Could it be something as simple as :

IF road speed < X mph
   DO lowest-emissions engine burn
ELSE
   DO best-for-consumer engine burn

?
It could even be argued that such an algorithm would be beneficial in an urban environment by minimising emissions when the vehicle is crawling in heavy traffic.

It was more complicated than that according to reports. It was something like, if car idles 14 - 16 seconds before a fairly aggressive acceleration to X mph while steering wheel does not move... Then assume an EPA test stand is in use. Otherwise, emit as needed satisfy the driver's demands.

per @nsaspook 's quest, I think it is not hidden so well and Bosch reportedly found development/(test only) code in a production vehicle. Bosch announced that they warned VW that the VW-requested code was only intended for testing purposes and not intended for production vehicles. So, I think Bosch developed the code for a VW R&D request but the code was reappropriated for other purposes as VW reprogrammed the devices for production use (at least that is Bosch's story for now). Also, it turns out that "Clean Diesel" is a Bosch trademark, not a VW trademark. interesting....

 

There is no "Fooling" involved. The current process with most government regulations works just like the IRS and your taxes.

A portion of those vehicles were in states or counties that require emission testing. The results are out there. Who designed those tests to ensure the vehicle emissions were "tested"? The government's scientists ... contracted or salaried. So, the government was fooled.

The multiple algorithms flag your taxes. Some cheating will always be undetected. You win 100 bucks in the billiards tournament. Did you report it on your taxes? Some do, some don't. What about that bottle of liquor you "won" at the raffle. Did you report it's value on your taxes? Probably not. And here is one ... you and your neighbor "help" each other out by providing expertise and labor to the other. You were suppose to agree upon the value of the exchange so each could report that value on your taxes. Did you bribe your senator? Did the senator report it on their taxes? All income is reportable.

 

A portion of those vehicles were in states or counties that require emission testing. The results are out there. Who designed those tests to ensure the vehicle emissions were "tested"? The government's scientists ... contracted or salaried. So, the government was fooled.

The multiple algorithms flag your taxes. Some cheating will always be undetected. You win 100 bucks in the billiards tournament. Did you report it on your taxes? Some do, some don't. What about that bottle of liquor you "won" at the raffle. Did you report it's value on your taxes? Probably not. And here is one ... you and your neighbor "help" each other out by providing expertise and labor to the other. You were suppose to agree upon the value of the exchange so each could report that value on your taxes. Did you bribe your senator? Did the senator report it on their taxes? All income is reportable.

Semantics. There is simply not enough money to test every vehicle. The EPA relies on the risk of lying/cheating/fooling to be so high that they assume big companies are running sustainable business models and are reasonably ethical that they will not take the risk of cheating (fooling) the system. Looks like they were wrong for a while - not fooled. Just like the algorithms for the IRS. The filters in the algorithms are set to keep all IRS auditors busy, not to find every cheater.

 

Did you see the algorithm? Like I said, unless it goes to court, we may never find out.

I would agree in the urban area's you would want less emissions. If your writing "standards", one standard does not fit all when it comes some things.

CARB has the strictest standards and they test. Their protocol didn't pick up on the "cheat".

No proof has been proffered other than the statement about it "could" emit 7 to 40 times the allowable .

 

There is simply not enough money to test every vehicle.

ICCT funded the WVU tests. They have more money. Let them test a good representative sample of the 11 million vehicles out there.

Ok. Of the vehicles that have been tested by the states that require testing, how many failed? Who designed those tests? The manufacturer certainly didn't.

You have Samsung under the gun now for "in use" cheating.

When are you going to look at the testing protocol to see where the testing FAILED or is the government designed (even if a contractor did the work) test infallible?

Not to fear, the government solution will be to mandate every consumer purchase the GPS package with their vehicle so the on board computer can report back the emissions every minute the vehicle is energized. Every time you emit more than allowable, on a minute by minute basis, you will incur a fine of $10,000 per event. Hey, we need to be green.

 

ICCT funded the WVU tests. They have more money. Let them test a good representative sample of the 11 million vehicles out there.

Ok. Of the vehicles that have been tested by the states that require testing, how many failed? Who designed those tests? The manufacturer certainly didn't.

You have Samsung under the gun now for "in use" cheating.

When are you going to look at the testing protocol to see where the testing FAILED.

Not to fear, the government solution will be to mandate every consumer purchase the GPS package with their vehicle so the on board computer can report back the emissions every minute the vehicle is energized. Every time you emit more than allowable, on a minute by minute basis, you will incur a fine of $10,000 per event. Hey, we need to be green.

You are all over the map in your arguments. What do you want the end result to be here? I can't figure out of you want every vehicle to be tested in use, no vehicle tested, no standards, tighter standards, saying VW and Samsung should be demonized or glorified.

 

The end result should be the truth ...

Where do you want it to end?

What can you prove other than a few of the 11 million vehicles out there emitted more than allowed when tested by a ICCT funded adventure.

The states that require testing have tested more than the VWU.

 

Could it be something as simple as :

There's that word again .. "could"

It could be a lot of things.

 

The end result should be the truth ...

Ha! to what level of quality and from which point of view? Truth is a nebulous figment of your imagination. You can drive yourself crazy looking for that result - especially if you want everyone to agree on one version of truth.

 

per @nsaspook 's quest, I think it is not hidden so well and Bosch reportedly found development/(test only) code in a production vehicle. Bosch announced that they warned VW that the VW-requested code was only intended for testing purposes and not intended for production vehicles. So, I think Bosch developed the code for a VW R&D request but the code was reappropriated for other purposes as VW reprogrammed the devices for production use (at least that is Bosch's story for now). Also, it turns out that "Clean Diesel" is a Bosch trademark, not a VW trademark. interesting....

"at least that is Bosch's story for now"

That's something that IMO will be hard to find out unless this ends up in a count with the power to break confidentially agreements under oath. Bosch looks like the hardware integrator for the ECM using the infineon TCL1796. If VW specified something like a special code protection module, drivers and demonstration code to hide test firmware from prying eyes that would be nothing special as most advanced controllers have this capability in the hardware as options but if Bosch provided technical advice with the specific details and information of designing a defeat device with possible cloaking or cryptographic masking of the functions for the willing purpose of committing a fraud they would be in deep, deep trouble.

If they find similar cheat codes in other Bosch products not for VW that would be damning.

 

In the end somebody at the top will rat out and it might be because of something totally unrelated to the cheat that's makes them talk.

To quote a politician:

Before election day, Edwards joked with reporters: "The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy".
...
In 2001, he was found guilty of racketeering charges and sentenced to ten years in Federal prison.

 

http://www.usnews.com/news/business...r-missed-its-best-chance-to-catch-vw-cheating

CHICAGO (AP) — More than a decade ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency helped develop a technology that ultimately was used by an independent laboratory to catch Volkswagen's elaborate cheating on car emissions tests. But EPA used the technology primarily to test trucks rather than passenger cars because such heavy equipment was a much bigger polluter.

That decision meant that the U.S. regulator missed its best chance to foil the German carmaker's deception early on. The portable emissions measurement systems that EPA pioneered might have subjected VW diesel cars to on-road tests and discovered they were spewing up to 40 times the allowable levels of key pollutant nitrogen oxide under normal driving conditions.

Without that test, VW was virtually home free and evaded detection for seven years.

 

More than a decade ago, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency helped develop a technology that ultimately was used by an independent laboratory to catch Volkswagen's elaborate cheating on car emissions tests. But EPA used the technology primarily to test trucks rather than passenger cars because such heavy equipment was a much bigger polluter.

Sounds like the EPA went into damage control. Someone must have asked the question.

If EPA had used the technology back then (on diesel cars), we could have caught it," said Margo Oge, who was director of the EPA's office of Transportation and Air Quality at the time and headed the office for 18 years until 2012. But she doesn't regret EPA's decision to focus that technology on manufacturers of trucks and heavy equipment, which had a record of cheating on tests and accounted for a much bigger portion of U.S. pollution than the nascent diesel car business.

Margo Oge is at ICCT, the sponsor of the WVU "independent" testing and reputed to be opposed to the combustion engine.

The EPA requires carmakers to follow a test script that has not changed in more than a decade. The script must be the same, experts said, in order to compare vehicles or validate data. They put the vehicles on a dynamometer — a treadmill for cars — that accelerates and slows down at a programmed interval known as a "drive cycle." A device measures pollutants from the tailpipe.

Sounds like the government created the protocols used by the states ... and the article is damage control.

Aware of the script, VW installed 2009-2015 diesel models with software that sensed when the vehicles were on the treadmill and switched the emissions system to trap the right amount of nitrogen oxide. That sophisticated software algorithm sensed things such as the position of the steering wheel, speed, the duration of the engine's operation and barometric pressure.

This sounds like all vehicles have a "defeat device" to bypass ancillary systems when on the "treadmill", or the testing device actually "tells" the onboard computer that the "test" is underway and the program shifts to a different subroutine that defeats the ancillary systems.

In addition to certification, the EPA runs spot checks on cars representing 15-20 percent of models in a year to verify the data from manufacturers.

It wasn't caught in the spot checks? Bad news for the EPA. Set circle zebra.

EPA's National Fuel and Vehicle Emissions Laboratory in Ann Arbor, Michigan, ran spot checks on VW's 2009 models that validated the company's data by running an identical series of laboratory tests.

The government failed to catch them. The government didn't do "in use" testing. The government is as culpable as VW, as they were completely satisfied with the VW product at the time of testing.

Standby for the next generation of pollution testing, with the testing device informing the onboard computer system that a test is being conducted.

 

It is interesting reading the rave reviews of the 2009 diesel - and the consumer comments about how the EPA is unfairly penalizing VW diesel with low city/highway milage ratings, and the various conspiracy theories they have to explain why the EPA gives the clean diesel lower numbers than the consumer actually sees on the road. Interesting to read after the recent 'additional information' is available.

Here is one review to get you started. Set the date range on your google search to find more.
http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1019256_volkswagen-jetta-tdi-much-more-mileage-than-epa-admits

 

The government failed to catch them. The government didn't do "in use" testing. The government is as culpable as VW, as they were completely satisfied with the VW product at the time of testing.

and VW could not resist the Irresistible impulse to cheat because of an insane need to make more money. Too bad it won't work.

In 1994, Lorena Bobbitt was found not guilty when her defense argued that an irresistible impulse led her to cut off her husband's penis.
...
The Penal Code of the U.S. state of California states (2002), "The defense of diminished capacity is hereby abolished ... there shall be no defense of ... diminished responsibility or irresistible impulse..."

 

The government failed to catch them. The government didn't do "in use" testing. The government is as culpable as VW, as they were completely satisfied with the VW product at the time of testing.

As an analogy,

Lets say the IRS accepted your income tax return in 2009, ran its audit algorithm and no red flags so it all is good. Same process repeats for 2010 - 2015. Sometime in 2015, someone tips off the IRS that you have unreported income and the IRS hauls you in for an audit. By your logic, the IRS is partially to blame because they accepted your tax return.

Good luck with that.

 

Nice analogy. You will need to check the RULES that the IRS follows before creating another false analogy.

So, what people are complaining about is there MUST be cheating, when in 2009 people reported higher mileage than the EPA estimated, and we know government estimates are accurate, yet the EPA saw fit in 2010 not to explore this disconnect further, but then, 5 years later, an ICCT commissions a different test, let's call it "real world driving", and that bought and paid for test demonstrated the emissions are higher then allowed. The EPA tested up to 20 percent of the VW based on the current protocols.

Now there will be a push for more funding to test more vehicles under the "real driving" scenario.

I say test all the vehicle models, gas and diesel under the same tests. Lets get the straight shit on everything. Then maybe we will find out the truth.

I'll let the government rent my vehicle to do the tests....and of course, I want to be compensated for driving it, so they can measure my real car, using a real driver, driving to and from real locations, to get a baseline for the two models I have.

Margo Oge was at the EPA in 2009 when the disconnect between what the EPA estimated and what the consumers reported. She retired in 2012 after 30 plus years of service.

I say hold VW accoutable, Margo Oge accountable, and the EPA accountable as all three had the info to take action in 2010.

 

I say test all the vehicle models, gas and diesel under the same tests. Lets get the straight shit on everything. Then maybe we will find out the truth.

And what happens if they find out that the very large majority of vehicles do not pass and never did a good eal of the time in real life driving conditions?

 

That is the interesting question.

The politicos will have a choice ... Reign in the EPA or lose their job.

Reactionary solutions ...