Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help



Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Tech Help

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 04-10-2005, 09:09 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK - South East Coast
Posts: 864
I got chance to make a few measurements this weekend and my observations were as follows:

1. My Cat just needed a real good heat up. 20 minutes in second gear up and down our local 60MPH motorway resolved that and produced these results:

At idle:

CO 0.062% (0.3% limit)
CO2 15.13%
HC 14ppm
O2 0.06%
Lambda 1.000
NO 8ppm

2500-300RPM (as required by UK Law)

CO 0.141% (0.3% limit)
CO2 15.10%
HC 23ppm
O2 0.03%
Lambda 0.996
NO 11ppm

For comparison, what's the 'normal' level of CO would one expect from a 12 year old LH V8 engine with Cat?

2. The 9 pin X11 diag connector (pin 3 and 6 for my car) outputs a nice signal (which as Duke2.6 previously mentioned) representing the amount of adjustment the engine is having to make to ensure that the Lambda sensor reads the 14.7:1 ie a Lambda of 1.

So this signal is ideal to determine if the car has any minor air leaks. Mine was perfect, at a fluctuating duty of 48-52%.

To prove that unmetered air would be compensated for I pulled one of the vac hoses of the intake manifold - and watched the duty change down to 10%, or of course up to 90% depending how you've connected your DVM/Scope and also if your reading negative or positive going duty cycles.

For me it was irrelevant, as to see the change right in front of my eyes was great.

BUT - from pulling a hose (only a 2mm diameter hose) it took nearly 10 seconds to complete adjustment and settle, or at least display the adjustment. So why so slow? Closed loop systems are usually capable of reacting much quicker.

Is this dependent on O2 sensor reaction time? Thinking about it I was at idle, but still 10 seconds!?

Any thoughts welcomed.

Lea

__________________
'93 R129 500SL-32
'89 190E 2.6 - sold in 2002

http://antron.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/i...nature/Sig.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 04-10-2005, 01:02 PM
JimF's Avatar
'94 S500: only 793 sold!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,933
I guess the your . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeaUK
To prove that unmetered air would be compensated for I pulled one of the vac hoses of the intake manifold - and watched the duty change down to 10%, or of course up to 90% depending how you've connected your DVM/Scope and also if your reading negative or positive going duty cycles.

BUT - from pulling a hose (only a 2mm diameter hose) it took nearly 10 seconds to complete adjustment and settle, or at least display the adjustment. So why so slow? Closed loop systems are usually capable of reacting much quicker.

Is this dependent on O2 sensor reaction time? Thinking about it I was at idle, but still 10 seconds!?

Lea
'blue-baby' passed with flying colors!

Just came across this thread re comments about X11 pins. As far as I know, using my car as a reference, pin 2 is 'ground' (chassis) and pin 3 is the output signal. Pin 6 is the battery voltage, so reading of DC should be made with the stated convention.

There's a picture in MENU#4 on my page showing 'directions'; lean or rich and if you click on the "M0039" link, you see a pin out of X11 connector. In '95 the O2 signals were moved to the 38 pin connector (pin 14 O2, pin 2 ground, pin 3 battery).

Bosch rates their O2 sensors for about 60k miles, so if it's not been replaced you will be surprised at the better performance. I'd imagine that the response time could be used as an indicator of how well the O2 sensor is performing. 10 secs tells me it's may well need to be replaced.

I believe that it (O2 sensor) should 'switch' in a second or so from rich to lean given the right stimulus. In servo design, the 'electronics' behind the sensor is always made to be slower than the sensor otherwise the system would "HUNT" (oscillate). I would think that it should correct in 2-3 seconds at most.
__________________
Regards . . . . JimF
-------------------
'94 S500 Cpe

Visit my Mercedes Web Page

Last edited by JimF; 04-10-2005 at 01:48 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 04-10-2005, 01:40 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeaUK

To prove that unmetered air would be compensated for I pulled one of the vac hoses of the intake manifold - and watched the duty change down to 10%, or of course up to 90% depending how you've connected your DVM/Scope and also if your reading negative or positive going duty cycles.

For me it was irrelevant, as to see the change right in front of my eyes was great.

BUT - from pulling a hose (only a 2mm diameter hose) it took nearly 10 seconds to complete adjustment and settle, or at least display the adjustment. So why so slow? Closed loop systems are usually capable of reacting much quicker.

Is this dependent on O2 sensor reaction time? Thinking about it I was at idle, but still 10 seconds!?

Any thoughts welcomed.

Lea
I doubt if there's anything wrong with your system including the 02 sensor. Measured emissions are commendably low, but your standards seem unusually tight. For example, in California the CO limit for cars from the late eighties to early nineties is near 0.75 percent.

MB specified a replacement interval for O2 sensors because in their first decade of use degradation was not well characterized, and no one knew how long they would last, but they turned out to be more durable than originally thought. My recommendation is to not change them unless testing shows that they have definitely failed or their response time has become sluggish. The addition of on board diagnostics has eliminated the need for specified O2 sensor replacement since modern OBD systems monitor their performance.

I don't know how quickly the system should respond to a signficant lean condition, such a pulling a vacuum hose, since there is no MB published spec, but all feedback control systems are designed with "damping" that limits the rate of correction. The lambda system is actually designed to "hunt" back and forth centered on lambda = 1.0, but the nominal deviation its designed to correct is very small. Also, your "test" pushed the lambda system to near, if not beyond, the limit of its control authority, and the conditions are not something that the system would have to deal with in normal operation. Only an engineer with indepth knowledge of the lambda system design could answer questions about system response time to various deviations in lambda.

Given your test results, I would say leave it alone, but your experience is another illustration of the importance of "conditioning" i.e. making sure the catalyst is a hot as possible before the start of the test. The LH system may be inherently cleaner than the KE system. I've never seen a KE system that was this clean! Many KE systems in the US just scrape by the limits, especially HC.

Duke

Last edited by Duke2.6; 04-10-2005 at 01:53 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 04-10-2005, 01:50 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK - South East Coast
Posts: 864
Hi Jim

I did take a quick review of your page before testing and again some good info - ta.

Unfortunately I used the pins rather blindly as these were the two my documentation points too, I guessed one would be 0 or 12V but as I don't understand if I'm measuring negative or positive duty cycle, I decided it didn't really matter at first. I've read MB invert their DC reading and maybe this is why they connect between the Lambda signal and 12V as opposed to 0V? Of course, had I found that she was biased above or below 50% I would need to find out more .

I also note that in documentation (and on your site) the 'purge' valve should be disconnected before testing - do you know of it's function? and what effect on the test this has. I never removed mine, if my car has one of course!

With regards to the O2 sensor I've placed the order already but unfortunately my local dealer has no stock, so next week should see further testing and comparison

10 seconds seems slow but I certainly agree it's response has to be much slower than a sensors output with the characteristics of a typical O2 sensor. The control system has further interesting factors, such as, although the engine prefers to run at 14.7:1 infact cats actually need O2 to operate correctly so I guess that's one reason why we see high swings on the O2 sensor o/p - and of course this sensor also has a very high transfer ratio around the 14.7:1 mark too.

Can't wait to get a little more time to carry out further testing now...

Cheers
__________________
'93 R129 500SL-32
'89 190E 2.6 - sold in 2002

http://antron.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/i...nature/Sig.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 04-10-2005, 02:06 PM
JimF's Avatar
'94 S500: only 793 sold!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,933
As of today, Bosch . . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke2.6
MB specified a replacement interval for O2 sensors because in the first decade of their use, degradation was not well characterized and no one knew how long they would last, but they turned out to be more duration than originally thought. My recommendation is to not change them unless testing shows that they have definitely failed or their response time has become sluggish. The addition of on board diagnostics has eliminated the need for O2 sensor replacement since modern OBD systems monitor their performance.
rates their O2 sensors for 60k miles; MB doesn't make them. Sure, to be positive that you need to replace it, it should be tested. If I remember correctly, Art Dalton described a test that he has done to see if its response time is ok.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke2.6
I don't know how quickly the system should respond to a signficant lean condition, such a pulling a vacuum hose, since there is no MB published spec, but all feedback control systems are designed with "damping" that limits the rate of correction. The lambda system is actually designed to "hunt" back and forth centered on lambda = 1.0, but the nominal deviation its designed to correct is very small. Only an engineer with indepth knowledge of the lambda system design could answer questions about system response time to various deviations in lambda.
Duke
The term "hunt" is probably a bad term because "hunt" means that the system will never lock. I'd offer "correct" as a more appropriate term since when it's 'locked', it corrects. When it's OPEN, it 'hunts'. As an engineer with expertise in servo systems, that would be a better use of the more correct terms.

As I said, the overall system should correct a few seconds slower than the O2 sensor. If I recall correctly, a good O2 sensor will correct in within a second from the extremes; if it takes 10 secs as an example, I would say that it needs to be replaced. So would Bosch.

On my car, that test 'corrects' within a few seconds. I have a new O2 sensor with 5k miles on it.
__________________
Regards . . . . JimF
-------------------
'94 S500 Cpe

Visit my Mercedes Web Page
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 04-10-2005, 02:12 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK - South East Coast
Posts: 864
Hi Duke

Thanks also for your comments.

Maybe a change of 40% was a little harsh but hey I was simply looking to generate a reaction and yep - I got one. Shame we have no data on the response time as it may yield further clues.

I need to recheck the HC as 15ppm just seems rather low in my opinion but I have little practical experience and have to rely on those that do and often what the measuring instrument tells me. MB specs are 300ppm max so if these weren't erroneous readings then she's burning fuel fine

UK CO limits are <=2.5% for cars used before '93 (excluding classic and other strange classes) after it's 0.3% and I've heard that's it's soon (if it hasn't already) to be <=0.2%.

Lea
__________________
'93 R129 500SL-32
'89 190E 2.6 - sold in 2002

http://antron.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/i...nature/Sig.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 04-10-2005, 02:13 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeaUK
Hi Jim

I did take a quick review of your page before testing and again some good info - ta.

Unfortunately I used the pins rather blindly as these were the two my documentation points too, I guessed one would be 0 or 12V but as I don't understand if I'm measuring negative or positive duty cycle, I decided it didn't really matter at first. I've read MB invert their DC reading and maybe this is why they connect between the Lambda signal and 12V as opposed to 0V? Of course, had I found that she was biased above or below 50% I would need to find out more .

I also note that in documentation (and on your site) the 'purge' valve should be disconnected before testing - do you know of it's function? and what effect on the test this has. I never removed mine, if my car has one of course!

With regards to the O2 sensor I've placed the order already but unfortunately my local dealer has no stock, so next week should see further testing and comparison

10 seconds seems slow but I certainly agree it's response has to be much slower than a sensors output with the characteristics of a typical O2 sensor. The control system has further interesting factors, such as, although the engine prefers to run at 14.7:1 infact cats actually need O2 to operate correctly so I guess that's one reason why we see high swings on the O2 sensor o/p - and of course this sensor also has a very high transfer ratio around the 14.7:1 mark too.

Can't wait to get a little more time to carry out further testing now...

Cheers
The purge valve controls air flow to purge the evap cannister of stored HC. It only opens above a certain coolant temperature (typically 50C) and is controlled by a "ported" vacuum signal line that does not open the valve until the throttle is opened. If the purge valve is not disabled the duty cycle above idle speed will be affected to one degree or another depending on the amount of stored HC in the cannister.

Even if the A/F ratio was kept exactly at stoichiometric, there would still be a fraction of a percent O2 in the exhaust since the entire mixture is never completely burned. This is due to local deviations in A/F within the mixture and quenching at the combustion chamber boundaries. Thus, the engine out emissions contain a small amount of HC, O2, CO and NOx. A three way catalyst actually works best if there are slight rich and lean periods as they store O2.

I note that your test results include O2 down to one hundreth of a percent (0.01 percent = 100 PPM). In the California test they only report O2 down to one-tenth percent (1000 PPM). Assuming they are rounding, a reading of 0.0 percent (which is what you want to see) means that there could still be up to 499 PPM O2 remaining, which could further support oxidation reaction if the catalyst was hotter or otherwise more efficient, but most engines will be under the test limits if O2 is less than 0.1 percent.

If the O2 content is reported at 0.1 percent, that means that there is still about 500 to 1499 PPM O2 remaining, which should support considerably more oxidation reaction. My rule of thumb is that the difference between 0.1 and 0.0 percent O2 is about 30 PPM HC.

Duke
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 04-11-2005, 01:28 AM
JimF's Avatar
'94 S500: only 793 sold!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,933
On my last CA smog . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeaUK
I need to recheck the HC as 15ppm just seems rather low in my opinion but I have little practical experience and have to rely on those that do and often what the measuring instrument tells me. MB specs are 300ppm max so if these weren't erroneous readings then she's burning fuel fine
Lea
test, my baby's HC was . . . are you sitting down . . 2ppm at idle and 4ppm at 2500. So 15ppm is not too low. Means the cat is doing it's thing! And you car's engine ain't too bad either. Enjoy it!
__________________
Regards . . . . JimF
-------------------
'94 S500 Cpe

Visit my Mercedes Web Page
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 04-11-2005, 03:36 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK - South East Coast
Posts: 864
See this is where you just cant beat practical experience. Thanks for the HC confirmation, so cars can have extremely low HC emissions. Mind you I thought my 15ppm was good...

Out of interest, what's your CO Jim?

Just checked our UK limits again and it seems that it's 200ppm not 300ppm, but hey, no problems here.

I'm still a little concerned with the relatively high CO readings even after a good cat conditioning - although I do have to admit to idling for around 5 to 8 minutes before the test was performed as I had to wait for a second machine calibration. Not ideal I know, but I had no choice. Next time I'll ensure the measuring instrument is ready to go as I arrive

Duke2.6/Jim - what's your feeling on my CO out?

Thanks
Lea
__________________
'93 R129 500SL-32
'89 190E 2.6 - sold in 2002

http://antron.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/i...nature/Sig.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 04-11-2005, 11:39 AM
JimF's Avatar
'94 S500: only 793 sold!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,933
Here's the results of . . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by LeaUK
See this is where you just cant beat practical experience. Thanks for the HC confirmation, so cars can have extremely low HC emissions. Mind you I thought my 15ppm was good...

Out of interest, what's your CO Jim?
Lea
my older smog test w/ limits for "CA" in 2002:
RPM----%CO2---%02----------HC(ppm)--------------CO(%)-----
MEAS---MEAS---MEAS---MAX---AVE---MEAS---MAX---AVE---MEAS
640----- 13------2.9-----100----17-----2------1.0----0.00---0.00
2400---- 13.1----2.8-----130----12-----4------1.0----0.10---0.00

I can't seem to find my latest one, for 2004. I do remember the HC and CO were higher than the readings above but not much; like 6ppm and 8ppm respectively. I'll look for it.

Yes, you '15ppm' was good the 'average' is 17ppm at idle. The CO limit is 1% (and it's been tightened) but not sure it was '0' but must be small?
__________________
Regards . . . . JimF
-------------------
'94 S500 Cpe

Visit my Mercedes Web Page

Last edited by JimF; 04-11-2005 at 05:35 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 04-11-2005, 01:33 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,272
Quote:
Originally Posted by LeaUK
Duke2.6/Jim - what's your feeling on my CO out?

Thanks
Lea
I think your CO is fairly low. As I said previously, the allowable CO in our California 15 and 25 MPH Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM) test is in the range of 0.75% depending on year and vehicle weight.

Jim - you had a two speed, no load test on your '94 S500 in San Diego in '02??? I thought they went to the ASM test in '99 like we did up here in LA.

Also, I'm having trouble digesting your results. An O2 sensor/TWC car should have close to zero O2, however, I've seen such anamolous results before and I suspect a machine calibration problem.

Your results are more typical for an older pre-02 car with full time air injection and a two-way catalyst.

Duke
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 04-11-2005, 01:55 PM
JimF's Avatar
'94 S500: only 793 sold!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,933
Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke2.6
I think your CO is fairly low. As I said previously, the allowable CO in our California 15 and 25 MPH Acceleration Simulation Mode (ASM) test is in the range of 0.75% depending on year and vehicle weight.

Jim - you had a two speed, no load test on your '94 S500 in San Diego in '02??? I thought they went to the ASM test in '99 like we did up here in LA.

Duke
Yes, CA lowered the MAX from 1.0% to 0.75%. Wish I could find last year's report.

Yes, had a two-speed, no-load (t/s-n/l) test since I bought the car because the '94 S500 has full time, non-defeatable ASR.

Funny story: At my 'first' smog, I loaded it on the "treadmill" (know the guy who does the smog) and at about 20mph, the ASR went on and it slipped, no power, . . etc. Thought I 'broke' the car! Since he hadn't ever tested a full-time ASR, he was at a loss. We ended up 'reading' the CA specs for smog testing for my car which clearly called out a t/s-n/l test. At that time, I wasn't aware that it couldn't be defeated. I believe the '95 have a defeat switch.
__________________
Regards . . . . JimF
-------------------
'94 S500 Cpe

Visit my Mercedes Web Page
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 04-11-2005, 03:37 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Southern California
Posts: 2,272
Ah, yes, ASR! AWD also cannot be ASM tested.

Does the current ASM software have an override to allow a two-speed, no load test at a commercial test station, or do you have to go to the Referee?

Keep looking for your '04 test and any prior to '02 because there something flaky about the results you posted (O2 content).

Duke
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 04-11-2005, 05:34 PM
JimF's Avatar
'94 S500: only 793 sold!
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 1,933
Still can't seem to find . .

Quote:
Originally Posted by Duke2.6
Does the current ASM software have an override to allow a two-speed, no load test at a commercial test station, or do you have to go to the Referee?

Keep looking for your '04 test and any prior to '02 because there something flaky about the results you posted (O2 content).
Duke
last years results and for me, that's driving me nuts! I USUALLY save everything.

No, there's no need to go to a referee; that car is tested w/o going on to the treadmill; it can be bypassed and the car is tested on the 'ground' as it was in the 'old' days.

Checked my wife's smog report (same place) for '01 and '03 and the O2 levels are 0.041 and 0.025 for both. Have a feeling that mine s/b 0.029 and 0.028???
__________________
Regards . . . . JimF
-------------------
'94 S500 Cpe

Visit my Mercedes Web Page

Last edited by JimF; 04-11-2005 at 06:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 04-11-2005, 06:17 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: UK - South East Coast
Posts: 864
Wow, UK (European) law is highly confusing and has taking hours of 'Googling' to which I think I have the UK view on emissions:


Quote:
In-use emissions requirements are enforced at annual MoT test and roadside checks. In accordance with European Directive 96/96/EC, emissions requirements are based on information provided by manufacturers, where available, and are model specific.
Ah, so I found the list of Manufacturers limits (after a while) and for the R129 067 engine (ie mine):

Fast Idle (2200 - 2800RPM)
Max CO 0.3% Max HC 200ppm
Min Lambda 0.97 - Max Lambda 1.03

For my age of car, vehicles not individually referenced by the list, default limits (same as above) shall be applied. It's these default limits that have been reduced. For those cars first used after 1st July 2002 shall be tested to <=0.2% CO - HC remains the same.

This is due to modern car manufacturers producing more efficient emission reduction systems.

Also, I have just found a really old MOT certificate which a previous owner must have saved.

Year Nov 2001:
CO: 0.13% MAX <=3.5% Vol (whoops wrong value Mr tester)
HC: 58ppm <= 1200ppm (again, wrong max limit applied)


So my cat is working better now - guess that preconditioning in 2nd gear made all the difference! I think I can now rest a little more sure that no replacement cat is required and the system is working just fine

Now on to solving my occasional 'hunting'/'surging' issue when the engine is <8deg C and just come off of cold start (about 8minutes driving)......

Big thanks to all and especially Duke2.6 and Jim for their comments.

__________________
'93 R129 500SL-32
'89 190E 2.6 - sold in 2002

http://antron.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/i...nature/Sig.jpg

Last edited by LeaUK; 04-11-2005 at 07:47 PM.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:01 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page