Particulate Filters: Performance & Fine Dust Reduction

Hello.

Can anyone imagine how a particulate filter (which is currently being heavily demanded ) affects performance?

Or are there already more specific details or experiences available?

I remember those from the Golf 2. Those were mine back then.
- without catalytic converter: 75 hp, with underfloor catalytic converter: 72 hp, and with a gasoline catalytic converter: only 70 hp.

How do vehicles with performance upgrades and a particulate filter behave?



Best regards, Klima96.

I think that with the production vehicle, you won't notice any difference.

For heavily modified vehicles that have a much higher exhaust flow, this might not be good for the turbocharger and pistons.
I'm thinking that it will result in a higher thermal load and, consequently, less torque.

I would only do it if the government gave me €1000 for it, and if my 1.9 TDI... (The sentence is incomplete).
It only costs 100 euros in taxes.

Klima96 wrote:

How do vehicles with performance upgrades and a particulate filter behave?

Based on the old rule of thumb that "the cleaner the exhaust emissions, the lower the overall efficiency," I fear that this would not be an exception for retrofitted TDIs in particular.

To the delight of Mr. Eichel:
He charges a "fairytale tax" for modifications and registration, etc.
2. He collects more mineral oil tax, eco-tax, and "fairytale tax" with each refueling, corresponding to the increase in consumption.

Or has anyone heard anything about announced tax benefits for retrofitted TDIs ?

What do you think of this system: twin-tec?
They even promise a slight improvement in fuel consumption.
The system functions as a replacement for a catalytic converter.

By the way, on the homepage it states that a subsidy of €250 will be available starting in 2006.

For the Volkswagen Golf II 1.8 with 66 kW, the fuel consumption was even more extreme.
Without a catalytic converter, within city limits, according to standard: 9 liters.
With a catalytic converter, it's already 10.5 liters!

Another aspect to add:

In a technical publication about a BMW engine, it was mentioned that the installation of a particulate filter (as standard equipment) required modifications to the turbocharger mounting. The altered pressure difference caused by the increased resistance of the filter resulted in an additional axial force.
I don't quite understand why a smaller pressure difference leads to a higher axial force. Perhaps the forces from the compressor side and the exhaust side partially cancel each other out without a filter?

Hi,

Did I miss something? Why on earth would a car that consumes 10.5 liters instead of 9 liters (which is a whopping 17% MORE) be more environmentally friendly?
Right, environmental protection is just something that's written everywhere but actually implemented nowhere. Ultimately, it always boils down to coal.

Regards,
Micha.

P.S.: By the way, when are those New Zealand sheep going to be slaughtered? It's been proven that the methane in sheep farts contributes to the depletion of the ozone layer. (No, I'm not kidding!)

Hello,
One should 'tear apart' those politicians who 'talk the most nonsense.'
Best regards,
Günther

Hello.

I don't understand the world anymore!

Now, those poor diesel drivers are being blamed for everything!

As a diesel car driver, you're already paying enough.

"When purchasing, it costs 1000 euros more than a comparable gasoline-powered version."
The insurance company offers better rates here because diesel-powered passenger cars are generally...
only be used by frequent riders.
3. The higher taxes on motor vehicles.
As far as I know, inspection costs are also somewhat higher for diesel vehicles compared to gasoline-powered ones.

The only advantage (besides the fuel efficiency and the thrill of acceleration) has now disappeared, even at the gas station.
See the increase in diesel prices!!!

Just saw a news report on TV from Dortmund (the city next to the border, after 35 days).
A family living near the street was questioned. The young boy is coughing, and we are to blame – those diesel drivers!

What actually happened at the border last year, or was that mess not even there yet?
If we were already talking about the value everywhere in early April in 2005!!!???

I just had to get that off my chest! I'm always right up to the edge!

Best regards,
Klima96

@Klima96:

It will happen like this: Diesel drivers are already being made to feel guilty (about the environmental impact), so that they will more easily open their wallets and willingly pay their various types of punitive taxes in the future.

Around the mid-1980s, we experienced something similar; diesel engines were also heavily criticized at that time. After a while, diesel technology became acceptable again – remember the flagship 3.0-liter TDI models – and for a long time, it was considered effective in reducing CO2 emissions and conserving oil reserves.

Now he's being mean again and is getting heavily criticized. It's all happened before.
I'm starting to wonder if this is just malicious propaganda sponsored by the automotive industry, designed to force a large portion of the vehicle fleet to be converted to different propulsion systems on a regular basis. Otherwise, the particulate filters – whether effective or not – would have been widely available long ago. But they are hardly obtainable now.

Hello,
It's all just his big joke!
Best regards,
Günther

Hello fellow enthusiasts,

I don't want to take the government's side, but fundamentally, they're not entirely wrong. When catalytic converters were introduced, everyone complained and cursed, but now it's standard and no one talks about it anymore. And if we hadn't forced the industry to implement them, we still wouldn't have catalytic converters today.

With diesel engines, it's just the same. Why should I support a lot of technical complexity when I can achieve much better results with significantly less effort than with EURO 4 standards (particle filter)?
Honestly, does a car with a particulate filter consume more fuel than one without? 0.2 is almost impossible to measure realistically. When you accelerate in a TDI, it still produces a lot of smoke, which a particulate filter prevents. It's only two years until these filters are standard equipment and cost significantly less. That's how we drive innovation forward.

As I said, I don't support the government, but Germans just don't seem to do anything on their own unless it involves making money.
Years ago, you criticized Mitsubishi's GDI engines, but now you produce FSI engines yourselves. Nowadays, you no longer use stratified charge injection, but you don't even tell customers about it, yet the cost remains just as high.

Best regards, Manuel.

Best regards, Manuel.

It's not that simple.

Even with a gasoline catalytic converter, fuel consumption increases slightly because the air-fuel mixture cannot be leaned out arbitrarily under partial load conditions without causing unacceptable changes to the exhaust gas composition.

The issue with diesel particulate filters is quite different. Depending on the system, the filter can cause significant back pressure. This impairs gas exchange and turbocharging, leading to a noticeable increase in fuel consumption. In controlled systems (with pressure monitoring and additives), the engine management system is adjusted to the filter. This means, for example, post-injection and injection timing shaping adapted to the filter. Here, the well-known problem arises: either fuel efficiency, emissions reduction, or maximum performance. Since emission regulations prioritize emissions reduction, this path must be taken. Even a standard TDI engine consumes more diesel than it should due to the compromise made to achieve the required exhaust composition.

I'm not saying I want to dismiss the particulate filter, but you gain one advantage at the expense of drawbacks in other areas.
By the way, many vehicles exceed the Euro 3 emission limits when the collected particles combust.
Even now, a Euro-4 vehicle emits more dust from tire and brake wear than from particles in the exhaust.

The fine particulate matter scare, of course, doesn't affect this situation. In response to the latest wave of alarmism, a city has released its collected measurement data and is loudly calling for filters for diesel vehicles. It was only discovered by the local newspaper that the days with high levels of dust pollution coincided precisely with the maintenance schedules of the filter system at the neighboring cement plant.
Industry and households are not considered as major contributors, but together they account for the largest share of the problem!
Scientists even question the effectiveness of particulate filters in reducing fine dust emissions.
Due to the filtering out of larger particles, fine particulate matter lacks binding partners. Therefore, it is more likely that particle filters will lead to an increase in fine dust concentrations.


Sure, here's the translation:

'CU' is an abbreviation for 'see you.' It can be used in a variety of contexts, such as:

* In text messages or emails to say goodbye.
* At the end of a phone call or video chat.
* When leaving a meeting or event.
* As a casual way to say hello when arriving somewhere.

'CU' is often used by people who are close friends or family members, but it can also be used in more formal settings.

Hello fellow mechanics,

I don't want to take the government's side, but fundamentally, they're not entirely wrong. When catalytic converters were introduced, everyone complained and cursed, but now it's standard, and no one talks about it anymore. And if we hadn't forced the industry to do it, we still wouldn't have catalytic converters today.

With diesel engines, it's just the same. Why should I support a lot of technical complexity when I can achieve much better results with significantly less effort than with EURO 4 standards (particle filter)?
To be honest, does a car with a particulate filter consume more fuel than one without? 0.2 is almost impossible to measure realistically. When you accelerate a TDI, it still produces a lot of smoke, which a particulate filter prevents. It's only two years until these filters are standard equipment and cost significantly less. That's how we drive innovation forward.

As I said, I don't support the government, but Germans just don't seem to do anything on their own unless it involves making money.
Years ago, you criticized Mitsubishi's GDI engines, but now you produce FSI engines yourselves. Nowadays, you no longer use stratified charge injection, but you don't even tell customers about it, yet the cost remains just as high.

Best regards, Manuel.

Best regards, Manuel.

Hello,
The GDI engine performed quite well up to about 120 km/h, but then the exhaust emissions became significantly worse.
It always depends on the 'legal' measurement specifications (usage profile) of the car!
Best regards,
Günther.

Hello,

It's not all nonsense or a joke.
In the United States, regular TDI vehicles are banned in some states due to particulate emissions. Instead, people drive fuel-guzzling V8 engines, etc.
Okay, let's talk about this discussion: retrofitting a diesel particulate filter is not possible.
It's either good for a long time or it's not. Either the component will regenerate itself, or it will eventually fail and need to be replaced. Accordingly, the performance will reflect that.
In the older city buses with 'conventional' particulate filters, they were removed after a certain distance and then regenerated . This resulted in smoke coming from the yard of the company , because the soot was being 'burned out' there.

You can get angry however you want; it won't change anything – the foolish one is and remains the driver .

Those who buy the permit either purchase a car with a particulate filter, or they are provided with one or given one as a favor out of kindness.

Someone dug themselves into a deep hole, is now shocked awake, and is wildly attacking everything that can't defend itself.

Best regards,

"Günther, that's still the case for most gasoline direct injection (GDI) cars today. Above a certain speed, they switch to a largely unregulated mode and emit whatever they can."

But nobody wants to hear that today; now everyone is criticizing diesel engines.