[net.physics] EPA ratings: why so miserable?

KING@KESTREL (04/19/83)

From:  Richard M. King <KING at KESTREL>

	I've made some intersting observations about the EPA highway
ratings.  They are notoriously inaccurate.  However, I found out a few
things.

	1> they are much better for Diesel cars.

	2> the people who do the testing DO take air resistance into
account.  Although the tests are run on a dynomometer, the setting on the
dynomometer is made to simulate actual measured air resistance.

	3> rolling resistance is, of course, taken into account.  The car
does actually roll on the dynomometer.  The surface is actually roughened to
simulate road conditions.

	So why are the test results inaccurate?  And why are they worse for
gasoline engines than Diesels.  I have a hypothesis...

	It seems to me that the main difference between test and reality is
that the air is not rushing at the front of the car at 55 MPH during the
test.  This does NOT cause extra air resistance; the wind tunnel test that
produces the drag setting for the dyno would measure the air resistance that
the front of the car encounters.  (It is not reasonable to assume that wind
tunnel tests are done with some sort of dummy engine.  If that were the case
the tests would be as inaccurate for Diesels as for gasoline cars.)
	I hypothesize that the air turbulence under the hood reduces the
efficiency of gasoline cars, but not of diesels.  (Why one but not the
other?  Variations in air pressure going into cylinders shouldn't affect
diesels as long as there is enough air to burn the fuel, which would always
be true except near full "throttle".  Gasoline engines, however, are very
sensitive to mixture and therefore to air pressure.  Servos that modern
engines contain to regulate fuel feed would be much too slow to follow the
variations I am hypothesizing.  I expect 10 Hertz variations.)

	Engine designs tend to be tested in a non-windy room.  

	Does anyone out there know anything about this possibility?


						Dick
-------