The main issues I have with the Ice, and Detroit, involve 'pumping losses' which we'll get into, and PPS, (Patchwork Problem Solving), particularly as it involves emissions.
PPS; Saw a show recently about medical marajiuana. They were interviewing a cancer 'survivor', and she said; "After the radiation therapy, I was nauseous, so they gave me a pill for that. That pill made me constipated, so they gave me a pill for that.Which gave me diarhea, so, you guessed it, they gave me a pill for that.I was also depressed, another side effect of the treatment, so they gave me an anti-depressant, which also had side effects.I was ranting to a friend about this, and they said; So, your taking a pill, to deal with the side effects of a pill, that your taking to deal with the side effects of a pill, that your taking to deal with the side effects of the treatment?Why don't you just smoke pot?No nausea or depression, and no need for other pills?" Thats an example of PPS, which might also be called Piss Poor Problem solving!
In my current project, I'm taking parts and using them in ways they weren't designed for;i.e. putting a front axle that wasn't designed to go on my frame on in a way it and the frame weren't designed for, then hooking up a power steering box to a frame it wasn't designed to go on, and the box is ford, the axle is Dodge, so have to get creative with the pitman arm drag link combo to make it work.Almost every time, despite careful thought and measurements, it takes 3 tries to get it right.
Once or twice, however I have gotten in to PPS.Modifying my design has unintended consequences, and the solution to that causes other problems, etc.Because I have limited resources, (Time, $ , energy) eventually I have to say "This just isn't working", scrap the whole thing and start again at square 1.Unfortunately Detroit DOEs have the resources to go down this road way past the point of absurdity, and the medical profession doesn't have to pay, the patient does, often with $ being the least of it.
My point; in 1966, knowing it was coming and with time to prepare, the car companies had to deal with emission controls; initially focused on smog, caused by hydrocarbons.i.e. unburned gas coming out the tailpipe.They could have said "Lets look at the other end of the pipe. If theres unburned gas coming out the tailpipe, its NOT burning in the engine, which is wasting gas as well as causing smog.They didn't Instead they focused on the tailpipe.
Within the previous 10 years, scientists for the oil co.'s had developed Catalyctic cracking, as a different way to make gasoline.Expose the petroleum to high heat, (700-1000 degees) and a catalyst, IN THE ABSCENCE of OXYGEN, and it triggered a chemical reaction, in which the longer chain molecules are cracked into lighter, more volitile elements."AHH, (said the auto engineers) but what happens if you do it with O2 present?" "Well, then the petroleum breaks down to its ultimate constituents, Hydrogen an methane, and ignites.We try to avoid that in refineries, as things go BOOM!"
So, the auto engineers made a catalyctic converter, and it worked, sort of. Problem was, at some throttle poisition/load conditions, there wasn't ENOUGH unburned gas in the exhaust to trigger the reaction, and so the unburned gas went right by the converter, and out the tailpipe. Hmmm,..Need another pill!
So, they put an O2 sensor upstream of the converter. Despite its name, what it really does is measure the amount of unburned gas in the exhaust. Sends a signal to the ECM, which puts more gas in the engine, simply to ensure there will be more unburned gas in the exhaust. Coarse, (need another pill) carburetors weren't able to respond adequately to such signals from the ECM, so they had to change all vehicles to fuel injection.
But, there was a problem (Need ANOTHER pill!). There was so much extra fuel in the combustion chamber, that liquid fuel was forming on, or running/dripping onto hotspots in the combustion chamber, leading to pre-ignition, or engine knock.So, they put a knock sensor, that would detect engine knock, and send a signal to the computer.But, this alone wasn't enough, so they went to the oil companies.Basically, what they said was "Your gasoline is too ignitable.Can you make it less ignitable, so we won't have engine knock, by raising the octane from 75 to 85 or 90?"This the oil Co.s were glad to do, even tho it meant spending 10-12 million $, per refinery.They were "Happy to do it", because the independant refineries, unaffilliated with the major oil co.'s that simply bought oil on the open market, refined it, and distributed it to independant gas stations, (@ a retail price .5-.7/gal cheaper) couldn't afford the upgrades, and went out of business, and the independant stations followed, or had to buy from the oil co's. But I digress.
(Need yet ANOTHER Pill) Making the gas in plain language LESS ignitable meant that the whole combustion process was slowed down. We're only talking 10ths or 100ths of a second, but that makes a difference. The slower the burn, the more NOX, (Nitrous oxide) is produced.So, to deal with this side effect of a side effect, etc. they came up with EGR valve, to send a little of the exhaust gas back into the engine, in order to reduce NOX.I don't really care how this works, cause at this point I'm ready to just smoke a joint and forgetaboutit!
Seriously,this is what I mean by Patchwork Problem Solving, or Piss-poor Problem solving, take your pick!Thing is, when it comes to wasted gas, its not just the unburned gas in the exhaust, there is also gas which burns in the combustion chamber, but ignites too late to impart any useable energy to the piston, and gas thats wasted, because its ignited before the piston gets to top dead center; the notorious pumping losses.To explore this in more detail, we have to look at the nature of gasoline. If anyones still reading, sorry for the long post, and for (perhaps) seeming to state the obvious.I do have a point I'll be getting to, (eventually), I need to frame the discussion, and put things in context.Just so you know, My endpoint is that I have a 1965 truck, that will have a re-built engine.Seeing the results of the path that Detroit took, I can use any developments of the last 40+ years, and what resources I have, to try and take a different approach to mileage and pollution.
PPS; Saw a show recently about medical marajiuana. They were interviewing a cancer 'survivor', and she said; "After the radiation therapy, I was nauseous, so they gave me a pill for that. That pill made me constipated, so they gave me a pill for that.Which gave me diarhea, so, you guessed it, they gave me a pill for that.I was also depressed, another side effect of the treatment, so they gave me an anti-depressant, which also had side effects.I was ranting to a friend about this, and they said; So, your taking a pill, to deal with the side effects of a pill, that your taking to deal with the side effects of a pill, that your taking to deal with the side effects of the treatment?Why don't you just smoke pot?No nausea or depression, and no need for other pills?" Thats an example of PPS, which might also be called Piss Poor Problem solving!
In my current project, I'm taking parts and using them in ways they weren't designed for;i.e. putting a front axle that wasn't designed to go on my frame on in a way it and the frame weren't designed for, then hooking up a power steering box to a frame it wasn't designed to go on, and the box is ford, the axle is Dodge, so have to get creative with the pitman arm drag link combo to make it work.Almost every time, despite careful thought and measurements, it takes 3 tries to get it right.
Once or twice, however I have gotten in to PPS.Modifying my design has unintended consequences, and the solution to that causes other problems, etc.Because I have limited resources, (Time, $ , energy) eventually I have to say "This just isn't working", scrap the whole thing and start again at square 1.Unfortunately Detroit DOEs have the resources to go down this road way past the point of absurdity, and the medical profession doesn't have to pay, the patient does, often with $ being the least of it.
My point; in 1966, knowing it was coming and with time to prepare, the car companies had to deal with emission controls; initially focused on smog, caused by hydrocarbons.i.e. unburned gas coming out the tailpipe.They could have said "Lets look at the other end of the pipe. If theres unburned gas coming out the tailpipe, its NOT burning in the engine, which is wasting gas as well as causing smog.They didn't Instead they focused on the tailpipe.
Within the previous 10 years, scientists for the oil co.'s had developed Catalyctic cracking, as a different way to make gasoline.Expose the petroleum to high heat, (700-1000 degees) and a catalyst, IN THE ABSCENCE of OXYGEN, and it triggered a chemical reaction, in which the longer chain molecules are cracked into lighter, more volitile elements."AHH, (said the auto engineers) but what happens if you do it with O2 present?" "Well, then the petroleum breaks down to its ultimate constituents, Hydrogen an methane, and ignites.We try to avoid that in refineries, as things go BOOM!"
So, the auto engineers made a catalyctic converter, and it worked, sort of. Problem was, at some throttle poisition/load conditions, there wasn't ENOUGH unburned gas in the exhaust to trigger the reaction, and so the unburned gas went right by the converter, and out the tailpipe. Hmmm,..Need another pill!
So, they put an O2 sensor upstream of the converter. Despite its name, what it really does is measure the amount of unburned gas in the exhaust. Sends a signal to the ECM, which puts more gas in the engine, simply to ensure there will be more unburned gas in the exhaust. Coarse, (need another pill) carburetors weren't able to respond adequately to such signals from the ECM, so they had to change all vehicles to fuel injection.
But, there was a problem (Need ANOTHER pill!). There was so much extra fuel in the combustion chamber, that liquid fuel was forming on, or running/dripping onto hotspots in the combustion chamber, leading to pre-ignition, or engine knock.So, they put a knock sensor, that would detect engine knock, and send a signal to the computer.But, this alone wasn't enough, so they went to the oil companies.Basically, what they said was "Your gasoline is too ignitable.Can you make it less ignitable, so we won't have engine knock, by raising the octane from 75 to 85 or 90?"This the oil Co.s were glad to do, even tho it meant spending 10-12 million $, per refinery.They were "Happy to do it", because the independant refineries, unaffilliated with the major oil co.'s that simply bought oil on the open market, refined it, and distributed it to independant gas stations, (@ a retail price .5-.7/gal cheaper) couldn't afford the upgrades, and went out of business, and the independant stations followed, or had to buy from the oil co's. But I digress.
(Need yet ANOTHER Pill) Making the gas in plain language LESS ignitable meant that the whole combustion process was slowed down. We're only talking 10ths or 100ths of a second, but that makes a difference. The slower the burn, the more NOX, (Nitrous oxide) is produced.So, to deal with this side effect of a side effect, etc. they came up with EGR valve, to send a little of the exhaust gas back into the engine, in order to reduce NOX.I don't really care how this works, cause at this point I'm ready to just smoke a joint and forgetaboutit!
Seriously,this is what I mean by Patchwork Problem Solving, or Piss-poor Problem solving, take your pick!Thing is, when it comes to wasted gas, its not just the unburned gas in the exhaust, there is also gas which burns in the combustion chamber, but ignites too late to impart any useable energy to the piston, and gas thats wasted, because its ignited before the piston gets to top dead center; the notorious pumping losses.To explore this in more detail, we have to look at the nature of gasoline. If anyones still reading, sorry for the long post, and for (perhaps) seeming to state the obvious.I do have a point I'll be getting to, (eventually), I need to frame the discussion, and put things in context.Just so you know, My endpoint is that I have a 1965 truck, that will have a re-built engine.Seeing the results of the path that Detroit took, I can use any developments of the last 40+ years, and what resources I have, to try and take a different approach to mileage and pollution.