Manually controlling the EGR

[svenakela]

I'm thinking of keeping the EGR on my mTDI-swap, and how it could be controlled like the manual VNT setup.
On some engines the EGR recirculate as much as 30 % at idle but closes pretty quick. On other brands the EGR doesn't open that much and have a slower closing pattern.
How about letting the boost be the controlling factor instead of RPM and then having a spring loaded arm that regulates the valve?
My strategy is something like having the EGR recirculate about 15 % at idle and then close directly at boost.

[svenakela]

...on the other hand, it might be better for lower temp to let the EGR run a little bit open even under load?
The first generation's of EGR's were vacuum driven, so it could be a first step to a simple but working reflow.

[rallydiesel]

I think you should have stuck with an e-tdi if you want the egr functional.

[svenakela]

I think you should have stuck with an e-tdi if you want the egr functional.

Answers like this makes me wanna keep the EGR even more.

[745 turbogreasel]

Seems to me the EGR form a Volvo D24T should be a direct swap, and free or cheap

[monkey magic]

I think you should have stuck with an e-tdi if you want the egr functional.

Answers like this makes me wanna keep the EGR even more.

Why?

[OM617]

There is zero benefit to an EGR on any diesel. Why in the world would you want something that INCREASES pollution just to reduce a small amount of smog producing chemicals by a small amount?

[svenakela]

I think you should have stuck with an e-tdi if you want the egr functional.

Answers like this makes me wanna keep the EGR even more.

Why?

Because EGR's existed long time before TDI's, and saying that an EGR only works with e-TDI is false. And that makes me wanna proof it works even more.

There is zero benefit to an EGR on any diesel. Why in the world would you want something that INCREASES pollution just to reduce a small amount of smog producing chemicals by a small amount?

I don't think any of the worlds vehicle producers agree on that one. Not the European MOT's either.
 
Never mind. It seems I have a different perspective on pollution than you guys.

[rallydiesel]

I'm not saying it couldn't work. I'm just saying you would have more control parameters and easier tuning if you used an ecu. Plus you would be able to control more pump parameters to decrease emissions. That's why people are criticizing you. You seem to be contradicting your goals with your means.

[monkey magic]

Answers like this makes me wanna keep the EGR even more.

Why?

And that makes me wanna proof it works even more.

I understand now. But, you missed the point though.

Nobodys saying etdi is the only way to make it work, but to make it work well etdi is probably the best way. The manufacturers choose to control it electronically..

Rallydiesel is spot on, if its full on eco friendly you want, electronic control is the best way you will achieve this.

OM617 also has a point (cant believe i said it  ), research EGRs and you will find that they reduce one type of pollution, but increase another, a lot. Thats before you even consider the extra wear on the engine, and the gradual choking of the intake which only serves to make your vehicle less efficient (worse MPG means more pollution per mile, except Euro MOTs dont test MPG so they dont reflect the true amount of pollution being produced). EGR doesnt help pollution, it helps pass a crude test, nothing more.

I don't think any of the worlds vehicle producers agree on that one. Not the European MOT's either.

The comments about worlds vehicle producers dont count. They make what the regulations demand of them. If the people writing the regulations miss the point and get it wrong (happens a lot in the world I live in), the world car producers still do what they say, otherwise they cant sell their cars.

Never mind. It seems I have a different perspective on pollution than you guys.

We arent pollution lovers, and we arent trying to put you down for what you're trying to achieve. We're saying you wont achieve reduced pollution with EGR, and if you really want to reduce NOX, in spite of what is said above & below, then etdi will be the best way to do it.

A quote from wiki:

EGR deletion

EGR deletion in diesel engines is considered justifiable by a wide range of people, including the environmentally conscious. Although deleting the EGR system results in increased NOx level; hydrocarbon emissions, particulates, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide are drastically reduced. Furthermore, EGR deletion results in an increase in fuel economy as high as 25%. Exhaust gas recirculated back into the cylinders adds wear-inducing contaminants and increases engine oil acidity, which can result in an inefficient, poorly running engine. The increased level of soot also creates the need for diesel particulate filters to prevent environmental contamination.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Exhaust_gas_recirculation

peace, MM  

[svenakela]

...

We arent pollution lovers, and we arent trying to put you down for what you're trying to achieve. We're saying you wont achieve reduced pollution with EGR, and if you really want to reduce NOX, in spite of what is said above & below, then etdi will be the best way to do it.

...

So, NOx is not pollution?
I've now been talking NOx and EGR for hours with one guy who's working with combustion at one of the big car companies, surprisingly(?) he has the opposite stand point. NOx is way more polluting than both COx and the soot (that's why they were used in mining vehicles before they were in use in road vehicles, to get better air in the tunnels). I'm swapping a pretty ugly IDI into a mTDI to get a betterand less pollutant engine - and the mTDI's from the mid-90's did meet the same requirements as the eTDI's - and the EGR is sitting there so why shouldn't I use it? If I want to be totally ECO friendly I wouldn't drive a car at all. Now I have the possibility to decrease the NOx by using the existing EGR I see no reason to not do it.
The eTDI controlling system for the EGR from a VW -95 has a temperature sensitive vacuum valve that opens when the coolant temp has reached a certain level. When the valve is open the adjustment is linear with fuel and air mass. Pretty simple.

[monkey magic]

You have essentially answered your own question as to how to go about it then.

Your theory is to make it MORE eco friendly by adding in the EGR. What Rallydiesel is saying is, if you really want to, electronic control will surely improve things further still? Surely an electronic setup will give you further improvements in the area you want them? Nobodys talking about not driving at all, thats a ridiculous response.

Also, you're still ignoring the fact that your engine will suffer more wear with EGR (whats the carbon footprint on replacing your engine sooner) as well as reduced MPG (thereby increasing ALL pollution per mile, NOX particulate etc. MOTs dont measure pollution per mile, just whats there under zero load while stood still).

Some quotes you maybe missed:

"EGR deletion results in an increase in fuel economy as high as 25%"

"EGR also tends to reduce the amount of fuel burned in the power stroke. This is evident by the increase in particulate emissions that corresponds to an increase in EGR. Particulate matter (mainly carbon) that is not burned in the power stroke is wasted energy."

"deleting the EGR system results in increased NOx level; hydrocarbon emissions, particulates, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide are drastically reduced."

"Stricter regulations on particulate matter(PM) call for further emission controls to be introduced to compensate for the PM emissions introduced by EGR. The most common is particulate filters in the exhaust system that result in reduced fuel efficiency. Since EGR increases the amount of PM that must be dealt with and reduces the exhaust gas temperatures and available oxygen these filters need to function properly to burn off soot, automakers have had to consider injecting fuel and air directly into the exhaust system to keep these filters from plugging up."

Sorry, we're only trying to help. Being so defensive about it is not going to attract others with good info to the thread. Nobody said NOX wasnt pollution either. You can do as you please, nobody is saying its not possible, were only trying to show the bigger picture regarding total pollution. Ie its not as simple as :"EGR reduces total pollution".

The guy who works with combustion, is he a pollution expert, or is he just another tech working to the guidelines given?

I wont come back to this thread, you seem to have your heart set on an EGR system regardless of the facts 

[745 turbogreasel]

After putting forth that may out of context half truths, I probably wouldn't come back either.

[monkey magic]

Im back 

Sorry greasel,  i wasnt quoting as fact, just pointing out info on the web, please feel free to counter with other info. I arent an authority on this, and am open to alternative theories. I judge your comment as 100% useless, so you can suck it my troll friend. 

[svenakela]

<snip>

The guy who works with combustion, is he a pollution expert, or is he just another tech working to the guidelines given?

I wont come back to this thread, you seem to have your heart set on an EGR system regardless of the facts 

As I said earlier, we don't agree and will not either. I didn't ask to get more opinions about removing the EGR, I was trying to get a discussion started how to get it working.
In this case, I trust the guys at Opel's engine department more than loosely coupled facts taken from wikipedia.

Over n out, let this thread die.