AU ARL Haze Values: Measurement & Analysis

Today I had the mandatory vehicle inspection (AU) done on my Seat Leon with a 70,000 km mileage. It was overdue by a bit.
After some initial difficulties related to the OBD system, it eventually worked.

However, I was somewhat surprised by how high the turbidity level was.
I have a value between 0.8 m/1 and 0.9 m/1.
He definitely passed the exam easily; the passing score is far below his result.

However, I would like to know from you what the turbidity values were for your AU (Automated Urine Analyzer) when using ARL (presumably a specific reagent or solution).
It would be great if you could check your vacation request form and then post about it.
Sure, no problem. Here's the translation:

'Thanks in advance.'

With my highly optimized ARL (alternative loading system, different PDEs, etc.), the turbidity values on Tuesday were 0.00 / 0.00 / 0.01.

RTDI-Tom wrote:

With my extremely high-performance ARL (different charger, different PDEs, etc.), the turbidity values on Tuesday were 0.00 / 0.00 / 0.01

.
Meßfehler, d.h. Quark measured.

We're not on some amateur forum here. There are enough people reading this who make trading decisions every day. You shouldn't try to mislead either them or inexperienced newcomers.

'I don't want to make anyone feel like I'm trying to deceive them. I don't take sick leave every day; it's only every two years, and the last time was just on Tuesday. And those are the values that are recorded in the report. I have the original report, but I wasn't present during the examination itself. If incorrect measurements were taken, I apologize, and I'm happy to retract the values I posted. We'll see what comes out next time.'

Yes, you can safely disregard that statement because it's completely unrealistic.

The initial series values are already significantly higher!

Hello,

Quote:

I was somewhat surprised, however, that the turbidity was so high. I have a value between 0.8 m/1 and 0.9 m/1

.
Depending on the driving style, this is quite normal.

Best regards, Rainer.

Does the driving profile actually not play a role in the vehicle inspection (AU)?
With both measurement methods, whether it's for diesel engines or diesel engines with OBD (On-Board Diagnostics), the time taken during free acceleration and any resulting emissions are measured.

The only difference is that the readiness code appears on the diagnostic report when using OBD.
Otherwise, it's essentially a certificate that doesn't include the OBD system.

You can only achieve values of 0.00 with a DPF, and that's only in a closed system. However, I haven't encountered anything like that for the ARL .

Quote:

Isn't the driving profile not actually used in the general inspection (AU)?

Yes, because the exhaust system is also more or less filled with soot deposits, which are then expelled when you accelerate fully.
The main problem is with "persistent leakers," because then you end up with a significant amount of accumulated sludge over many, many kilometers.
Regardless, the intake manifold is more or less coated with deposits depending on whether or not an EGR system is being used.

Best regards, Rainer.

A thought-provoking idea:

"An AU (presumably referring to a specific tool or device) can quickly earn money for any mechanic (or improve their efficiency)."

Failed inspections are not in the best interest of the mechanic, the customer, or the workshop management.

So, do these things also get AU?

In my experience, a car has never failed the emissions test (unless there were defects or leaks). Somehow, it always works out.

Recently, a particular Octavia 2 diesel stubbornly refused to start during its inspection.

He then passed the test with similar levels of interference as the car belonging to RTDI-Tom.

I didn't intend to start a discussion about the correct way to perform an audit, but rather just wanted to ask for some comparison values.

If any of my mechanics try to cheat during the vehicle inspection ('AU'), they will receive exactly two things from me: 1) A written warning, and 2) Revocation of their authorization to perform 'AU' inspections.

It is absolutely not in the workshop management's interest for a vehicle to pass the emissions test!
Quite the opposite: Failing the initial inspection means follow-up work, including troubleshooting, subsequent repairs, and another inspection, which all generate revenue.

If someone doesn't pass the exam, they don't pass! If they ever catch you cheating, you'll know what I mean!

....0.9m/1... what unit of measurement is that?
I only know the K-value in a diesel exhaust test. The K-value is a reference number related to the measured number of particles per unit volume (ppm - parts per million, which are cumbersome units). The relationship is close to an exponential function.

Here are some workshops where cars consistently pass the emissions test...

I know of some workshops like that, but they are few and far between. However, they generally have a bad reputation because many other aspects are also questionable.
It is also not in the best interest of a (reasonable) customer if an abnormality or defect in their engine or engine management system is not detected or intentionally overlooked, especially since consequential damage may occur.

g1om wrote:

Today, I had the overdue emissions test (AU) done on my Seat Leon with a 70,000 km mileage. After some initial difficulties related to the OBD system, it eventually worked. However, I was somewhat surprised by how high the turbidity level was. I have a value between 0.8 m/1 and 0.9 m/1. He definitely passed the exam easily; the passing score is far below his result. However, I would like to know from you what the turbidity values were for your AU (Automated Urine Analyzer) when using ARL (presumably a specific reagent or solution). It would be great if you could check your vacation request form and then post about it. Thanks in advance

.

The values might be close. Maybe practice driving properly before the inspection, going above...
4000 RPM to initially remove ash from the exhaust system .

Besides the turbidity values of 0.0/m or 0.01/m, only vehicles that originally came with a particulate filter from the factory have those values.

With a vehicle that doesn't have a particulate filter, the readings shouldn't be consistent with a proper measurement, no matter how much the vehicle has been driven previously.

Hello.

I just checked. The values are 0.7, 0.9, and 0.7 for the AU (likely referring to a specific medical test or measurement) in February 2008. Considering the threshold of 2.0, I see these as normal.


Best regards, Charly.