[IamIan]

Originally Posted by ngrimm

Looking at this pdf
http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j...hh97-NKC-E4KMA
The diagram shows fuel being fed directly into the catalyst so the engine is able to remain in lean burn mode. Hence the reason for the catalyst in the first place.

Ahh ... now I see the difference ... Instead of a ICE purge cycle to get the unburned fuel hydrocarbons to the NOx catalyst , they are pumping unburned fuel directly from the gas tank into the cat.

Interesting.

So the catalyst functions the same concept / principles ... but they are applying / getting the unburned fuel hydrocarbons to it differently.

hmmm .... I wonder how difficult it would be to safely accomplish the same direct fuel pumping to my Gen-1 Insight NOx Cat.... then I to would never have to leave lean burn .... hmmmm... the safely thing will probably be a deal breaker....

Although I guess the other question is how much unburned fuel is being used? ... In this 'new' routing method they are getting 0% of the re-routed fuel energy in the ICE because it is all being bypassed to go directly to the cat ... where instead there is a % of the fuel energy content still being used in the purge cycle of Gen-1 Insight ... this suggests there is a break even point ... where the 0% of bypassed fuel energy used in the ICE is a bigger waste of fuel than the lower % ICE efficiency of the purge cycle ... I wonder where that break even point is.

Sadly neither that article or others I've yet found indicate the rate of bypassed unburned fuel going to the cat ... ideally to know the break even point we would want to know that rate compared to the ICE fuel consumption rate at the same time.