On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 07:56:20 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 9/19/2015 10:51 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 05:30:45 -0400, Steve W. wrote:

How do you figure that "almost no states use OBD" testing. In fact most
of the states do not use a dyno any longer.

I just had mine tested, in California, and they used a dyno.
No OBD hookup whatsoever.

How did they check for pending codes if they did not use a code scanner?
You can't pass with more than two pending codes (one on some years).

That shop would be shut down by the state if it was found that they were
passing cars without checking for pending codes.
In ontario the testers are directly connected to a central computer
and it is virtually impossible to go from stem 1 to step 3 without
completing step 2 first.

A number of years back, some crooks were running a "good" vehicle
through the test 5 or 6 times, entering the Vin for one that would not
pass. They made changes to the system that prevented that pretty
quick.

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 08:00:37 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 9/19/2015 8:15 PM, wrote:

Exactly what are you trying to say??? My reply was to say there were
many instances of people - hobbyists and mechanics alike, screwing
with emmission controls in an attempt to defeat them and get better
mileage and power, and getting (usually) neither.

That was the big problem in California. A significant number of
out-of-compliance vehicles were causing most of the pollution. Even
though percentage-wise the number of such vehicles was small, in
absolute numbers it was large enough to cause a problem.

The "catalytic converter test pipe" was popular for a while. But as you
said, in most cases, all the tampering with emissions controls did not
have any effect on mileage and/or power.
Didn't have any significant positive effect on mileage and or power.

And the "test pipe" stopped being an option in 1996 with OBD2 testing
pre and post cat O2 - unless you bought an O2 fake-out device that
generated a fake O2 signal (actually, 2 signals ----)- which caused
other problems (genrally a lot poorer fuel mileage and not much power
improvement, if any)

On 20 Sep 2015 12:12:31 -0400, (Scott Dorsey) wrote:

sms wrote:
On 9/19/2015 10:51 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 05:30:45 -0400, Steve W. wrote:

How do you figure that "almost no states use OBD" testing. In fact most
of the states do not use a dyno any longer.

I just had mine tested, in California, and they used a dyno.
No OBD hookup whatsoever.

How did they check for pending codes if they did not use a code scanner?
You can't pass with more than two pending codes (one on some years).

They look for the light on the dashboard that indicates codes have been
logged.

Except "pending"codes don't turn on the CEL, and the CEL does not
indicate if monitors have been "set"

In some places they always use the scanner to make sure, for instance,
that the ECU wasn't reset immdiately before taking the car in for
inspection. In some places they do not.
--scott

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 12:12:31 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote:

They look for the light on the dashboard that indicates codes have been
logged.

That.

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 07:54:12 -0700, sms wrote:

You said it yourself. You can't pass emissions with pending codes. They
have to run a scan to check this.

You have a good point.
I need to recheck my facts.

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000, Ewald Böhm wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...agen/72436098/
The software code allows all of the car's emissions systems to work when the cars are taken in for clean-air testing. But as soon as the emissions tests are complete, the system reverts to spewing pollutants. The cars emitted nitrogen oxide at a level of up to 40 times the standard level, the EPA alleges.

On 9/20/2015 1:29 PM, Mitch Kaufmann wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000, Ewald Böhm wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...agen/72436098/
The software code allows all of the car's emissions systems to work when the cars are taken in for clean-air testing. But as soon as the emissions tests are complete, the system reverts to spewing pollutants. The cars emitted nitrogen oxide at a level of up to 40 times the standard level, the EPA alleges.


According to the LA Times:

"Rather than meet the standards, the EPA says VW sneaked in the defeat
device software to detect when the car is hooked up to a dynamometer, a
machine that measures emissions. When emissions are being measured, the
defeat device tells the car to operate at "dyno calibration," or full
emission control levels, to meet the standards."

"At all other times, however, the software sets the engine to run on
"road calibration," allowing the excessive emissions. How can the
program tell the difference? By noting the position of the steering
wheel, variations in speed and other data that suggest no one is driving
the car, and thus it is likely being tested."

On 9/20/2015 9:12 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
sms wrote:
On 9/19/2015 10:51 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 05:30:45 -0400, Steve W. wrote:

How do you figure that "almost no states use OBD" testing. In fact most
of the states do not use a dyno any longer.

I just had mine tested, in California, and they used a dyno.
No OBD hookup whatsoever.

How did they check for pending codes if they did not use a code scanner?
You can't pass with more than two pending codes (one on some years).

They look for the light on the dashboard that indicates codes have been
logged.

In some places they always use the scanner to make sure, for instance,
that the ECU wasn't reset immdiately before taking the car in for
inspection. In some places they do not.

Well in California they definitely check via the OBD-II port. I had
replaced a battery and there were no dashboard lights indicating
anything. The first thing they did was to do a scan for codes.

The number of pending codes that is allowable varies by year of
manufacture. A good shop will tell you the drive sequence to clear the
pending codes for each model. A bad shop won't even know this information.

On 9/20/2015 12:32 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 07:56:20 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 9/19/2015 10:51 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 05:30:45 -0400, Steve W. wrote:

How do you figure that "almost no states use OBD" testing. In fact most
of the states do not use a dyno any longer.

I just had mine tested, in California, and they used a dyno.
No OBD hookup whatsoever.

How did they check for pending codes if they did not use a code scanner?
You can't pass with more than two pending codes (one on some years).

That shop would be shut down by the state if it was found that they were
passing cars without checking for pending codes.
In ontario the testers are directly connected to a central computer
and it is virtually impossible to go from stem 1 to step 3 without
completing step 2 first.

A number of years back, some crooks were running a "good" vehicle
through the test 5 or 6 times, entering the Vin for one that would not
pass. They made changes to the system that prevented that pretty
quick.

In California, one "smog check factory" in L.A. got caught because the
state checked registered addresses of the vehicles and wondered why so
many vehicles were being smogged at this one particular shop when their
registered address was so far away. Few people will drive 25 miles in
L.A. to get a smog check at a particular shop.

My brother-in-law regularly had inspectors come into his shop with test
vehicles to be smogged. They would reveal who they were after the test.
He did really well. He got one demerit for not telling the "customer"
that they had the option of getting the vehicle repaired at his shop or
any shop, even though he did ask if they wanted it to be repaired. But
he still passed the inspection.

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:49:16 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 9/20/2015 9:12 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
sms wrote:
On 9/19/2015 10:51 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 05:30:45 -0400, Steve W. wrote:

How do you figure that "almost no states use OBD" testing. In fact most
of the states do not use a dyno any longer.

I just had mine tested, in California, and they used a dyno.
No OBD hookup whatsoever.

How did they check for pending codes if they did not use a code scanner?
You can't pass with more than two pending codes (one on some years).

They look for the light on the dashboard that indicates codes have been
logged.

In some places they always use the scanner to make sure, for instance,
that the ECU wasn't reset immdiately before taking the car in for
inspection. In some places they do not.

Well in California they definitely check via the OBD-II port. I had
replaced a battery and there were no dashboard lights indicating
anything. The first thing they did was to do a scan for codes.

The number of pending codes that is allowable varies by year of
manufacture. A good shop will tell you the drive sequence to clear the
pending codes for each model. A bad shop won't even know this information.
Actually it is not pending codes that are the issue. It is the
readiness monitors.. Can't remember how many readiness monitors there
are - but there's a catalyst monitor, a O2 sensor monitor, and EGR
monitors, and O2sensor heater and cat heater monitor on some vehicles.
These are the intermittent monitors that need to be "set" .

Setting the monitor just means they have been through one or more
test sequences and have aquired valid data..

The rest of the monitors are contimuous monitors - misfire,
component, and fuel system, nonitors.

The evap monitor, for instance, is only "valid" in a fixed temperature
range, and with the tank between something like 1/4 and 3/4 full (not
100% sure of the actual numbrs). If you reset the codes or replace
the battery on a vehicle with the tank full or almost empty you can
NOT set the readiness monitor for the evap system - so virtually ALL
OBD2 based emission test facilities will allow at least one monitor to
be un-set or not ready.

If you know what code is coming up, and want to "cheat" the system, if
you can avoid setting that particular monitor, while setting all the
others, you can sometimes get a vehicle to pass. You need to
understand the drive cycle and what can cause the monitor you want
dissabled to fail to set. (and it needs to be an intermittent or
non-continuous monitor. The usual culprits are Cat, evap, or EGR.

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:49:16 -0700, sms wrote:

The number of pending codes that is allowable varies by year of
manufacture. A good shop will tell you the drive sequence to clear the
pending codes for each model. A bad shop won't even know this information.

It's usually documented as the FTP.

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 16:29:30 -0400, Mitch Kaufmann wrote:

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000, Ewald Böhm wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/...agen/72436098/
The software code allows all of the car's emissions systems to work when the cars are taken in for clean-air testing. But as soon as the emissions tests are complete, the system reverts to spewing pollutants. The cars emitted nitrogen oxide at a level of up to 40 times the standard level, the EPA alleges.

That answers what.
But it doesn't answer HOW.

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 14:03:08 -0700, Sofa Slug wrote:

How can the
program tell the difference? By noting the position of the steering
wheel, variations in speed and other data that suggest no one is driving
the car, and thus it is likely being tested."

Finally!

Someone who both understood the question, and who posited an answer!

Of all the posters, you're the ONLY one who understood the question!

Sofa Slug wrote in :

VW sneaked in the defeat
device software to detect when the car is hooked up to a dynamometer

What I'm surprised at is that each state can have a *different* procedure.

In California, they use the dyno, but in many less technical states, they
still use the dumb procedures.

This explains how they noticed there was testing going on.
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/edito...919-story.html
http://www.rocketnews.com/2015/09/did-volkswagen-cheat/

But that only works for the intelligent states.
How did they also fool the low-tech states like NJ, Kentucky & Kansas?

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000, Ewald Böhm wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

The best answer to the question seems to be here, as noted by Sofa Slug:

http://www.rocketnews.com/2015/09/did-volkswagen-cheat/
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/edito...919-story.html

"How can the program tell the difference? By noting the position of the
steering wheel, variations in speed and other data that suggest no one
is driving the car, and thus it is likely being tested."

Apparently VW lied at first, & apparently they can no longer sell the cars:

"The cheating came to light when the California Air Resources Board and
the EPA pressed Volkswagen for an explanation for disparities found between
lab tests and road tests of its vehicle emissions. The agencies didn't
find the technical reasons offered by VW to be convincing and said they
would not issue certificates allowing 2016 models to be sold until the
automaker offered an adequate explanation. "Only then did VW admit it
had designed and installed a defeat device in these vehicles," the EPA
said. VW said it was cooperating with the investigation but otherwise
had no comment."

It's interesting that VW didn't fess up until they were forced to.

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 07:57:34 -0500, Ewald Böhm
wrote:

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000, Ewald Böhm wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for
emissions?

The best answer to the question seems to be here, as noted by Sofa Slug:

http://www.rocketnews.com/2015/09/did-volkswagen-cheat/
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/edito...919-story.html

"How can the program tell the difference? By noting the position of the
steering wheel, variations in speed and other data that suggest no one
is driving the car, and thus it is likely being tested."

Apparently VW lied at first, & apparently they can no longer sell the
cars:

"The cheating came to light when the California Air Resources Board and
the EPA pressed Volkswagen for an explanation for disparities found
between
lab tests and road tests of its vehicle emissions. The agencies didn't
find the technical reasons offered by VW to be convincing and said they
would not issue certificates allowing 2016 models to be sold until the
automaker offered an adequate explanation. "Only then did VW admit it
had designed and installed a defeat device in these vehicles," the EPA
said. VW said it was cooperating with the investigation but otherwise
had no comment."

It's interesting that VW didn't fess up until they were forced to.


That's pretty much human nature going back to the Garden of
Eden. The next trick is to blame someone else. A TV show from long
ago had comedian Flip Wilson on. His line was "The devil made me
do it".



--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

trader_4 wrote in
:

Just the facts.

OK. Just the facts Danno:
http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/smogche...bd_only_im.pdf

On 9/20/2015 4:57 PM, wrote:
On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:49:16 -0700, sms
wrote:

On 9/20/2015 9:12 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
sms wrote:
On 9/19/2015 10:51 PM, Ewald Böhm wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 05:30:45 -0400, Steve W. wrote:

How do you figure that "almost no states use OBD" testing. In fact most
of the states do not use a dyno any longer.

I just had mine tested, in California, and they used a dyno.
No OBD hookup whatsoever.

How did they check for pending codes if they did not use a code scanner?
You can't pass with more than two pending codes (one on some years).

They look for the light on the dashboard that indicates codes have been
logged.

In some places they always use the scanner to make sure, for instance,
that the ECU wasn't reset immdiately before taking the car in for
inspection. In some places they do not.

Well in California they definitely check via the OBD-II port. I had
replaced a battery and there were no dashboard lights indicating
anything. The first thing they did was to do a scan for codes.

The number of pending codes that is allowable varies by year of
manufacture. A good shop will tell you the drive sequence to clear the
pending codes for each model. A bad shop won't even know this information.
Actually it is not pending codes that are the issue. It is the
readiness monitors..

Yes, sorry, that's what I was referring to.

Can't remember how many readiness monitors there
are - but there's a catalyst monitor, a O2 sensor monitor, and EGR
monitors, and O2sensor heater and cat heater monitor on some vehicles.
These are the intermittent monitors that need to be "set" .

Setting the monitor just means they have been through one or more
test sequences and have aquired valid data..

The rest of the monitors are contimuous monitors - misfire,
component, and fuel system, nonitors.

The evap monitor, for instance, is only "valid" in a fixed temperature
range, and with the tank between something like 1/4 and 3/4 full (not
100% sure of the actual numbrs). If you reset the codes or replace
the battery on a vehicle with the tank full or almost empty you can
NOT set the readiness monitor for the evap system - so virtually ALL
OBD2 based emission test facilities will allow at least one monitor to
be un-set or not ready.

If you know what code is coming up, and want to "cheat" the system, if
you can avoid setting that particular monitor, while setting all the
others, you can sometimes get a vehicle to pass. You need to
understand the drive cycle and what can cause the monitor you want
dissabled to fail to set. (and it needs to be an intermittent or
non-continuous monitor. The usual culprits are Cat, evap, or EGR.

By the way, there's an excellent Android app for OBD-II called Torque
Pro. The app is $4.95, and a Bluetooth ELM327 OBD-II adapter is less
than $10 (I am using this one
http://www.dx.com/p/super-mini-elm327-bluetooth-odb2-v1-5-car-diagnostic-interface-tool-blue-142679).
The app does a lot more than just read or clear codes. It will display
electronic gauges based on the sensor readings (especially useful for
vehicles without temperature gauges or tachoometers). You can set alarms
for things like over-temperature. It's also a very accurate speedometer
(via the GPS), and it'll measure things like 0-60.
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=org.prowl.torque&hl=en

There's no iOS version because Apple forgot to include the necessary
Bluetooth profile (SPP) in its devices. There are similar apps for iOS
but not nearly as good. This one is one of them
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/engine-link-obd-ii-vehicle/id591557194?mt=8
but you need to get a Wi-Fi ELM327 dongle, not a Bluetooth one.

I like having a 7" tablet with TorquePro and CoPilot (GPS). I made a
holder for the tablet using one of the Panavise mounting brackets
http://www.panavise.com/index.html?pageID=1&id1=30&startat=1&--woSECTIONSdatarq=30&--SECTIONSword=ww.
Just be sure the tablet has a GPS chip, since very low-end Android
tablets don't have one, nor do Wi-Fi only iPads. You can buy a decent
Asus 7" tablet with a GPS for $50
http://www.tigerdirect.com/applications/SearchTools/item-details.asp?EdpNo=9561735
just use a virtual credit card with a $1 limit and a one month
expiration date when you sign up with McAffee (required to get the
rebate). Intel, which owns McAffee, is trying to promote devices with
their processor inside, hence the large rebate.

wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 12:08:40 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

Steve W. wrote:
. wrote:
On 9/19/2015 11:12 AM, Steve W. wrote:
Sure will. You have to enter the VIN into the system to start the
inspection. IF the EPA requires a recall to reflash the ECM to
remove that software and "correct" the problem, that would have to
be done at a dealer. They will track completed vehicles by VIN.
The
state can just flag ALL those vehicles. You pull in, they plug in
the tester, and your VIN doesn't show on the "recall complete"
list. You don't get inspected. That has happened before for other
recalls. I'm betting the fix
will be to re-flash the ECM software to remove the "switch". Then
run each one through the full EPA test regardless of registration
state. That because this if a federal law that was broken.

What will be fun will be watching all the johnny racer types who
modified the cars by removing emissions gear and "tuning" the ECM.
VW could actually show them to the EPA and say "THEY removed the
systems so they should pay a fine as well".

When has the EPA ever gone after individual passenger car vehicle
owners?

Happens a lot more than you might think. States get into the act
under the umbrella of the EPA laws.


VW intentionally wrote software for their vehicles with the express
intent of violating the EPA laws. They admitted to that already so
it will be interesting to see what happens. The EPA could recall the
cars, judge them as "unrepairable gross polluters" and have them
crushed. I doubt they will go that far but they have done it before
under the "cars for cash" BS.

Or, the EPA could require that all the cheating cars be
re-programmed to meet requirements all the time, and owners could
sue VW's ass off for cheating them, since the resulting performance
will be terrible.

The cars should be re-programmed, at the expense of VW. And then a lot
of class action suits should be filed against VW. I suppose, to be
fair to the car buyers who did not knowingly participate in the scam,
there should be an option to have the new firmware installed. If they
get the new firmware then they get to sue. If not then they would get
no compensation because they have not suffered a loss.
ERS

No loss other than being unable to license their cars?

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 09:43:43 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 12:08:40 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

Steve W. wrote:
. wrote:
On 9/19/2015 11:12 AM, Steve W. wrote:
Sure will. You have to enter the VIN into the system to start the
inspection. IF the EPA requires a recall to reflash the ECM to
remove that software and "correct" the problem, that would have to
be done at a dealer. They will track completed vehicles by VIN.
The
state can just flag ALL those vehicles. You pull in, they plug in
the tester, and your VIN doesn't show on the "recall complete"
list. You don't get inspected. That has happened before for other
recalls. I'm betting the fix
will be to re-flash the ECM software to remove the "switch". Then
run each one through the full EPA test regardless of registration
state. That because this if a federal law that was broken.

What will be fun will be watching all the johnny racer types who
modified the cars by removing emissions gear and "tuning" the ECM.
VW could actually show them to the EPA and say "THEY removed the
systems so they should pay a fine as well".

When has the EPA ever gone after individual passenger car vehicle
owners?

Happens a lot more than you might think. States get into the act
under the umbrella of the EPA laws.


VW intentionally wrote software for their vehicles with the express
intent of violating the EPA laws. They admitted to that already so
it will be interesting to see what happens. The EPA could recall the
cars, judge them as "unrepairable gross polluters" and have them
crushed. I doubt they will go that far but they have done it before
under the "cars for cash" BS.

Or, the EPA could require that all the cheating cars be
re-programmed to meet requirements all the time, and owners could
sue VW's ass off for cheating them, since the resulting performance
will be terrible.

The cars should be re-programmed, at the expense of VW. And then a lot
of class action suits should be filed against VW. I suppose, to be
fair to the car buyers who did not knowingly participate in the scam,
there should be an option to have the new firmware installed. If they
get the new firmware then they get to sue. If not then they would get
no compensation because they have not suffered a loss.
ERS

No loss other than being unable to license their cars?

If they cannot license their cars without a firmware update then
they have suffered a loss and should of course be able to sue or
otherwise be remunerated. I was thinking about the car owners who live
in an area where cars are not smog checked. For example, I live in
Island County which is about 30 Miles from Seattle which is in King
County. This means I don't have to get my vehicles smog checked
whereas King County residents do. I don't know how CA does smog checks
but I suspect everyone who lives there has to get one. I can see that
I should have thought of that before I posted my comments.
I just heard on the news that there are about 450,000 vehicles in
the USA that have the dishonest firmware and that the EPA can fine VW
$37,500 for each car.
I find it amazing that so many people would participate in such a
dishonest act, and that it could remain secret for so long. All sorts
of folks, from the upper management to the software writers, had to
know about and agree to actively participate in the fraud. I can see
how some would do so because of greed. And others may have been afraid
of losing their jobs. But I would think that many would refuse to
commit fraud and that some of them would spill the beans. I guess I'm
naive.
Eric

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:57:34 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

The best answer to the question seems to be here, as noted by Sofa Slug:

http://www.rocketnews.com/2015/09/did-volkswagen-cheat/
http://www.latimes.com/opinion/edito...919-story.html

Staying on topic, this article says the cheat only worked when there was a
DYNO involved!
http://www.chron.com/business/energy...on-6520088.php

Here are the contiguous quotes:
(begin quote)
VW used secret software €” an algorithm that detects when cars are being
tested on treadmill-like devices called dynamometers, and stealthily
switches the engines to a cleaner mode.

Because *smog tests are almost always done on dynamometers*, VW got away
with the scheme for seven years, until the "clean transportation" advocates
went to West Virginia University, which tests emissions using equipment
that fits in car trunks.
(end quote)

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 07:13:08 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

They got their buddies selling dynos to be rich.

Why is it called a dyno if it's spelled dynamometer?
Why not call it a dyna?

On Sun, 20 Sep 2015 15:08:01 -0400, wrote:

Officially, all cars 1996 and newer must be OBD2 compliant, but most
jurisdictions using OBD2 for E-Testing only start at 1997 models
because some 1996 models were not fully compliant. Only a very few
1995 vehicles had OBD2 capability as 1995 was "pre-standard"

This article says the whole TDI Clean Diesel campaign is a fraud.
I don't drive a diesel.

What was the "TDI Clean Diesel" campaign anyway?

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 17:30:19 -0700, Danny D. wrote:

This article says the whole TDI Clean Diesel campaign is a fraud.
I don't drive a diesel.

What was the "TDI Clean Diesel" campaign anyway?

Oopops. Forgot to include the url:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars...l-controversy/

What was this "TDI Clean Diesel" campaign anyway?
And, what does that have to do with "urea" injection?

How does this UREA injection work?

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 19:34:46 -0500, Danny D. wrote:

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 17:30:19 -0700, Danny D. wrote:

This article says the whole TDI Clean Diesel campaign is a fraud.
I don't drive a diesel.

What was the "TDI Clean Diesel" campaign anyway?

Oopops. Forgot to include the url:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars...l-controversy/

What was this "TDI Clean Diesel" campaign anyway?

Apparently a way to avoid the urea injection everyone else
used to get emissions down to the legal limit.

And, what does that have to do with "urea" injection?

Both are supposedly ways to meet emissions standards.
One works. The other is Wizard of Oz engineering apparently.



How does this UREA injection work?
A youtube explanation:
http://preview.tinyurl.com/pumvto8
I didn't watch it and ain't qualified to
say if it's correct.

Have you noticed signs at truck stops saying "DEF Sold
In All Lanes"? That's diesel exhaust fluid or urea.



--
Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/

"Danny D." writes:

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 17:30:19 -0700, Danny D. wrote:

This article says the whole TDI Clean Diesel campaign is a fraud.
I don't drive a diesel.

What was the "TDI Clean Diesel" campaign anyway?

Oopops. Forgot to include the url:
http://www.popularmechanics.com/cars...l-controversy/

What was this "TDI Clean Diesel" campaign anyway?
And, what does that have to do with "urea" injection?

How does this UREA injection work?

It's in the article:

All the other carmakers control diesel emissions by spraying a urea
solution into the exhaust stream, where a catalyst converts it to
ammonia. The ammonia breaks down NOx into nitrogen and water.

--
Dan Espen

In rec.autos.tech Lucia Gallo wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:57:34 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

Staying on topic, this article says the cheat only worked when there was a
DYNO involved!
http://www.chron.com/business/energy...on-6520088.php

Here are the contiguous quotes:
(begin quote)
VW used secret software ? an algorithm that detects when cars are being
tested on treadmill-like devices called dynamometers, and stealthily
switches the engines to a cleaner mode.

Because *smog tests are almost always done on dynamometers*, VW got away
with the scheme for seven years, until the "clean transportation" advocates
went to West Virginia University, which tests emissions using equipment
that fits in car trunks.
(end quote)

I have seen a suggestion that the onboard computer takes note of the
fact that the rear wheels are rotating and the front wheels are
stationary. That seems plausible to me.

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 21:07:31 -0700, Jack Myers wrote:

I have seen a suggestion that the onboard computer takes note of the
fact that the rear wheels are rotating and the front wheels are
stationary. That seems plausible to me.

They didn't explicity mention that, but this article has a section named
How did this alleged cheat work exactly?
http://jalopnik.com/your-guide-to-di...g-c-1731857018

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 21:44:12 -0700, Sam Wilhelm wrote:

How did this alleged cheat work exactly?

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...estions/page-2
(4) What exactly did VW do?

Volkswagen has admitted that it equipped the control software for its
2.0-liter TDI diesel vehicles with a "defeat device" that detected when the
car was undergoing emissions testing and significantly changed the
operations of its powertrain to reduce emissions during the tests.

That detection was likely based on a combination of sensor data from the
car, which might include steering angle (since cars on dynamometer tests
don't make turns), front-wheel versus rear-wheel rotation speed, and a
variety of other factors.

It appears that a combination of the factors above plus extremely gentle
acceleration and braking might alert the car that it wasn't on the road but
being tested in a lab.

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 12:46:48 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm wrote:

But it doesn't answer HOW.

http://www.greencarreports.com/news/...estions/page-2

Based on discussions with knowledgeable sources, we surmise that once an
emissions test was detected, VW got the affected TDI engines to meet the
Tier 2, Bin 5 NOx limits by reducing the fuel flow rate.

This would reduce performance, but most likely not to the point where the
car couldn't complete the emission cycles.

Lowering fuel flow would also reduce combustion temperatures and/or the
duration of high-temperature operation enough to keep NOx emissions barely
within EPA limits.

If the car detected that it was no longer in "testing mode" but had
returned to "driving mode," it would restore fuel flow to the regular
level--which would send NOx emissions soaring.

On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/cert/docume...a-09-18-15.pdf

On Mon, 21 Sep 2015 22:05:54 -0700, Jack Black wrote:

My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions?

http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/cert/docume...a-09-18-15.pdf

VW manufactured and installed software in the electronic control module
(ECM) of these vehicles that sensed when the behicle was being tested for
compliance with EPA emission standards. For ease of reference, the EPA is
calling this the "switch".

The "switch" senses whether the vehicle is being tested or not based on
various inputs including teh position of the steering wheel, vehicle speed,
the duration of the engine's operation, and barometric pressure.

These inputs precisely track the parameters of the federal test procedure
used for emission testing for EPA certification purposes. During EPA
emission testing, the vehicle's ECM ran software which produced compliant
emission results under and ECM calibration chart that VW referred to as the
"dyno calibration".

" I find it amazing that so many people would participate in such a
dishonest act, and that it could remain secret for so long."

Sorry. Seems like you are a good person and projecting, trying to think everyone else is good.

That ain't how it is. Companies have a roomful of lawyers and accountant who do nothing but figure out odds on how much they can break the law or endanger people with a cheap design, versus how much it will cost them if they get caught, or have lawsuits. It is like playing poker. If you now ht you're doing, it is all a matter of real odds versus pot odds. that is how they think. That is how they stay on the board of directors, because they live the company on the edge. And if they don't they are voted out.

On 9/21/2015 9:07 PM, Jack Myers wrote:

snip

I have seen a suggestion that the onboard computer takes note of the
fact that the rear wheels are rotating and the front wheels are
stationary. That seems plausible to me.

Well the opposite for most or all VWs, but that makes sense.

I think a potato stuffed up the exhaust pipe would do just as much at half
the cost.

| My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for
emissions?
|

I'm more curious about how the EPA didn't
figure it out earlier. Reports say the EPA saw a
discrepancy between testing and on-road
results. But they've been haggling with VW
all this time and somehow never thought to look
at the software. Is the software accessible to
EPA? Do they have developers who could
understand it?

How the test is faked is just a technical issue.
How the EPA didn't figure it out seems to be the
important issue. They only found out because they
threatened to hold up sales and at that point the
VW execs admitted what they were doing.
(Have they disclosed everything? Surely if there's
more dirty dealing they're not going to tell if they
don't have to.)

... Then of course there's the question that begs
to be asked: How could all of those executives,
in a company whose clientelle tend to be liberal
environmentalists, have possibly decided it was
a good idea to be so dishonest and shortsighted?

There should be arrests. Either way, it's likely
to be a serious, perhaps fatal, blow to the company.
If it were Chevy I'm sure rednecks would come out
of the woodwork to support "the company that denies
global warming". But VW customers are almost a
cult following, and mostly liberal.

On 2015-09-22, Mayayana wrote:
There should be arrests.

Should there have been arrests of EPA miscreants (or the environmentalists
that petitioned them to do so) for the hatchet job they did on DDT? This
resulted in millions of third-world deaths from malaria due to other
countries following our lead:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/v...ry.asp?id=1259

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)

NSA sedition and treason -- http://www.DeathToNSAthugs.com
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Mayayana wrote:
I'm more curious about how the EPA didn't
figure it out earlier. Reports say the EPA saw a
discrepancy between testing and on-road
results. But they've been haggling with VW
all this time and somehow never thought to look
at the software. Is the software accessible to
EPA? Do they have developers who could
understand it?

No. The software is a black box both to vehicle owners and the EPA. Not
only that, but under the DMCA it would be illegal for vehicle owners OR
the EPA to attempt reverse-engineering it from the object load.

How the test is faked is just a technical issue.
How the EPA didn't figure it out seems to be the
important issue. They only found out because they
threatened to hold up sales and at that point the
VW execs admitted what they were doing.
(Have they disclosed everything? Surely if there's
more dirty dealing they're not going to tell if they
don't have to.)

Gaming the system is a longstanding tradition among car manufacturers and
I am _sure_ that if the source code were made public that all manner of
interesting games would be found.

... Then of course there's the question that begs
to be asked: How could all of those executives,
in a company whose clientelle tend to be liberal
environmentalists, have possibly decided it was
a good idea to be so dishonest and shortsighted?

THAT is the best question of all, yes. But that is a question that
needs to be asked by stockholders, and I have a suspicion that the next
annual meeting at Volkswagen will be interesting.

There should be arrests. Either way, it's likely
to be a serious, perhaps fatal, blow to the company.
If it were Chevy I'm sure rednecks would come out
of the woodwork to support "the company that denies
global warming". But VW customers are almost a
cult following, and mostly liberal.

Arrests will do nothing. What has to happen is that vehicle control code
needs to be documented and available to the vehicle owner and to the
government inspectors. Yes, I know this makes it easier for technology to
be stolen in places where patent and trademark law is unenforced (such as
China, where the car industry is growing by leaps and bounds and trying to
learn as much as possible from Western and Japanese manufacturers by any
means possible). But, it's necessary.

If you want to see something REALLY evil, take a look at John Deere's take
on their proprietary control systems. THERE are some people who could use
arresting.
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

Roger Blake wrote:
On 2015-09-22, Mayayana wrote:
There should be arrests.

Should there have been arrests of EPA miscreants (or the environmentalists
that petitioned them to do so) for the hatchet job they did on DDT? This
resulted in millions of third-world deaths from malaria due to other
countries following our lead:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/v...ry.asp?id=1259

This article is not exactly accurate.

In the fifties, DDT was amazing, it worked great. We put it between our
sheets. You could spray it in the air and see insects dropping out right
and left.

But... by the seventies, mosquitoes (at least in Hawaii where I lived)
had pretty much become immune to the stuff. Enormous, absolutely enormous
amounts were necessary to kill insects. This is why there were environmental
effects. My father had a gadget that would drop a mix of diesel and DDT into
the muffler of the lawnmower and the smoke would kill mosquitoes, but by
the seventies it wasn't killing them any more, even with a couple pounds of
the stuff being burned.

Give it another forty years or so and we might be able to start using DDT
in a small way again. But it was the massive overuse and abuse of DDT that
got us to the point where it was banned, not some crazy left-wind conspiracy.

And yes, it WAS one of the big weapons in the fight against malaria, and it
was a crime to lose that weapon. But it wasn't politicians that lost it.
--scott


--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."

On 09/22/2015 7:07 AM, Scott Dorsey wrote:
Mayayana wrote:
I'm more curious about how the EPA didn't
figure it out earlier. Reports say the EPA saw a
discrepancy between testing and on-road
results. But they've been haggling with VW
all this time and somehow never thought to look
at the software. Is the software accessible to
EPA? Do they have developers who could
understand it?

No. The software is a black box both to vehicle owners and the EPA. Not
only that, but under the DMCA it would be illegal for vehicle owners OR
the EPA to attempt reverse-engineering it from the object load.

How the test is faked is just a technical issue.
How the EPA didn't figure it out seems to be the
important issue. They only found out because they
threatened to hold up sales and at that point the
VW execs admitted what they were doing.
(Have they disclosed everything? Surely if there's
more dirty dealing they're not going to tell if they
don't have to.)

Gaming the system is a longstanding tradition among car manufacturers and
I am _sure_ that if the source code were made public that all manner of
interesting games would be found.

... Then of course there's the question that begs
to be asked: How could all of those executives,
in a company whose clientelle tend to be liberal
environmentalists, have possibly decided it was
a good idea to be so dishonest and shortsighted?

THAT is the best question of all, yes. But that is a question that
needs to be asked by stockholders, and I have a suspicion that the next
annual meeting at Volkswagen will be interesting.

There should be arrests. Either way, it's likely
to be a serious, perhaps fatal, blow to the company.
If it were Chevy I'm sure rednecks would come out
of the woodwork to support "the company that denies
global warming". But VW customers are almost a
cult following, and mostly liberal.

Arrests will do nothing. What has to happen is that vehicle control code
needs to be documented and available to the vehicle owner and to the
government inspectors. Yes, I know this makes it easier for technology to
be stolen in places where patent and trademark law is unenforced (such as
China, where the car industry is growing by leaps and bounds and trying to
learn as much as possible from Western and Japanese manufacturers by any
means possible). But, it's necessary.

If you want to see something REALLY evil, take a look at John Deere's take
on their proprietary control systems. THERE are some people who could use
arresting.
--scott


Not just John Dee

http://www.wired.com/2015/02/new-hig...tmare-farmers/

https://dmca.digitalrighttorepair.org/

John :-#(#

--
(Please post followups or tech inquiries to the USENET newsgroup)
John's Jukes Ltd. 2343 Main St., Vancouver, BC, Canada V5T 3C9
(604)872-5757 or Fax 872-2010 (Pinballs, Jukes, Video Games)
www.flippers.com
"Old pinballers never die, they just flip out."