How The Volkswagen Dirty Diesel 'Flow Straightener' Really Works

Bozi Tatarevic
by Bozi Tatarevic

Volkswagen announced a fix for some of its diesel engines in Europe last week that included fitting a “flow straightener” device to their 1.6-liter engines. The device provides something tangible for Volkswagen to trot out, but has been criticized for being a low-tech distraction from the actual fix.

The “flow transformer” serves a purpose to provide a more accurate reading by the mass air flow sensor, but its initial exclusion may point to how far the cheating reached. To understand the implications of installing such a device, we need to take a look at the role of the mass air flow sensor on fuel and emissions mapping.

In a gasoline engine, the mass air flow sensor plays an integral role in calculating the fuel mixture for an engine and many of these sensors come with some sort of screen or grid in order to smooth out the air flow. The smoothed air flow allows for a more exact calculation of fuel, which can improve performance and fuel economy. It works so well that many even add them to large aftermarket intakes in order to achieve a better tune for theirs cars.

Diesel engines that deploy a mass air flow sensor do not use them for fueling calculations and instead they deploy the sensor as part of the EGR control strategy. The primary purpose of an EGR control strategy is to reduce nitrogen oxide emissions and the mass air flow sensor plays a role in calculating the EGR flow rate.

The telling part of excluding the “flow transformer” in the initial design is that multiple design teams would have been affected and would have to work around the limitation. The engineers that worked on the EGR system would have to calculate EGR flow based on their testing equipment and set it to a minimal level for production since real-time data would not be reliable enough to calculate it on the fly.

Without a reliable reading, the engineers may not have had enough data to create a functional EGR flow map and would need to let the car leave production with a dirty map. The preset EGR flow rate may work to clean up some of the emissions but it may not be optimal to meet all of the government standards hence the need for a “defeat device” map which could temporarily increase flow in order to pass the test.

While the “flow straightener” has been criticized by some as just a gimmick, it will actually serve a purpose, but the main driving force behind the fix is the programming. The device will assist programming the ECM with a proper EGR flow map that will reduce emissions and should meet the government standards in Europe.

Since the fix seems so simple now, many will ask why it was not installed and programmed on the cars when it was originally built and the answer lies in engine reliability. Increased EGR flow can cause increases in soot build up along with the need for increased maintenance on an engine. It can also cause premature failures on some engine components which could lead bean-counters to push for modifications in order to decrease the amount of warranty claims.

The 2-liter TDI engine is excluded from the “flow straightener” upgrade and for good reason. Taking a look at the sensor used on the engines, we can see an example of the 1.6-liter sensor made by Continental exposed the sensor element directly to the air stream, while the 2-liter sensor made by Bosch has a “flow straightener” screen built directly into the sensor thus negating the need to add one. All of the U.S. market diesels appear to use the Bosch sensor so the “flow straightener” is unlikely to make it to our shores as part of the upcoming recall fix.

Bozi Tatarevic
Bozi Tatarevic

More by Bozi Tatarevic

Comments
Join the conversation
19 of 22 comments
  • NickS NickS on Dec 02, 2015

    I don't argue the explanation about what a flow straightener does to a MAF and how that affects a diesel engine tune. That is all correct. But that piece of plastic is a minor red herring at best, in terms of what is needed to bring the affected TDIs into compliance. "Since the fix seems so simple now ..." There are two assumptions behind this simple statement that are unwarranted: 1- that the fix will reduce emissions below limits -- how about we wait for some real-world emissions results first, and also see how performance and longevity of parts are affected? 2- that the fix is largely a simple device like the flow straightener. The fix for the emissions starts and ends with changing the tune to increase duty cycle of EGR and a whole lot more. If in the process, they need to add a flow straightener to that 1.6 engine to get more reliable air mass readings, that is a significantly minor extra on all they have to do for a fix. Seriously, why are we focusing on that piece of plastic as somehow significant? You want more proof of why the flow straightener is largely insignificant? Why hasn't VW announced a fix for the 2.0 yet?

    • See 15 previous
    • Speedlaw Speedlaw on Dec 03, 2015

      @Scoutdude You are probably right. The excessive EGR needed would explain why BKW 335 series cars in the US have such clogged intake issues, and why VW didnt have the same problem....VW didn't EGR as much. In an alternate reality I bought a 335d and am now bankrupt. I would still have a smile from the first 60k, though...great car.

  • EAF EAF on Dec 02, 2015

    I know people who modify their MAF/MAS sensors and remove these screens. DSMs, GMs, Kompressors, BMWs, for example. Claims of increased throttle response and horsepower gains are always reported with ill affects noticed only at idle. Interesting. Makes sense, turbulent air is being forced to straighten its direction, there must be some loss? Anyway, how long before said screens destroy turbocharger compressor wheels? :-)

    • Scoutdude Scoutdude on Dec 03, 2015

      Yes this will reduce the maximum air flow potential. So assuming that the fueling had be set to consume all the O2 the engine can ingest then this will cut peak torque and HP.

  • Bkojote Allright, actual person who knows trucks here, the article gets it a bit wrong.First off, the Maverick is not at all comparable to a Tacoma just because they're both Hybrids. Or lemme be blunt, the butch-est non-hybrid Maverick Tremor is suitable for 2/10 difficulty trails, a Trailhunter is for about 5/10 or maybe 6/10, just about the upper end of any stock vehicle you're buying from the factory. Aside from a Sasquatch Bronco or Rubicon Jeep Wrangler you're looking at something you're towing back if you want more capability (or perhaps something you /wish/ you were towing back.)Now, where the real world difference should play out is on the trail, where a lot of low speed crawling usually saps efficiency, especially when loaded to the gills. Real world MPG from a 4Runner is about 12-13mpg, So if this loaded-with-overlander-catalog Trailhunter is still pulling in the 20's - or even 18-19, that's a massive improvement.
  • Lou_BC "That’s expensive for a midsize pickup" All of the "offroad" midsize trucks fall in that 65k USD range. The ZR2 is probably the cheapest ( without Bison option).
  • Lou_BC There are a few in my town. They come out on sunny days. I'd rather spend $29k on a square body Chevy
  • Lou_BC I had a 2010 Ford F150 and 2010 Toyota Sienna. The F150 went through 3 sets of brakes and Sienna 2 sets. Similar mileage and 10 year span.4 sets tires on F150. Truck needed a set of rear shocks and front axle seals. The solenoid in the T-case was replaced under warranty. I replaced a "blend door motor" on heater. Sienna needed a water pump and heater blower both on warranty. One TSB then recall on spare tire cable. Has a limp mode due to an engine sensor failure. At 11 years old I had to replace clutch pack in rear diff F150. My ZR2 diesel at 55,000 km. Needs new tires. Duratrac's worn and chewed up. Needed front end alignment (1st time ever on any truck I've owned).Rear brakes worn out. Left pads were to metal. Chevy rear brakes don't like offroad. Weird "inside out" dents in a few spots rear fenders. Typically GM can't really build an offroad truck issue. They won't warranty. Has fender-well liners. Tore off one rear shock protector. Was cheaper to order from GM warehouse through parts supplier than through Chevy dealer. Lots of squeaks and rattles. Infotainment has crashed a few times. Seat heater modual was on recall. One of those post sale retrofit.Local dealer is horrific. If my son can't service or repair it, I'll drive 120 km to the next town. 1st and last Chevy. Love the drivetrain and suspension. Fit and finish mediocre. Dealer sucks.
  • MaintenanceCosts You expect everything on Amazon and eBay to be fake, but it's a shame to see fake stuff on Summit Racing. Glad they pulled it.
Next