Air/Fuel Ratio guage Circuit

blueroomelectronics said:

Get a grip on reality. How would you feel if I burned tires all day or poured poison into a lake.

Click to expand...

I think that's a quote from someone else and he's just hard to understand. The other stuff he says seems to contradict it, but I'm not certain.

Thats WHY I am now attempting electronic knowledge so I can MAYBE just maybe find an alternative fuel so you, I and others can still maintain our normal way of life,,,,without sacrificeing my grandchildrens HEALTH.

Click to expand...

The little kids around here remove the pollution controls on their little Honda cars.
Then the pollution cops just smell the pollution and pull them over for a check.

The diesel trucks and buses legally blow their stinking black smoke into the air we breathe. Do they burn coal??

DirtyLude said:

No, because manifold pressure does not directly relate to how much air gets in the cylinder. There are far too many variables to account for to 'know' exactly how much mass of air has gotten into the cylinder and then how much has actually burned.

Click to expand...

Are you saying that aircraft engine designers don't know what they're doing?

Boncuk said:

Are you saying that aircraft engine designers don't know what they're doing?

Click to expand...

No, you are saying that car engine designers don't know what they are doing. Perhaps you could post some point of reference for your argument.

audioguru said:

The little kids around here remove the pollution controls on their little Honda cars.
Then the pollution cops just smell the pollution and pull them over for a check.

The diesel trucks and buses legally blow their stinking black smoke into the air we breathe. Do they burn coal??

Click to expand...

Better lobbyists.

Back in the 70's GM's Caddy had a light bar system that indicated fuel usage as you opened up the venturies in the quadrajet carb. This allowed the driver to at least see where he was waisting fuel and he could back-off or feather his throttle pressure, this would change the amount of mileage one could get out of a tank of fuel imensely.

Click to expand...

Chrysler had that too. It works by reading the engine vacuum not the A/F ratio. The higher the vacuum the less air and fuel your using.

The air fuel ratio stays relatively constant from idle to full throttle. A leaner A/F ratio with gasoline does not save fuel. It burns valves and causes engine damage plus your fuel consumption actually tends to increase because the excess air being pulled through engine gets pointlessly heated and dumped out the exhaust while not having actually done any useful work! Oddly richening the A/F ratio to a slightly richer than ideal stoichiometric number cuts down on fuel usage when burning gasoline. Less fuel is actually used because less air mass is being used. The total mass of air and fuel used for the same power output is much lower than that used for a stoichiometric or even slightly lean burn condition.
Lean burning some types of fuels does work but gasoline is not one of them.

The O2 sensor signal does not put out a constant voltage in proportion to how the engines running either. It continually swings from rich to lean several times a second. When it reads too rich the computer leans out the A/F ratio until the sensor the reads a too lean condition then richness it up until it then reads the too rich conditions again.
The computer just sort of tries to hit the average between them.

Most of what makes up an emissions system is crap and a joke and anyone with a good mechanical and chemistry background can easily prove it. Its more of a mathematical misdirection and slight of hand game than anything just aimed at getting people to believe the wrong information.
Basically its just one more way to get people to buy more fuel while falsely feeling good about it.

The two honest and provable real emissions improvements were the catalytic converter and the reformulation of gasoline to clean up the NOx by products that created smog decades ago. They do have honest provable chemistry that backs up the improvements they make.
The rest is pointless over priced garbage that drives up the cost of a vehicle and makes you burn more fuel while the engine does the same work.

tcmtech said:

The air fuel ratio stays relatively constant from idle to full throttle. A leaner A/F ratio with gasoline does not save fuel. It burns valves and causes engine damage plus your fuel consumption actually tends to increase because the excess air being pulled through engine gets pointlessly heated and dumped out the exhaust while not having actually done any useful work! Oddly richening the A/F ratio to a slightly richer than ideal stoichiometric number cuts down on fuel usage when burning gasoline. Less fuel is actually used because less air mass is being used. The total mass of air and fuel used for the same power output is much lower than that used for a stoichiometric or even slightly lean burn condition.
Lean burning some types of fuels does work but gasoline is not one of them.

Click to expand...

Lean burn does work with gasoline, but it's a fidily thing to deal with. Honda's Lean Burn works well. Trying to balance it with emissions is difficult, though as it doesn't work well with catalytic converters. It's certainly not good enough to become mainstream, but it does work. I got my first OEM UEGO sensors from Honda's Lean Burn engines.

The O2 sensor signal does not put out a constant voltage in proportion to how the engines running either. It continually swings from rich to lean several times a second. When it reads too rich the computer leans out the A/F ratio until the sensor the reads a too lean condition then richness it up until it then reads the too rich conditions again.
The computer just sort of tries to hit the average between them.

Click to expand...

This is done for a reason, not just cuz it can't work well properly. Swinging back and forth in closed loop is specifically done to help the catalytic converter. The rich and lean burn help the two catalysts out making the converter more efficient. It replaces the old air injectors like on the old RX7.

Most of what makes up an emissions system is crap and a joke and anyone with a good mechanical and chemistry background can easily prove it. Its more of a mathematical misdirection and slight of hand game than anything just aimed at getting people to believe the wrong information.
Basically its just one more way to get people to buy more fuel while falsely feeling good about it.

The two honest and provable real emissions improvements were the catalytic converter and the reformulation of gasoline to clean up the NOx by products that created smog decades ago. They do have honest provable chemistry that backs up the improvements they make.
The rest is pointless over priced garbage that drives up the cost of a vehicle and makes you burn more fuel while the engine does the same work.

Click to expand...

Maybe you can point out what those unproven things are, because other than the cat the only main emmissions system I can think of on a gas engine is EGR, and that's definitely proven to work. Other than that, just design issue like sequential injection is proven to work.