- EPA caught VW cheating - how does the car know it's being tested? - 18 Updates
- Tantalum Capacitors - 7 Updates
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 22 10:47PM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 14:22:22 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote: > You would still need to measure actual > emissions to see if the car met the emissions requirements. I think this makes sense. The VW cheat code does NOT appear to do anything clever. In the official EPA pdf letter to VW, they called it a "switch". Basically, the cheat code determined that the car was not moving but that it was running as if it was moving, so, under that circumstance (i.e., under what the EPA called the "dynamometer" settings) VW engineers simply reduced the fuel to the engine, which lowered the NOx emissions. Under all other circumstances, which the EPA called the "road" settings, VW engineers let the car have as much fuel as it wanted, NOx emissions be damned. There was nothing sophisticated at all about it. It's like me stealing money from my own relatives. It's easy to do because they leave their wallet out on the kitchen table without checking. The audacious part isn't how clever it was (it wasn't at all clever). The audacious part is that we trusted them, just as you trust a house guest, and they violated that trust, just as it would be as if a house guest stole money out of your wallet. |
| "Tom Miller" <tmiller11147@verizon.net>: Sep 22 06:49PM -0400 "Mayayana" <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote in message news:mtskpo$9vn$1@dont-email.me... > an implicit statement that we as a society recognize > no legal or ethical requirements for people doing > business. Murder is illegal but people still do it. |
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 22 10:52PM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:20:29 -0400, Scott Dorsey wrote: > It's true that the proof is in the pudding I once looked that up, and it's the truth is in the /taste/ of the pudding! :) > actual emissions measurements tell the real story, but you cannot > realistically measure emissions under every possible driving circumstance You'll notice they drove the three test cars from San Diego to Seattle. Do you know why they did that? Because the trucking engine manufacturers were caught cheating years ago, where, after hundreds of miles of driving, the emissions would slowly creep up as the cheat codes slowly lowered the emissions constraints. The only way to tell if the VW cheat code did the same thing as Caterpillar and Volvo did in the past, was to drive for a thousand miles or so. It turned out that the cheat code was not the same as the ones previously used by the trucking engine manufacturers, but, as you noted, the only way to tell was to drive very long distances. > so at some point the test will need > to be simplified, and every test that is simplified will have a loophole. This is true. The problem here isn't that VW cheated; it's that we TRUSTED them not to cheat, and then they still cheated. It's like trusting a house guest not to steal from you. Or like trusting the pool boy not to steal chemicals from you. Or trusting the electrician not to steal wires from you. Or trusting the dentist not to steal gold fillings from you. It's a trust issue (in addition to one big legal issue). > when the measurements don't make sense, and of course it also allows you to > determine intent. Booleans with name like EPA_ENFORCEMENT and SMOG_MODE > might be a giveaway too... In the official documents, even VW called the cheat setting of the switch the dynamometer setting! |
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 22 10:56PM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 15:40:39 -0700, trader_4 wrote: > Otherwise it ran the car with emissions that according to the news > last night was 10 - 40x above the limits. Notice that they had from 5 to 45 times the LIMIT (which is a lot!). The lower/higher numbers were due to city/highway mode, I think. (I assume the city numbers are the higher ones?) The variation in the low and high figures themselves was due to the different vehicles tested. > They didn't look at the code, EPA went after VW to explain the huge > differences between dyno testing emissions and emission on the road. > VW couldn't explain it and finally admitted what they had done. I think, as someone mentioned, and as the news noted, the code is actually covered by the DCMA (it would be nice to find a cite). It wasn't so much that VW /couldn't/ explain, but that they wouldn't explain it. They only admitted guilt when both CARB and EPA said they would not certify 2016 diesels because they couldn't be certain of the manufacturer's own certification process. Only then, when VW knew their stock price would take the hit, did VW finally confess. And even then, they didn't confess to the fact that it's not half a million vehicles, but more than twenty times that number! |
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 22 10:57PM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:37:03 -0400, Mayayana wrote: > It's the difference between *maybe* risking their > bonus and definitely risking years in jail. I must agree, unfortunately. At this point, we don't know WHO was involved. Please post when anyone finds out WHO the guilty PEOPLE were. |
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 22 10:59PM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 16:04:25 -0500, Dean Hoffman wrote: > people died. > I don't think Jeff Foxworthy or Larry the Cable Guy > are running the Justice Department. You have to keep in mind that there are DIFFERENT laws when safety is involved (NHTSA) versus the environment (EPA). The NY Times, I think it was, discussed the difference, which essentially said that the EPA actually has more power to fine them than does the NHTSA. We should look up the details, but, my point is that the laws and maximum penalties are totally DIFFERENT for safety violations versus emissions violations. Inexplicably, the emissions violation laws appear (at first inspection) to be more stringent. Go figure. |
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 22 11:01PM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 18:32:46 -0400, Mayayana wrote: > cuts corners to save $100 million and gets fined > $20 million, with no arrests, then that seems to be > a good business plan. Again, let's remember the laws and maximum fines are very DIFFERENT for emissions laws versus for safety laws. Different laws. Different agencies. Different penalties. You could be arguing that we should make the laws more consistent between SAFETY violations and EMISSIONS violations; but the fact is they are very different - so - you can't really compare them that way and be fair. |
| "Dean Hoffman" <dh0496@windstream.net>: Sep 22 07:15PM -0500 On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 17:32:46 -0500, Mayayana <mayayana@invalid.nospam> wrote: > cuts corners to save $100 million and gets fined > $20 million, with no arrests, then that seems to be > a good business plan. My dad had a 1976 Chevy pickup. It was one of those with the gas tank outside of the rails. GM was supposed to allow an extra $1000 as trade in value as part of a settlement with the government. That deal smelled bad from the beginning. -- Using Opera's mail client: http://www.opera.com/mail/ |
| Don Wiss <donwiss@no_spam.com>: Sep 22 09:11PM -0400 On 9/18/2015 8:19 PM, Ewald Böhm asked: > My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions? From the NY Times: "The software could silently deduce that an inspection was taking place based on the position of the steering wheel (cars hooked up to emissions meters don't make turns), the speed of the vehicle, how long the engine had been running and barometric pressure." Don. www.donwiss.com (e-mail link at home page bottom). |
| Vic Smith <thismailautodeleted@comcast.net>: Sep 22 08:12PM -0500 On Sat, 19 Sep 2015 00:19:10 +0000 (UTC), Ewald Böhm >http://hothardware.com/news/vw-intentionally-programmed-engine-software-to-cheat-emissions-tests-forced-by-epa-to-recall-482k-vehicles >etc. >My question is HOW did the car *know* it was being *tested* for emissions? The most important thing here is that puts an end to those incessant and tasteless TDI ads on TV, with those offensive dirty old women. Good. |
| Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net>: Sep 22 09:34PM -0400 On 9/22/2015 8:15 PM, Dean Hoffman wrote: > allow an extra $1000 as trade in value as part of a settlement > with the government. That deal smelled bad from the > beginning. GM's answer to any problem was always to buy a new one. I no longer drive GM cars and the associated problems. |
| Tony Hwang <dragon40@shaw.ca>: Sep 22 07:52PM -0600 Vic Smith wrote: > The most important thing here is that puts an end to those incessant > and tasteless TDI ads on TV, with those offensive dirty old women. > Good. There may be others cheating too, just not caught yet. Big corp. mentality like VW cheating. They should be fined $$$ as an example and top guy should do some jail time as well. VW chief said, "we screwed up" So they intentionally cheated. |
| Vic Smith <thismailautodeleted@comcast.net>: Sep 22 09:13PM -0500 On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 19:52:57 -0600, Tony Hwang <dragon40@shaw.ca> wrote: >Big corp. mentality like VW cheating. They should be fined $$$ >as an example and top guy should do some jail time as well. >VW chief said, "we screwed up" So they intentionally cheated. Yeah, those disgusting ads on TV should have been a clue that VW was an immoral company. A thorough investigation is necessary. When the congressional Benghazi committee wraps it up in the next 10-12 years, they should take this up. They'll get to the bottom of it. |
| Ed Pawlowski <esp@snet.net>: Sep 22 10:19PM -0400 On 9/22/2015 9:52 PM, Tony Hwang wrote: > Big corp. mentality like VW cheating. They should be fined $$$ > as an example and top guy should do some jail time as well. > VW chief said, "we screwed up" So they intentionally cheated. I cannot imagine a big corporation intentionally doing something like that and figure they would not get caught. Too many people work on projects like that and superiors have to sign off. The cost t fix it is in the billions and for what? |
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 23 02:34AM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 20:12:41 -0500, Vic Smith wrote: > The most important thing here is that puts an end to those incessant > and tasteless TDI ads on TV, with those offensive dirty old women. > Good Apparently VW yanked *all* those youtube ads, completely. Amazing how quickly that marketing team can move! |
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 23 02:35AM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 19:52:57 -0600, Tony Hwang wrote: > VW chief said, "we screwed up" So they intentionally cheated. Actually, the USA chief said "we screwed up". The Germany chief is just "endlessly sorry". |
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 23 02:37AM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 21:13:49 -0500, Vic Smith wrote: > When the congressional Benghazi committee wraps it up in the next > 10-12 years, they should take this up. > They'll get to the bottom of it. I realize some things are "political", but is *this* issue really a "congressional" issue? Isn't it simply that CARB & the EPA have procedures which are backed up by force of law (admittedly, made by Congress), which VW broke? |
| Winston_Smith <invalid@butterfly.net>: Sep 23 02:38AM On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 22:19:48 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote: > that and figure they would not get caught. Too many people work on > projects like that and superiors have to sign off. The cost t fix it is > in the billions and for what? I wonder, out loud, how many people inside of VW knew about this? Do you think it was a small cadre? Or basically everyone? |
| bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net>: Sep 22 08:22PM -0400 On 9/22/2015 4:40 PM, John Larkin wrote: > literally ignites them; MnO2 is the oxidizer and tantalum is the fuel. > Derate them 3:1 on voltage, or use something else. Polymer aluminums > are good, and some come in a tantalum-like surface mount package. Is there anything I can use temporarily in its place, that I might have in stock, to try and get that switcher up and running while I wait for the appropriate part? |
| John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com>: Sep 22 05:47PM -0700 On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 20:22:49 -0400, bitrex >>>> So I'm working on repairing a Korg MS2000B synthesizer for a friend with >>>> a dead power supply. Here's the service manual: >>>> http://www.loscha.com/scans/Korg_MS2000_Service_Manual.pdf What a horrible schematic! A mosfet is "F1" and a fuse is "FU1" ! Connector names are all over the place. And worse. Replace C109 with most any 100 uF cap. What's with the 21 resistors between AGND and DGND? That's crazy. |
| Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>: Sep 22 05:55PM -0700 On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 13:40:36 -0700, John Larkin >Dry-slug tantalums across power rails are bad news. High dV/dT >literally ignites them; MnO2 is the oxidizer and tantalum is the fuel. That's what I've read everywhere. Yet, I spent 10 years shipping marine radios that were literally crammed with dipped and molded tantalum caps on power supply rails with never a problem. The only ones I've ever seen go up in smoke were reverse polarized (which produced an impressive red glowing piece of slag and plenty of white smog). Mostly, these caps were 25V caps on the 12V (nominal) power supply lines and 16V caps on the 8 and 10V regulated lines. There were also a bunch used in audio circuits. However, we never used tantalums on the output of a switcher, where I would expect problems. I guess using a tantalum in this 3.3V switcher would qualify. However, at the time (1970's) the literature declared that high voltage spikes were the culprit, not voltage slew rate. Since these often appear together, I can see where there might be some confusion. >Derate them 3:1 on voltage, or use something else. Polymer aluminums >are good, and some come in a tantalum-like surface mount package. The original cap is a 100uF 10v tantalum which is already 3:1 derated in a 3.3 VDC power supply. However, that doesn't included voltage spikes from the nearby inductor. Judging by the age of the Korg, I would guess(tm) axial leads not SMT. 100uf 10-16V From Digikey: <http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?pv13=67&pv63=19&pv63=11&pv63=449&pv63=489&pv69=80&FV=fff40002%2Cfff80532&mnonly=0&newproducts=0&ColumnSort=0&page=1&quantity=0&ptm=0&fid=0&pageSize=25> For fast delivery, there's probably something on eBay: <http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=polymer+capacitor+100uf> -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
| bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net>: Sep 22 09:23PM -0400 On 9/22/2015 8:55 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: > <http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?pv13=67&pv63=19&pv63=11&pv63=449&pv63=489&pv69=80&FV=fff40002%2Cfff80532&mnonly=0&newproducts=0&ColumnSort=0&page=1&quantity=0&ptm=0&fid=0&pageSize=25> > For fast delivery, there's probably something on eBay: > <http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=polymer+capacitor+100uf> Nope, the power supply is almost all SMT, including the tantalum. The only through hole parts is the switcher inductor and the other large capacitors, which are a mix of organic polymer and regular electrolytic. |
| bitrex <bitrex@de.lete.earthlink.net>: Sep 22 09:27PM -0400 On 9/22/2015 8:55 PM, Jeff Liebermann wrote: > <http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?pv13=67&pv63=19&pv63=11&pv63=449&pv63=489&pv69=80&FV=fff40002%2Cfff80532&mnonly=0&newproducts=0&ColumnSort=0&page=1&quantity=0&ptm=0&fid=0&pageSize=25> > For fast delivery, there's probably something on eBay: > <http://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_nkw=polymer+capacitor+100uf> This thing cost an arm and a leg when it was new 15 years ago. Inside the very large case there actually isn't very much - there's a board which holds all the front panel controls, and everything else including the power supply and output jacks are on a single mainboard measuring maybe 8"x10". |
| Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>: Sep 22 06:54PM -0700 On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 21:23:47 -0400, bitrex >Nope, the power supply is almost all SMT, including the tantalum. The >only through hole parts is the switcher inductor and the other large >capacitors, which are a mix of organic polymer and regular electrolytic. Bad guess(tm). Sorry. I couldn't tell from the "manual" because none of the caps are listed in the parts list. This should work for SMT on Digikey: <http://www.digikey.com/product-search/en?pv13=67&pv63=19&pv63=11&pv63=449&pv63=489&pv69=3&FV=fff40002%2Cfff80532&mnonly=0&newproducts=0&ColumnSort=0&page=1&quantity=0&ptm=0&fid=0&pageSize=25> The eBay link includes both through-hole and SMT. -- Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com 150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558 |
| John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandtechnology.com>: Sep 22 07:02PM -0700 On Tue, 22 Sep 2015 17:55:51 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote: >smog). Mostly, these caps were 25V caps on the 12V (nominal) power >supply lines and 16V caps on the 8 and 10V regulated lines. There >were also a bunch used in audio circuits. The tantalum thing is very erratic. Some batches blow up, some are fine. >that high voltage spikes were the culprit, not voltage slew rate. >Since these often appear together, I can see where there might be some >confusion. I know for sure that tantalums sometimes blow up at below their rated voltages, with no overshoot spikes. It's dV/dT, namely peak current, that can ignite tiny particles of tantalum, which then burn in the solid MnO2 electrolyte. >The original cap is a 100uF 10v tantalum which is already 3:1 derated >in a 3.3 VDC power supply. However, that doesn't included voltage >spikes from the nearby inductor. Could be. Or maybe there was a lot of dV/dT. Or maybe some other failure mechanism. Tantalums are just right for some things, but have to be used carefully. https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Parts/Caps/Bang.jpg https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/53724080/Parts/Caps/Fried_Tant_1.JPG |
| You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com. |
No Response to "Digest for sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com - 25 updates in 2 topics"
Post a Comment