F1technical.net

Even these independent dyno tests must be using the manufacturers own coast down curves?

I took a bit more of a research into the subject. Am I correct to state they use a filter to reduce co2 emissions?

Turbo: The filter (aka DPF) is used to reduce particulate emissions (aka smoke).

There are not any after treatment systems which reduce CO2 emissions.

CO2 is a direct result of the basic combustion process: HC+O2 (in the air) > H2O + CO2 + pollutants.

It is proportional to fuel used. Carbon atoms in. Carbon atoms out.

The main pollutants are HC, CO, NOx which are oxidised/reduced by catalysis; and smoke/particulates which are trapped in a ceramic filter then periodically burned off.

In the case of a Diesel, meeting the more stringent NOx targets (e.g. USA) may require the use of a reductant additive such as Urea, although this increases the cost of the system.

Other methods used to achieve this appear to include cheating.

Shooty81 wrote:

SiLo wrote:The list is slowly building up then. I'm currently working for a large car manufacturer and have had people that work in engine development tell me that we don't do anything like this. I don't believe them and am waiting for most car companies to get caught with their pants around their ankles.

The irony that there is a big climate push going on at the moment regarding CO2 emissions as well...

3 companies doing that doesn't mean all companies!

I'm quite certain most of them are doing something like this, if not defeat devices, then coding the ECU so it knows its under test conditions etc, and modifying the engine performance accordingly.

SiLo: Re: ... if not defeat devices, then coding the ECU so it knows its under test conditions etc, and modifying the engine performance accordingly."

That's a defeat device!

outside the USA there is no legal prohibition of functionalities appearing to some as 'defeat devices'
VW has not broken any laws elsewhere

the modern diesel on its best behaviour can be far cleaner than before (ie much of the time it's storing pollution)
but it can't maintain this behaviour (and economy) every minute of the journey (periodically it must purge stored pollution)
that is a basic reason why there's discrepancies in emissions 'off test' ie with different and more extensive tests

the industry delivered (the Eur 5 then Eur 6) magic progress that politicians (helped by spineless govt 'scientists') wanted
but even Eur 6 lets the diesel be dirtier than the petrol engine (in all but CO2/consumption)
all engines get dirtier 'off test', but petrol engines far less so than these diesels
because the diesels store then purge their pollution

mainland European refineries were lazier than some others, producing lower grade petrol (and correspondingly more diesel)
other countries manage without the diesel car - so perhaps it will now be phased out in favour of the hybrid ?

Deleted. Double posted in error.

Tommy Cookers wrote:outside the USA there is no legal prohibition of functionalities appearing to some as 'defeat devices'
VW has not broken any laws elsewhere

Are you sure that is correct.

I thought it was explicitly illegal in EU for several years.

Google "EU 715/2007 Defeat Device" and you should get the relevant statute.

yes, you're right
chapter 1 article 3 - definitions
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ ... 32007R0715

it prohibits 'that which reduces the effectiveness of the emission control system' (under normal vehicle use)
what constitutes 'reducing the ECS's effectiveness' ?
how have VW reduced the effectiveness of the ECS ? - (they haven't ?)

iirc not as good a 'catch-all' as the EPA dd clause

and we already have the oficial schedule of indefinite acceptance of real driving emissions much higher than the test emissions
(although the news media don't seem to mention that, so keeping their story on the boil)
one crime is official air quality management seemingly based on incompetent judgement that test emissions are representative
but no dismissals, resignations, or even apologies ?
no, the plan is for VW to play the role of (repentant) sinner so the EU can escape responsibility for incompetence or corruption
and if the EPA hadn't rumbled VW the EU would still pretend that real driving Eur 6 NOx emissions are within 80 mg

Tommy Cookers wrote:yes, you're right
chapter 1 article 3 - definitions
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ ... 32007R0715

it prohibits 'that which reduces the effectiveness of the emission control system' (under normal vehicle use)
what constitutes 'reducing the ECS's effectiveness' ?
how have VW reduced the effectiveness of the ECS ? - (they haven't ?)

iirc not as good a 'catch-all' as the EPA dd clause

That is some serious selective quoting, the full text reads:

10. ‘defeat device’ means any element of design which senses temperature, vehicle speed, engine speed (RPM), transmission gear, manifold vacuum or any other parameter for the purpose of activating, modulating, delaying or deactivating the operation of any part of the emission control system, that reduces the effectiveness of the emission control system under conditions which may reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal vehicle operation and use;


Much more encompassing than the tiny snippet you posted.

It all includes ' any other parameter for the purpose of ....delaying or deactivating the operation of any part of the emission control system'.

So yes, the VW device does get caught out by this law.

Pieoter wrote:That is some serious selective quoting, the full text reads:

10. ‘defeat device’ means any element of design which senses temperature, vehicle speed, engine speed (RPM), transmission gear, manifold vacuum or any other parameter for the purpose of activating, modulating, delaying or deactivating the operation of any part of the emission control system, that reduces the effectiveness of the emission control system under conditions which may reasonably be expected to be encountered in normal vehicle operation and use;

(..)

Such a definition would make almost every, if not every, emission control system a cheat device. Those systems are controlled (modulated) based on inputs from the sensors, and their effectiveness is being varied to achieve certain level of emission.

BTW - does this document define term "effectiveness of the emission control system"?

so an air flow straightener will fix nox emissions, together with a remap, I just can't figure out why they didn't include the magnets on the fuel rail, that align the molecules properly

I guess they think that people are this dumb nowdays

https://www.volkswagen-media-services.c ... h=aur4bDiS

jz11 wrote:so an air flow straightener will fix nox emissions, together with a remap, I just can't figure out why they didn't include the magnets on the fuel rail, that align the molecules properly

I guess they think that people are this dumb nowdays

https://www.volkswagen-media-services.c ... h=aur4bDiS

and the say the 2.0 will just need a software update and it will not affect mileage or anything, if it was that easy why didn't they just do that from the start?

langwadt wrote:

jz11 wrote:so an air flow straightener will fix nox emissions, together with a remap, I just can't figure out why they didn't include the magnets on the fuel rail, that align the molecules properly

I guess they think that people are this dumb nowdays

https://www.volkswagen-media-services.c ... h=aur4bDiS

and the say the 2.0 will just need a software update and it will not affect mileage or anything, if it was that easy why didn't they just do that from the start?

"Please note: The information contained in this press release does not apply to products and services from the Volkswagen Group of America or Volkswagen Canada."

The problem has always been NA emissions - the European NOx regs are a piece of cake by comparison.

outside the USA there is no legal prohibition of functionalities appearing to some as 'defeat devices'
VW has not broken any laws elsewhere

If true it just re-enforces my complaint about other countries wanting the USA to further curb pollution.
Why should we try to clean up pollution here when other countries are so lax .
Look at what happened this past week in China. When other counties start caring then I'll care.
.

The problem has always been NA emissions - the European NOx regs are a piece of cake by comparison.

Further proof of what I say.
When y'all stop clearing land by burning, when you stop cutting down rain forests, when the rest of the world stops all the insane BS,,then i'll care about pollution here.