c5 particle filter

This is the Forum for all your Citroen Technical Questions, Problems or Advice.

Moderator: RichardW

cachaciero
Posts: 1407
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 9

Post by cachaciero »

rmunns wrote:Am I simple or is this all a load of tosh regarding emissions?

As I see it, if this container becomes absolutely full of soot particulates then it only represents a litre or two in volume (or whatever the volume of the tank is).

Eco-wise we've gone too far and I think, with my cynics hat on, that much of the complexities on modern cars are there for profit through servicing.

I worked in the Energy field (mostly conservation) from 1966 to 2003 (now retired).
In general no it's not a load of tosh, there are real issues of throwing crap into the environment from whatever source, basically if you throw any kind of rubbish in to the world somebody somewhere has to spend time and money cleaning it up, increasingly because the environment itself doesn't have the capacity to do so.
The arguments are always about who and how much. At the end of the day making the polluter pay seems quite a reasonable way of doing it, however whether we are being asked to pay too much for others to clean up our mess is a justifiable question.

With respect to the issue under discussion here i.e Diesel Particulate emmisions i.e soot this what the FAP systems handles.

Now as an individual I suffer from the results of diesel soot fallout in the rain, being acidic it has over the years played havoc with the fibreglass on my boat and cost me considerable time and money to control and the greater motoring public have who caused the problem have not paid one iota in compensation.
Additionally there is little doubt in my mind that now an increasing amount of heavy traffic no longer emits clouds of noxious gas and soot our towns are becoming pleasanter places to live and visit I am willing to pay something so that this may continue.

The FAP system doesn't actually collect soot as such, it creates the conditions such that the soot burns by adding cerin to it, the carbon soot burns, the cerin doesn't, the cerin gets trapped in the filter together with residual non carbon ash by products of oil additives etc.

The cost of doing this works out by my conservative reckoning being £1000.00 per 60000 miles say 0.2P a mile to take into account the slight reduction in engine efficiency as well.

Is there an alternative way that we can get to more acceptable aerial pollution levels without forcing the whole of the motoring population to fit such devices?

Well yes there is, reduce the human population to a more sustainable level, if the U.K had 1950's level of traffic then anti pollution devices probably would'nt be needed, levels of pollution would be significantly lower and nature could probably cope with any clean up required.
We might also have somewhat lower fuel prices as well!

I will sign off leaving that last paragraph as food for thought.

cachaciero
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
User avatar
myglaren
Forum Admin Team
Posts: 25366
Joined: 02 Mar 2008, 13:30
Location: Washington
My Cars: Mazda 6
Ooops.
Previously:
2009 Honda Civic :(
C5, C5, Xantia, BX, GS, Visa.
R4, R11TXE, R14, R30TX
x 4888

Post by myglaren »

Very clearly and succinctly put cachaciero.
I wish that I could express myself as eloquently.

Incontrovertible logic. And as you frame it, the price is actually negligible in comparison to other running costs. It is just when it hits, it is a fairly substantial hit, as with major servicing, tax and insurance.
Simon99
Posts: 22
Joined: 02 Sep 2009, 14:06
Location: Stratford Upon Avon
My Cars:

Post by Simon99 »

Had a problem with my 2.2hdi giving error messages regarding Particle Filter blocked. Removed it fairly easily apart from one bolt that needed drilling out and gave it a good flush through with pressure washer which seemed to remove 90% of deposits. Has been good ever since. :D
2002 C5 2.0 16v Estate
2001 C5 2.2hdi Hatchback
1998 Xantia 1.9td Estate
cachaciero
Posts: 1407
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 9

Post by cachaciero »

Simon99 wrote:Had a problem with my 2.2hdi giving error messages regarding Particle Filter blocked. Removed it fairly easily apart from one bolt that needed drilling out and gave it a good flush through with pressure washer which seemed to remove 90% of deposits. Has been good ever since. :D
And what pray did you do with the dirty water that came out? boiled it out and then took the residue to the local tip as toxic waste i suppose.



Ah....! thought not :-( another few gallons of heavily contaminated water wending it's way to various streams and ponds via the surface drainage system.

cachaciero
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
cachaciero
Posts: 1407
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 9

Post by cachaciero »

myglaren wrote:Very clearly and succinctly put cachaciero.
I wish that I could express myself as eloquently.

Incontrovertible logic. And as you frame it, the price is actually negligible in comparison to other running costs. It is just when it hits, it is a fairly substantial hit, as with major servicing, tax and insurance.
So true! So true!.

I had as most have considered getting rid of the FAP both for the cost saving and the increase in performance which I estimate is probably worth between 3 and 6 Bhp extra. I even considered the fact that from a carbon point of view you could make an argument which says that CO2 is better trapped in soot rather than burnt off and converted to the gaseous form and released to the atmosphere and the fact that fuel consumption is increased because of the inefficiency of the exhaust system and that every so often fuel is burned to cause filter re-generation so further increasing the amount of CO2 released to the atmosphere.
However I remain to be convinced that increased atmospheric CO2 is as bad as is made out in some quarters while the provenance of just how much of a hazard diesel soot is is well known and as a real bonus the back of the car doesn't get so black and dirty anymore :-).

cachaciero
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
User avatar
myglaren
Forum Admin Team
Posts: 25366
Joined: 02 Mar 2008, 13:30
Location: Washington
My Cars: Mazda 6
Ooops.
Previously:
2009 Honda Civic :(
C5, C5, Xantia, BX, GS, Visa.
R4, R11TXE, R14, R30TX
x 4888

Post by myglaren »

I don't have the FAP/Eolys system on my car and I am surprised at how little the exhaust smells in comparison to other diesels. There are never any sooty deposits on the rear of the car either, and I don't clean the car very often, today being the exception as it is going for a bit of the old remedial in the morning (ball joint & rear washer - which I could have done myself today, first bit of decent weather for yonks).
I like to think that they are a bit more attentive when the car looks as though it is cared for 8-)
It isn't going to my usual place but to a workshop near my work, purely for convenience. I have it MOTd by them and they are always pretty good but not Citroen dedicated by any means.

Interestingly, there is a bit of info on Cerium and Eolys that I wasn't aware of previously.
cachaciero
Posts: 1407
Joined: 13 Apr 2009, 07:24
Location: West Sussex U.K
My Cars:
x 9

Post by cachaciero »

myglaren wrote:-----snip-----
I don't clean the car very often, today being the exception as it is going for a bit of the old remedial in the morning (ball joint & rear washer - which I could have done myself today, first bit of decent weather for yonks).
-----snip----
Interestingly, there is a bit of info on Cerium and Eolys that I wasn't aware of previously.
Interesting, nearside ball joint? is it very noisy?

I went and had a look at the cerium reference after a minute or two wished I hadn't, the headaches started again, think I understood about 1% of that wikkipedia page, my chemistry education stopped shortly after I learn't how to make gunpowder :-)
cachaciero
2006 Toyota Prius T Spirit
2001 2.2 C5 Exclusive SE
1996 XM 2.1 TD Auto VSX
1995 XM 2.1 TD Auto SX died @ 140K
1987 CX 2.5 Gti Turbo II dead
1984 Ford Scorpio
1981 CX 2.4 Pallas Auto
Renault 21
1220 GS Club
Rover P6 2000TC
User avatar
myglaren
Forum Admin Team
Posts: 25366
Joined: 02 Mar 2008, 13:30
Location: Washington
My Cars: Mazda 6
Ooops.
Previously:
2009 Honda Civic :(
C5, C5, Xantia, BX, GS, Visa.
R4, R11TXE, R14, R30TX
x 4888

Post by myglaren »

cachaciero wrote:
myglaren wrote:-----snip-----
I don't clean the car very often, today being the exception as it is going for a bit of the old remedial in the morning (ball joint & rear washer - which I could have done myself today, first bit of decent weather for yonks).
-----snip----
Interestingly, there is a bit of info on Cerium and Eolys that I wasn't aware of previously.
Interesting, nearside ball joint? is it very noisy?

I went and had a look at the cerium reference after a minute or two wished I hadn't, the headaches started again, think I understood about 1% of that wikkipedia page, my chemistry education stopped shortly after I learn't how to make gunpowder :-)
cachaciero
No, not at all, just the tyre wearing quickly.

My chemistry is limited but we did make a few Mercury Fulminate 'bombs' and Nitrogen triiodide, not destructive but extremely audible.
Post Reply