The Oldsmobile Connection

[88 Coupe]

raskull wrote: first of all...i am getting so confused with all these quotes haha. quote of a quote of a quote ........
Typical Clown tactic. Makes it harder to catch them editing quotes. Also helps to mask their limited grasp of the basics.

Since 91parkave has been posting in that manner, I've been splitting my posts into sections, to make it a bit easier on everyone.

Norm

[88 Coupe]

91parkave wrote: ........ to increase fuel mileage ........
Nothing to do with fuel mileage.

Everything to do with keeping gasoline vapors out of the atmosphere.

91parkave wrote: ........ and emissions.
By doing so, emissions are decreased, not increased.

Norm

[91parkave]

Your continued donations keep Wikipedia running!
Automobile emissions control
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Vehicle emissions inspection stationAutomobile emissions control covers all the technologies that are employed to reduce the air pollution-causing emissions produced by automobiles. Exhaust emissions control systems were first required on 1966 model year vehicles produced for sale in the state of California, followed by the United States as a whole in model year 1968. Their use became widespread in the following decades and now they are ubiquitous in industrialized nations and common in most others.

Emissions controls have been highly successful in reducing the emissions produced by motor vehicles in terms of quantity per distance traveled. However, substantial increases in the distance traveled by each vehicle, and equally substantial increases in the number of vehicles in use, have meant that the overall reduction in pollution has been much slower. The emissions produced by a vehicle fall into three basic categories:

Tailpipe emissions: This is what most people think of when they think of vehicle air pollution; the products of burning fuel in the vehicle's engine, emitted from the vehicle's exhaust system. The major pollutants emitted include:
Hydrocarbons: this class is made up of unburned or partially burned fuel, and is a major contributor to urban smog, as well as being toxic. They can cause liver damage and even cancer.
Nitrogen oxides (NOx): These are generated when nitrogen in the air reacts with oxygen under the high temperature and pressure conditions inside the engine. NOx emissions contribute to both smog and acid rain.
Carbon monoxide (CO): a product of incomplete combustion, carbon monoxide reduces the blood's ability to carry oxygen and is dangerous to people with heart disease.
Carbon dioxide (CO2): Emissions of carbon dioxide are considered to pollute because it is a significant greenhouse gas and increasing its levels in the atmosphere contributes to global climate change.
Evaporative emissions: These are produced from the evaporation of fuel, and are a large contributor to urban smog, since these heavier molecules stay closer to ground level. Fuel tends to evaporate in these ways:
Gas tank venting: the heating of the vehicle as the temperature rises from the night-time temperature to the hottest temperatures of the day mean that gasoline in the tank evaporates, increasing the pressure inside the tank above atmospheric pressure. This pressure must be relieved, and before emissions control it was simply vented into the atmosphere.
Running losses: the escape of gasoline vapors from the hot engine.
Refuelling losses: these can cause a lot of hydrocarbon vapor emission. The empty space inside a vehicle's tank is filled with hydrocarbon gases, and as the tank is filled, these gases are forced out into the atmosphere. In addition, there is loss from further evaporation and fuel spillage.
Life cycle emissions: These are produced in activities associated with the manufacturing, maintenance, and disposal of the automobile and include such items as:
Manufacturing plant power requirements
Volatile solvents utilized in the manufacturing process (auto paint finishes, etc)
Outgassing of synthetic materials utilized to reduce weight and simplify manufacturing
Maintenance requirements such as oil and filter changes, battery replacement, etc.
Disposal requirements including contaminated lubricants, tires, heavy metals, and landfill



Contents [hide]
1 Tailpipe emissions control
1.1 Increasing engine efficiency
1.2 Increasing vehicle efficiency
1.3 Increasing driving efficiency
1.4 Cleaning up the emissions
1.4.1 Air injection
1.4.2 Exhaust Gas Recirculation
1.4.3 Catalytic converters
2 Evaporative emissions control
2.1 Capturing vented vapors
2.2 Reducing refueling losses
3 Emission Testing
4 References
5 See also



[edit] Tailpipe emissions control

Dual exhaust pipes attached to a car's mufflerTailpipe emissions control can be categorised into three parts:

Increasing engine efficiency
Increasing vehicle efficiency
Cleaning up the emissions




[edit] Increasing engine efficiency
Engine efficiency has been gradually improved with progress in following technologies:

Electronic ignition
Fuel injection systems
Electronic control unit

[edit] Increasing vehicle efficiency
Contributions to the goal of reducing fuel consumption and related emissions come from

lightweight vehicle design
minimized air resistance
reduced rolling resistance
improved powertrain efficiency
increasing spark to the spark plug (this topic should be under the ignition system)
regenerative braking
Each of these items breaks down into a number of factors.


[edit] Increasing driving efficiency
Significant reduction of emissions come from

driving technique (some 10-30% reduction)
unobstructed traffic conditions
cruising at an optimum speed for the vehicle
reducing the number of cold starts

[edit] Cleaning up the emissions
Advances in engine and vehicle technology continually reduce the amount of pollutants generated, but this is generally considered insufficient to meet emissions goals. Therefore, technologies to react with and clean up the remaining emissions have long been an essential part of emissions control.


[edit] Air injection
A very early emissions control system, the Air injection reactor (AIR) reduces the products of incomplete combustion (hydrocarbons and carbon monoxide) by injecting fresh air into the exhaust manifolds of the engine. In the presence of this oxygen-laden air, further combustion occurs in the manifold and exhaust pipe. Generally the air is delivered through an engine-driven 'smog pump' and air tubing to the manifolds. This technology was introduced in 1966 in California, and was in use for the next several decades. It is not generally in use any longer, having been supplanted by cleaner burning engines and better catalytic converters.


[edit] Exhaust Gas Recirculation
Engines produced after the 1973 model year have an exhaust gas recirculation valve on the intake manifold; its sole purpose is to reduce NOx emissions by introducing exhaust gases into the fuel mixture, lowering peak combustion temperatures.

Around 1990, the Jeep division's powerplants (2.5 and 4.0) eliminated the EGR system. Some other engines also have dispensed with EGR, such as GM's Ecotec engine which was able to meet LEV emissions standards without requiring EGR. In some cases, the valve timing has been set to hold some exhaust in the combustion chamber after the exhaust stroke to perform a similar function to EGR.


[edit] Catalytic converters
The catalytic converter is a device, placed in the exhaust pipe, which converts various emissions into less harmful ones using, generally, a combination of platinum, palladium and rhodium as catalysts. Catalytic converters have been steadily improved over the years. They make for a significant, and easily applied, method for reducing tailpipe emissions. Their other significant effect on pollution was that they were incompatible with the use of tetraethyl lead as an octane booster in gasoline, prompting the phasing-out of that additive as converter-fitted cars became more prevalent. The lead emissions were highly damaging to human health, and its virtual elimination has been one of the most successful reductions in air pollution.


[edit] Evaporative emissions control
Efforts at the reduction of evaporative emissions include the capturing of vented vapors from within the vehicle, and the reduction of refuelling emissions.


[edit] Capturing vented vapors
Within the vehicle, vapors from the fuel tank are channelled through canisters containing activated carbon instead of being vented to the atmosphere. These are known as carbon canisters. The vapors are adsorbed within the canister, which feeds into the inlet manifold of the engine. When the vehicle is running, the vapors desorb from the carbon, are drawn into the engine and burned.

Evaporative emissions from the vehicle are limited by law and tested as part of the new vehicle type approval by a so-called SHED-test. The current limit in the USA is 2 grams of HC per hour, which may amount to an evaporation of one liter (1/4 gallon) in a month.


[edit] Reducing refueling losses
All modern vehicles have tank filler necks that instead of just being a tube into the tank, as in earlier vehicles, now have a small-diameter hinged and spring-loaded door only large enough for the tip of the filler nozzle. This prevents vapor leakage when the filler cap is removed, and also prevents a catalytic converter-fitted vehicle being refueled with leaded fuel (since the leaded fuel nozzle is too large to fit).

This is accompanied by modifications to the filling station pumps. They are now equipped to suck the vapors back into the pump as they are displaced by fuel. Some have intakes around the head of the filler nozzle, while others have a rubber 'boot' that presses securely around the end of the filler neck to prevent vapors escaping.

Vehicles sold in North America started to be equipped with "onboard refueling vapor recovery" (ORVR) systems around 1997. These systems are designed to capture the vapors displaced by the incoming fuel and evaporated by high environmental temperatures in the vehicle's vapor canister rather than releasing them into the atmosphere. This system makes vapor recovery systems on filling station pumps redundant.


[edit] Emission Testing

[91parkave]

88 Coupe wrote: 91parkave wrote: andrewk wrote: ........ most factory setups use a "flex duct" of sorts in which the MAF is inserted. If it was such a horrible idea, it would not be done .........
........ how efficient and performance oriented was GM during the early 90's? ........
Flex duct has been used, in performance applications, since the mid '60s. Olds W30 is an example.

I believe it is still in use, currently.

Efficiency, fuel mileage, and performance have been top priority from '73 till the present and will continue to be, into the foreseeable future. It would be a good topic for a new thread.

Norm

nobody uses drier duct anymore unless there muscle car replicas from the past. thus the evolution of "cold air intakes" smooth bends smooth couplers. You dont see anyone offering drier duct through performance shops now do you? my point exactly

[91parkave]

88 Coupe wrote: 91parkave wrote: 91parkave wrote: ........ one of the best results i had was ........

88 Coupe wrote: How much HP/ET/MPH did you gain?
........ with just a flow master back then and that was a 11.2 which works out to being a 16 second quarter mile so yes i ripped off a full second
wow it clearly states simple intake AND EXAUST mods ........
And you clearly claimed a one second gain with those two simple mods.

Norm

yea i admit to that one i was getting ahead of myself and didnt state what i else i had done at the time so yes i mislead people by saying that

[88 Coupe]

wikipedia wrote: Long winded "cut and paste"
Thank you for verifying the accuracy of my previous post.

Norm

[91parkave]

88 Coupe wrote: 91parkave wrote: ........ Norm is running a big block olds drag car ........
Drag car?

You really ought to deal with that reading comprehension thing.

91parkave wrote: ........ Im running a 231 cu in v6 daily driver. apples to oranges ........
Apples to apples. Changing the size of the air pump does not alter the laws of Physics.

Quote: ........ we're not talking a 1/4 mile at a time ........
We never have been.

Norm

the pic of your car shows it with 2 ram air drier ducts under each headlight and looks like its on drag radials---nowwww if wrong for assuming that then sue me. otherwise your in socal which maybe like every 10 years it might rain everywhere else country has rain though so we can have huge drier duct running to the front of the car with out dealing with the possiblity of water ingestion.......yes size does matter unless were supercharged a 4' intake would lose power all around as we dont pull enough vacum to make a complete 4'tube work now a big block.....

[88 Coupe]

91parkave wrote: ........ nobody uses drier duct anymore ........
This has already been covered.

91parkave wrote: ........ You dont see anyone offering drier duct through performance shops now do you? ........
Not as long as Home Depot sells it.

Norm

[88 Coupe]

91parkave wrote: ........ the pic of your car ........
Has nothing to do with the topic.

Norm

[91parkave]

Thought id post all the air intakes i ever did this should help raskull some as well






and my redisgned TB when i still had the TB/MAF factory combo

[88 Coupe]

91parkave wrote: Thought id post all the air intakes i ever did this should help raskull some as well ........
You forgot this one.

http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=874405&highlight=#874405
http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=874380&highlight=#874380

I found them both to be interesting reads.

Norm

[91parkave]

88 Coupe wrote: 91parkave wrote: Thought id post all the air intakes i ever did this should help raskull some as well ........
You forgot this one.

http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=874405&highlight=#874405
http://www.bonnevilleclub.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=874380&highlight=#874380

I found them both to be interesting reads.

Norm
not really thats the first pic i posted either way they all speculated on my ideas but had no proof of their own to down my idea's and besides that what was your point in bringin this up? i didnt think

[88 Coupe]

91parkave wrote: ........ had no proof of their own to down my idea's ........
Wrong again.

They gave you accurate information. You ignored it. You would rather argue just for the sake of argument.

You got banned (after numerous warnings) for continuing to beat the same dead horses.

Then, you came here to troll for arguments in the same manner.


Speaking of proof: You keep saying you have it.

88 Coupe wrote: 91parkave wrote: ........ actually theres been many studies on how turbulent flexible tubing is. smooth bends and couplers get the best results ........
Again, cite a couple ........
Show it to us.

Norm

[91parkave]

88 Coupe wrote: 91parkave wrote: ........ had no proof of their own to down my idea's ........
Wrong again.

They gave you accurate information. You ignored it. You would rather argue just for the sake of argument.

You got banned (after numerous warnings) for continuing to beat the same dead horses.

Then, you came here to troll for arguments in the same manner.


Speaking of proof: You keep saying you have it.

88 Coupe wrote: 91parkave wrote: ........ actually theres been many studies on how turbulent flexible tubing is. smooth bends and couplers get the best results ........
Again, cite a couple ........
Show it to us.

Norm
Now is where youre crossing the line with me Norm you dont know what went on so dont talk about what you dont know. Bonneville club never showed hard proof to dispute my building materials for FWI/CAI setups.my posts were deleted showing the results. Thats the las time i will discuss that subject with you or anyone ese anymore from bonneville club

[88 Coupe]

91parkave wrote: ........ you dont know what went on ........
You already said that. You were wrong then, and you are wrong now.

91parkave wrote: ........ Bonneville club never showed hard proof to dispute my ........
You already said that. My statement stands.

91parkave wrote: ........ my posts were deleted showing the results ........
You did not post any hard data there. You did not have any then, and you do not have any now.

91parkave wrote: ........ Thats the las time i will discuss that subject ........
Considering the circumstances, that is perfectly understandable.

Norm