport ethanol-based gasoline one day only to haul ultra low sulfur diesel the next.
Alone, ultra low sulfur diesel has a higher affinity to water than traditional diesel. Water is known to be one of the main contributors to tank corrosion while also fostering rapid microbial growth in diesel. It has been shown that mixing ULSD with small amounts of biofuel, such as ethanol, may accelerate tank corrosion. This due to the microbes in the diesel fuel digesting trace amounts ethanol, creating high-enough levels of acetic acid to cause significant corrosion of the surrounding tank.
In conclusion, the benefits of ultra low sulfur diesel are undeniably noble but, as with many significant changes, there will always be trade-offs to consider.
Addressing Reduced Lubricity & Fuel Economy
As previously mentioned, hydrotreating diesel fuel to remove sulfur does reduce overall lubricity and energy density (fuel economy). To effectively address these problems, one can adopt a fuel additive, possibly addressing both issues with a single bottle. Using a fuel additive does require the individual to regularly dose their fuel supply upon fill-up, but the benefit they receive from doing MAY exceed that of simply restoring what was lost during the hydrotreating process.
Preventing Corrosion & Unplanned Downtime
Accelerated tank corrosion is no doubt a serious issue, especially for companies storing large volumes of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) for backup power applications. ULSD’s high affinity to water and the practice of fuel switching are two factors contributing to this alarming problem. Luckily, there is a solution to this in the form of regular fuel filtration.
Water in diesel fuel has long been an issue leading to tank corrosion and rampant microbial growth (“the diesel bug”).
When microbes proliferate in the fuel, they begin to produce a sludge byproduct which prematurely clogs onboard filters of connected equipment like backup power generators. The clogging of these filters can lead to unplanned maintenance and downtime, a serious issue for mission critical facilities. In addition to producing sludge, these microbes will break down trace amounts of biofuels, producing acetic acid. This acid, alongside water, contributes to accelerated tank corrosion.
By regularly filtering water out of the fuel, one can prevent accelerated tank corrosion from occurring. Without water, microbial contamination cannot occur, and without microbial contamination, acetic acid cannot be produced from the trace amounts of biofuel often found in ultra low sulfur diesel.
So one may ask, how is it that water continually finds its way into the fuel and how do I regularly filter water out of the fuel?
To answer the first question, water is always present in fuel to some degree. This presence is usually higher in ultra low sulfur diesel and biofuels due to their chemistry. Through tank condensation, water is continually reintroduced into the fuel supply as warm days turn into cooler nights.
While they are talking about diesel fuel storage tanks, this still applies to truck owners. As those tanks are where we get our fuel from. Just FYI...
so in this article algae is bad and remove and the water prevents algae. No mention of anti algae agents .
I currently have two water seperators. The second one is supposed to be 95% efficient at removing emulsified water . I have yet to see any water in either of the separators.
there must be something being added to the fuel by suppliers, that emulsified the water. It’s doing a pretty good job of it.
Sometimes I breeze over your longer posts Dave unless something catches my attention early. but this last one I found interesting. Agree with @speakerfritz about finding the lack of mentioning antimicrobe or algae agents a bit odd. I wonder if the presence of microbes and the resulting acid by product in our fuel tanks could cause corrosion? My assumption is our tanks are lined, but I wonder how good the liner is? I know some earlier Ford diesel trucks had some liner problems, but by now that should be a thing of the past.
so in this article algae is bad and remove and the water prevents algae. No mention of anti algae agents .
I currently have two water seperators. The second one is supposed to be 95% efficient at removing emulsified water . I have yet to see any water in either of the separators.
there must be something being added to the fuel by suppliers, that emulsified the water. It’s doing a pretty good job of it.
Originally Posted by KodiakF250
Sometimes I breeze over your longer posts Dave unless something catches my attention early. but this last one I found interesting. Agree with @speakerfritz about finding the lack of mentioning antimicrobe or algae agents a bit odd. I wonder if the presence of microbes and the resulting acid by product in our fuel tanks could cause corrosion? My assumption is our tanks are lined, but I wonder how good the liner is? I know some earlier Ford diesel trucks had some liner problems, but by now that should be a thing of the past.
What I got out of it is, if there is no water in fuel, you won't have the "fuel" required for microbe growth.
As to the "algae," it's not algae but microbes. It's not plant life in the fuel but living , moving organisms.
Before we discuss how to remove and prevent diesel algae, it is important to discuss what the substance growing in your tank ACTUALLY is.
Diesel “algae” is in fact, not algae at all. Although commonly referred to as such, the substance growing in your fuel tank is just bacteria and fungus. While algae and the substance in your tank are both a form of microbes, there is a key difference between the two.
Algae is a plant, bacteria is not. Unlike bacteria, algae require light to survive. Because a fuel tank does not let light in, actual algae cannot survive there. Although it’s not actually a type of algae growing in your diesel fuel, we will continue to use the term “diesel algae” throughout this post to reduce confusion.
I just post this schitt for FYI is all. You guys can do with it what you please. Not trying to sound pricky, but I'm smart enough to know that the stuff I post is not for everyone. I found it interesting that way back when I first started here, I said I didn't trust the fuel, hence the use of additive. Then they stated how they found ethanol, from gasoline, in five out of the six tanks tested, at the bottom of the tanks.
This came from an additive company but I kept the specific additive products out of this. This post was about the information about ULSD fuel and passing it on to those who wanted to read it.
I did mention that this was about storage tanks. But as to our own tanks, I have no idea.
Last edited by Overkill2; Jul 23, 2021 at 09:16 AM.
Reason: Add to post
that I looked at that PDF for the 2017 6.7 OBD Summary and saw that the Motorcraft secondary fuel filter is rated for 2 microns. This is from Ford themselves. I thought it was rated at 4 microns. I already had the 2016MY one on my computer because I found these OBD PDFs when I was looking into something for Bitter Diesel but never looked at the pages with the 6.7 engine schematics that showed that fact.
page 8 of the PDF shows it as 2 microns under the hood. So those replacing their OEM setup may not be getting the same filtration with every different brand of filter they buy. You already had a good filter under the hood.
Sometimes I breeze over your longer posts Dave unless something catches my attention early. but this last one I found interesting. Agree with @speakerfritz about finding the lack of mentioning antimicrobe or algae agents a bit odd. I wonder if the presence of microbes and the resulting acid by product in our fuel tanks could cause corrosion? My assumption is our tanks are lined, but I wonder how good the liner is? I know some earlier Ford diesel trucks had some liner problems, but by now that should be a thing of the past.
Now that I think about it, going to an S&B extra capacity, which I want to do in the future, is good move because it's plastic. No metal, no potential for any problems. But my truck doesn't sit. I'd imagine if the problem were to happen, it would be to the trucks that sit more.
So I will state that it's great that I don't have to stand on my front bumper anymore with my feet in the hole in the front bumper to remove the oil can to check it and drain it.
Where i had Gorilla tape on the edge of the fender to prevent the can from rattling against it, i placed an old rubber hose there which will keep it away from the lip. It still rattled with the tape on it. I should be good now.
Just pull it out from where it sits, grab my oil filter wrench, screw off the bottom and my feet are on the ground.
Not much oil in there. There were globs of moisture that were running down into the oil.
The last drain was on 5/9 at 73621 miles. This check was done today at 77098 miles.
