EPA & Volkswagen 20

[SomptingGuy]

EPA, California Notify Volkswagen of Clean Air Act Violations

I can totally understand why OEMs might want to cheat their sporty cars through noise legs, but I fail to see the point of having a "defeat device" to cheat the emissions test. If the emissions devices have an adverse effect on fuel economy, that would also show during the tests. Or maybe the EPA tests don't combine economy and emissions in a single cycle, as we do in EU?

Maybe it's more complex than that. Maybe the (artificially good for other reasons) fuel economy figures that the EPA tests give can only be achieved on the road if the emissions devices are shut off? What other reasons might an owner not want their car to be emissions compliant in daily use? I wonder if they just shut down the SCR so that the urea tank lasts forever?

Doesn't look good though.

(Does California even allow passenger car diesels?)

Steve

 

[IRstuff]

In California, in particular, fuel economy is never re-tested after delivery, so the only thing is to be able to detect the smog test that the delivered cars have to pass. This is clearly intentional fraud at the corporate level.

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
homework forum: //

http://www.engineering.com/AskForum/aff/32.aspx

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[IRstuff]

One thing that interesting is that most people complain about not getting the mileage that the was achieved by the EPA, so there's a possibility that that most cars cheat on the official tests

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
homework forum: //

http://www.engineering.com/AskForum/aff/32.aspx

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[BrianPetersen]

The VW TDI cars are known for using LESS fuel than the EPA tests say they should ... this may have something to do with it!

The EPA emission test and fuel economy test is one and the same.

It's likely an indication that whatever VW has to do to fix this, is likely going to make the cars use more fuel in the real world.

 

[SomptingGuy]

known for using LESS fuel than the EPA tests say they should

That's interesting and against the normal trend. But thinking about it a bit more, SCR doesn't really have a negative impact on (diesel) fuel economy. So I'm still confused as to the benefit of not activating the expensive SCR system that's already part of the price of the vehicle.

I guess it might be more of a cheat than I originally assumed though. They could be reducing the engine-out NOx during a test instead of shutting down the SCR unless testing. Or maybe the control strategy required for the SCR makes the vehicle undriveable?

I do hope the technical details emerge, not just the legal ones.

Steve

 

[BrianPetersen]

My understanding is that the worst offenders are the '09 - '14 Jetta/Golf series, which use a lean-NOx catalyst, not SCR. The Passat, and all '09-on V6 models (Touareg etc), and all 2015 models, use SCR but only the 4-cylinder models are affected by this and evidently the margin of failure was not as large as the lean-NOx models.

Obviously the vehicles passed the EPA tests in some fashion, so the vehicles are capable of passing the test (which means fixing them ought to be a simple re-flash), but for whatever reason, they opted to use less aggressive emission control strategies when it is not going through the test procedure.

If the reason is to reduce DEF usage in SCR-equipped models, that's not the end of the world, only a minor irritant and cost for having to fill it up more frequently. If the reason is to improve fuel consumption, it means they'll lose their reputation for using less fuel than EPA says; an owner irritant/cost factor, still not the end of the world. If the real reason is that they cannot pass the 150,000 mile durability test and that this is the reason VW has been having less DPF troubles than others ... that's bad. Really bad.

There is plenty of suspicion in Europe over diesels emitting more NOx in real world driving than in their test procedures (and it is by quite a large factor) so no doubt the European regulators will be watching this.

 

[GregLocock]

Here's the actual notice of violation.

http://www3.epa.gov/otaq/cert/documents/vw-nov-caa-09-18-15.pdf

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[tbuelna]

There's a couple things to consider here. First, if you read the relevant section of the US CAA, "...for any person to manufacture or sell, or offer to sell, or install, any part or component intended for use with, or as part of, any motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine, where a principal effect of the part or component is to bypass, defeat, or render inoperative any device or element of design installed on or in a motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine in compliance with regulations under this subchapter...", it is not clear that VW violated the law as written.

From what I can see VW sold a product that fully complied with the US CAA regulations as written. And if you were to take one of the vehicles in question and put it through the same emissions test, I'm sure it would likely pass. The software algorithm did not "bypass, defeat, or render inoperative" the vehicle's ability to comply with the US CAA emissions test standard requirements. So there is no violation of the law as written.

The only basis the EPA and CARB have for prosecuting VW is their subjective notion that VW has violated the "spirit" of the law. But I don't see the EPA and CARB being successful with that approach.

 

[IRstuff]

"the EPA has determined that VW manufactured and installed defeat devices in certain model year 2009 through 2015 diesel lightduty
vehicles equipped with 2.0 liter engines. These defeat devices bypass, defeat, or render inoperative elements of the vehicles· emission control system that exist to comply with CAA emission standards."

"VW sold a product that fully complied with the US CAA regulations as written. "

No, they did not; the cars can only comply with smog regulations during the smog test. That means it violates the smog regulations during normal driving, and the hardware and software that makes that happen is, by definition, a bypass device.

TTFN
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert!
homework forum: //

http://www.engineering.com/AskForum/aff/32.aspx

faq731-376 forum1529

 

[tbuelna]

That's not what I can see after reading the EPA's complaint against VW and the text of the CAA regulations. If you were to operate the VW vehicles in question at the same conditions used for the emissions compliance test, the "device or component", which in this case is a software algorithm, would still be fully functional and perform exactly as it did during the emissions compliance testing. It has not been "rendered inoperative, bypassed, or defeated" in any way.

VW simply did a good job of complying with the letter of the law as it was written. If the EPA and CARB see that as a problem, they need to do a better job of writing their regulations in the future. VW has the financial resources to litigate this case, and as far as I can see they have a pretty solid legal position. In federal court any "determination" made by the EPA should have no impact. What will matter is the decision of the judge presiding over the hearing, and if it goes to trial the decision of the jury. Frankly, I can't see the EPA prevailing in this case.

 

[JayMaechtlen]

kind of funny - from a consumer point of view, lots of times I'd like to fudge the system to get better performance, but still make it pass smog testing.
This is the first time I've heard of the mfg doing it for me.
(no, don't have VW diesel)

Jay Maechtlen

http://www.laserpubs.com/techcomm

 

[tbuelna]

Any of the 2010 and older VW's registered in California must pass an emissions test every other year. If a 2009 or 2010 VW vehicle passes the required emissions test, what basis does the EPA or CARB have for filing a complaint against VW?

 

[GregLocock]

I'd have though the EPA would only write such a letter if they had an iron-clad case - if they thought it was a bit wobbly they'd have a quiet word. I guess we'll have to let the lawyers mull that over.

Cheers

Greg Locock


New here? Try reading these, they might help FAQ731-376

http://eng-tips.com/market.cfm?

 

[BrianPetersen]

It is certain that this has been brewing for some time, and only became official and public knowledge now.

 

[gruntguru]

"In September, after EPA and CARB demanded an explanation for the identified emission problems, Volkswagen admitted that the cars contained defeat devices."

This is not the first time a manufacturer has done this. One of the truck engine makers was caught several years ago.

tbuelna. The defeat software is not just "tuning" for best emissions during the operating modes used most frequently during testing - that would be legal. The defeat software "recognises" the drive cycle modes and tunes the engine differently to the default tune for the remainder of the test.

No doubt the economy (and probably the performance) suffer when the engine is operating in the low emissions mode. eg Retarding injection timing is a sure-fire way to reduce NOx but performance and economy both suffer.

je suis charlie

 

[BrianPetersen]

Apparently CARB busted them by running part of the Federal Test Procedure repeatedly and skipping other parts of it. NOx skyrocketed.

If the vehicle had been "tuned" for best emissions during the operating conditions that are encountered in the test procedure, which is something that ALL engine manufacturers do, this shouldn't happen.

 

[Tmoose]

I look forward to seeing the letter the EPA Office of enforcement and compliance Assurance send (sent ?) to the folks across the hall regarding the Animas River event.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CL0HbstWcAAxime.png

 

[gruntguru]

This is beginning to bite VW - hard!

Link

je suis charlie

 

[140Airpower]

It is illegal to defeat emissions controls. There is also fraud. So, this is a criminal investigation. This morning I heard the possible fine could be $37,000 per vehicle = $16 billion. As well, customers may experience a loss of performance and economy when the vehicles are corrected, so lawsuits. VW is in a little trouble.

 

[ScottyUK]

I wonder if this will spill over to affect other brands in the group, e.g. Audi, SEAT, Skoda? There's a lot of shared technology in the group, at least among engines.