NHTSA Update on CR HPFP failure investigation

Never Say Never

abctdi said:

The idea that we now have to do a sniff test before fueling just shows how we are going backwards technologically. Things did not get better in the future.
Remember that man on the moon thing?
We will never be able to do that again.

Click to expand...

Remember, and do not forget, never say never, for never is forever!



D

dubStrom said:

Now wait a minute. Misfueling should NOT result in fuel pump failure. But even if it were impossible to build a pump that can handle other "solvents" the catastrophic full system contamination is absolutely Dumb. I am not saying that I think I will be one of the unlikely and unfortunate victims, but...

When fuel pump fails, car should stop running. Replace pump, prime if necessary (yes in this case), and drive away.

That's how fuel pump failure used to be. I guess you are not actually saying that now that we've made all of this technological advancement, a fuel pump should be MORE susceptible to failure, AND contaminating the entire system, but how difficult can it be? I mean why would the fuel system be designed to be susceptible to this type of recirculating contamination risk. It is an oversight that should result in a major change in technical design staff at Bosch and/or VW. Really inexcusable. The damage they are doing to fuel systems is bad... the damage they are doing to VW is very serious.

??

Click to expand...

This post makes it sound like you may not fully understand just how different this car is from not only a gasoline car, but from other diesel powered vehicles. This isn't your Daddy's Chevy - the fuel pump isn't a $90 part you go grab at AutoDrone, replace, and get on your way.

The high pressure fuel pump is basically the core of what makes this fuel delivery system what it is. We aren't dealing with 3-4 bar (40-60 or so PSI) in the fuel accumulator like your modern FI gasoline engines. We are dealing with pressures in the 250-1800 bar (3,000 - 26,000 PSI) range. This requires an entirely different type of fuel injection component than what you see in conventional gasoline engines.

The two pumps prior to the high pressure pump are more like the conventional pumps you find in gasoline engines - They fail, you replace and drive on.

The high pressure pump is different - it operates almost like a little engine itself -a submerged camshaft drives a plunger that pressurizes fuel drawn in from the sump. If something goes awry in the sump, then you've got bad news all around. There's not much like it in the gasoline world. Most fuel pumps are electric, whereas this one is driven by the force of the engine itself - there's a lot of force there to create the pressures required for these injection pressures. That same force is also there to keep the camshaft spinning even when something siezes, this is when things start to go bad. Lubrication is critical - so saying that the pump shouldn't fail when something like gasoline is introduced into the system is a tough call - gasoline isn't very lubricious.

The simple answer to the problem is this: Don't introduce gasoline into the fuel system - or in other words, don't misfuel. Could the fuel pump have been designed to handle gasoline a little better? Maybe - I'm no mechanical engineer; however since the pump seems to be very sensitive to vayring qualities of diesel fuel, something like gasoline is an absolute non-starter.

Basically, what I'm trying to get at is comparing a failure of the high pressure pump in this car to a fuel pump failure in any other gasoline / non CR diesel engine isn't fair. It's apples to oranges.

Is there a list of HPFP fuel pump failures in other diesels due to mis-fueling? I can tell you it's not happening in Duramax's.

Just how long will a diesel engine run on gasoline?
I thought pumping exposure would be self limiting since run time would be short.

El Dobro said:

Is there a list of HPFP fuel pump failures in other diesels due to mis-fueling? I can tell you it's not happening in Duramax's.

Click to expand...

There's also CR TDI's that have been misfueled, drained, filled with diesel and have motored on as well.

dzcad90 said:

There's also CR TDI's that have been misfueled, drained, filled with diesel and have motored on as well.

Click to expand...

Yes, but that doesn't answer the question.

dzcad90 said:

The simple answer to the problem is this: Don't introduce gasoline into the fuel system - or in other words, don't misfuel. Could the fuel pump have been designed to handle gasoline a little better? Maybe - I'm no mechanical engineer; however since the pump seems to be very sensitive to vayring qualities of diesel fuel, something like gasoline is an absolute non-starter.

Click to expand...

However, as said earlier in the thread, it isn't even the owner's fault, necessarily, for misfueling. The truck can dump gasoline into the diesel tank. How are you supposed to know that? And, if the station doesn't fess up to it, how are you supposed to prove that?

My opinion is that the design should have been made in such a way that it's tolerant to poorer fuel quality and occasional misfueling.

bhtooefr said:

However, as said earlier in the thread, it isn't even the owner's fault, necessarily, for misfueling. The truck can dump gasoline into the diesel tank. How are you supposed to know that? And, if the station doesn't fess up to it, how are you supposed to prove that?
My opinion is that the design should have been made in such a way that it's tolerant to poorer fuel quality and occasional misfueling.

Click to expand...

Just yesterday...http://abclocal.go.com/ktrk/story?section=news/consumer&id=7967570

bhtooefr said:

...


My opinion is that the design should have been made in such a way that it's tolerant to poorer fuel quality and occasional misfueling.

Click to expand...

Yup...what he said.

I really do not care if the high pressure fuel system is not the same as an old diaphragm style gasoline pump. It should not fail catastrophically when it fails.

That is the real issue. I can understand a fuel pump failure, but not fuel system destruction due to fuel pump failure. As I said, It is just dumb. I mean, suppose you fuel up where some minor contamination occurs (gasoline in the diesel). Six months later, your system gets trashed. Who the heck do you blame? Answer...Volkswagen. The system needs redesign, possibly an effective sensor to detect metal flakes dowsnstream of the pump(?), or a really bulletproof HPFP (the real solution).

That's the other thing.

I understand the realities that you can't filter 26,000 PSI fuel.

But, you sure as hell can filter the return.

Then, your "entire fuel system replacement" becomes just a replacement of the HPFP, the rail, and the injectors.

bhtooefr said:

That's the other thing.
I understand the realities that you can't filter 26,000 PSI fuel.
But, you sure as hell can filter the return.
Then, your "entire fuel system replacement" becomes just a replacement of the HPFP, the rail, and the injectors.

Click to expand...

And that would bring it down to a mere $2500?

In that ballpark... All prices below are list according to Impex (so, you can get them quite a lot cheaper than this):

The following parts would be replaced in that situation, on a 2010 CJAA (my ETKA is inaccurate for 2011 stuff):

03L130755A (HPFP) - $1265.00
03L130321 (pressure line to rail) - $88.00
03L130089 (rail) - $412.50
03L130301 (cyl #1 pressure line) - $68.20
03L130301R (cyl #2 pressure line) - $68.20
03L130301B (cyl #3 pressure line) - $68.20
03L130301C (cyl #4 pressure line) - $68.20
03L130235K (injector return lines) - $145.20
5N0130307G (return line from HPFP) - $135.30
03L201360G (return line from rail) - $134.20
4x 03L130277A (injector) - $1540.00
4x 059130119 (seal between injector and injector return line - may be optional) - $72.60
4x WHT000884 (seal on injector) - $4.40
4x 059130519 (injector hole seal) - $29.84

Total is $4099.84 in parts.

Still, a hell of a lot better than $11,000.

bhtooefr said:

However, as said earlier in the thread, it isn't even the owner's fault, necessarily, for misfueling. The truck can dump gasoline into the diesel tank. How are you supposed to know that? And, if the station doesn't fess up to it, how are you supposed to prove that?

My opinion is that the design should have been made in such a way that it's tolerant to poorer fuel quality and occasional misfueling.

Click to expand...

On the other side of the coin, how is it VW's fault? There's numerous warnings - "Ultra low sulfur diesel ONLY." It doesn't state "Ultra low sulfur diesel - Just as long as your intent is good"

If you put the diesel nozzle in the filler neck, what comes out better be pure diesel. If it's not, you don't have a probelm with VW - you have a problem with the station selling you the tainted fuel. Whether or not they fess up is not VW's issue, but it seems that people want to cut the station a break and keep VW on the hook.

Just how much RUG should the system tolerate before something happens? 1%, 5%, 100%? And for how long at those concentrations?

As I stated before, if the component is very sensitive to poor diesel fuel lubricity, why should ANYONE expect RUG to be OK in any way?? It's apparent that there's some kind of design issue here in regard to life expectency and compatibility with US fuel lubricity standars, however it's not fair to put VW on blast because RUG gets in the tank.

And also as I stated before, there's been reports on this forum of misfuels in CR cars and after a drain and fill they run again. If a failure does occur, was the component already weakened by running diesel fuel that's not lubricious enoug? Running some RUG through might just have been the nail in the coffin so to speak.

VW should've looked at the realities of fuel distribution in the US, and done one or more of the following:

1. Gasoline detection, refusing to start - that way, damage is averted, and it's made really, really obvious what happened.
2. Beefed up the fuel system to handle the occasional gasoline incident.
3. Partnered directly with major fuel companies to guarantee fuel quality - require an additional US-market-specific VW fuel spec above and beyond ASTM D 975, including processes that a fuel station must follow when filling the underground tanks, before fuel is authorized to be used in a TDI.
4. Not sold the TDI in the US until our fuel standards and distribution networks are up to snuff.

my dad's old 199somenthing Fiat Tipo 1.9 Diesel had a sensor to check for water in the fuel tank, would it be possible to do something similar and check for gas and water? i think it shouldnt be that hard nor expensive

Should NHTSA rule ...

bhtooefr >
> 1. Gasoline detection, refusing to start ...

This may well be insufficient or impossible, if the real
problem is lubricity. It calls for a lube sensor, which
may not exist.

> Beefed up the fuel system to handle the occasional gasoline incident.

If the TDI stays in the US market, this may be the solution.

> 3. Partnered directly with major fuel companies to
> guarantee fuel quality ...

Insufficient. Errors are still gonna happen, even if at
a lower rate with "ISO 9000 plus we really mean it".

> 4. Not sold the TDI in the US until our fuel standards
> and distribution networks are up to snuff.

Keep in mind that VW TDI pulled out of the US mkt entirely
during the ULSD transition. #4 is too easily possible.
_______
I plan to keep our 2003 running until this issue is
settled, and TDIs are both safe to buy (and still available).

bhtooefr said:

The following parts would be replaced in that situation, on a 2010 CJAA (my ETKA is inaccurate for 2011 stuff):

03L130755A (HPFP) - $1265.00
03L130321 (pressure line to rail) - $88.00
03L130089 (rail) - $412.50
03L130301 (cyl #1 pressure line) - $68.20
03L130301R (cyl #2 pressure line) - $68.20
03L130301B (cyl #3 pressure line) - $68.20
03L130301C (cyl #4 pressure line) - $68.20
03L130235K (injector return lines) - $145.20
5N0130307G (return line from HPFP) - $135.30
03L201360G (return line from rail) - $134.20
4x 03L130277A (injector) - $1540.00
4x 059130119 (seal between injector and injector return line - may be optional) - $72.60
4x WHT000884 (seal on injector) - $4.40
4x 059130519 (injector hole seal) - $29.84

Total is $4099.84 in parts.

Still, a hell of a lot better than $11,000.

Click to expand...

You left out the fuel pressure sensor, the pressure regulator, and the fuel quantity valve. (All easily contaminated). The fuel rail and lines could probably be successfully cleaned, though.

The only thing that is going to protect the fuel system is a filter in the high pressure line between the HPFP and the common rail. There is no filter media that I know of that can handle 1800 bar of pressure. MAYBE a sintered bronze filter in the line itself could, but I don't know if sintered bronze could offer the proper micron spec needed to protect the injectors without obstructing fuel flow in a normally operating, uncontaminated fuel system.

Pressure sensor and regulator are included in the rail part number that I included, and the quantity valve is, I believe, part of the HPFP part.

And, what I'm talking about filtering is the low pressure fuel return, so that only the high pressure areas of the fuel system get destroyed, not the lines to the tank, and all of that.

Been following this thread since it started, seems like a lot of "re-hashing" going on! I thought that the fuel tank had to be changed also if the HPFP grenaded.

My 2009 JSW TDI has 22,000+ miles now, I check the fuel filter every 5,000 +/- miles. I use 1 1/2 gal of B20 with 12 1/2 gal D2 (BP) when I fill. If I'm not home to get this fuel, PS (six oz.) at every fill. I carry a one gallon container and splash a bit of fuel into it to look/smell before pumping. I admit that it's being much more paranoid than one should have to be, but I really LOVE this car and want to keep it for a long time! Keeping fingers crossed...

bhtooefr said:

Pressure sensor and regulator are included in the rail part number that I included, and the quantity valve is, I believe, part of the HPFP part.

And, what I'm talking about filtering is the low pressure fuel return, so that only the high pressure areas of the fuel system get destroyed, not the lines to the tank, and all of that.

Click to expand...

Ok. I didn't know that those parts were included with the pump and the fuel rails. Thanks.

Filtering the return is better than nothing, but installing a high pressure line filter would be huge if it could be done. (Pump shreds, locks up a failsafe filter in the high pressure line with metal particles and stalls the engine with very little other damage).

Aquila said:

I thought that the fuel tank had to be changed also if the HPFP grenaded.

Click to expand...

Normally, yes. However, the list I posted was if there was a filter on the fuel return, so that the contamination couldn't make it back to the fuel tank.

As for the rail filter... how about this?

http://www.rovsco.com/PDFs/30k-series.pdf

Up to 30,000 PSI, check.
Down to 0.5 micron filtering, check.
Up to 5.5 GPH rating, check.

The trick will be, there'll be a pressure drop across that thing...

Does anyone want to speculate about what was done to the pumps for the various "improvements"?

I'm betting on progressive refinements like a Nikasil coated pump bore or a sleeved pump bore, a pin to orient the piston in the bore and prevent it from rotating in the bore, a revised cam profile in the pump, and additional hardening of the piston and roller or a combination of these things.

It might be a while before we know exactly what was done to improve the pumps, but we will know someday soon. If not from VW, then from people tinkering with them and examining them in the field.

I bet they are only trying coatings at this point. That is the cheapest fix out of the above mentioned. It is also how Bosch solved issues with the CR injectors in the Cummins powered Rams.

Automotive OEM parts are manufactured on very little profit to begin with. Car manufacturers will NOT pay more for the improved part. Therefore suppliers will do the absolute least they can get away with........

bhtooefr said:

03L130755A (HPFP) - $1265.00

Click to expand...

Now I understand why I haven't received a cordial invitation from the friendly folks at VWoA to stop by the dealer and have my original model HPFP swapped out for the newest and most "robust" version! But I sure hope that the NHTSA eventually forces them to do just that (and that my OEM lives long enough for that to happen)....

bhtooefr said:

As for the rail filter... how about this?

http://www.rovsco.com/PDFs/30k-series.pdf

Up to 30,000 PSI, check.
Down to 0.5 micron filtering, check.
Up to 5.5 GPH rating, check.

The trick will be, there'll be a pressure drop across that thing...

Click to expand...

It would seem a good idea for someone to test one of these. Doesn't seem to list prices on the web site.

I am interested in how you found these. Sure not a type of company I would have expected to find such a part. Undersea remote operated vehicles? Cool!

Let's get back to reality.

THIS IS A SAFETY INVESTIGATION as far as NHTSA is concerned. Unless VW voluntarily agrees that this issue needs fixed and offers a solution, NHTSA will likely try to duplicate the failure to see if it is a safety related issue. They may conclude it is not a safety issue.

VW could perhaps with existing sensors offer a software fix that will give ample warning of impending doom and allow a driver to safely stop the car and perhaps not restart it and hence there is no need to replace all HPFPs with a more robust one. VW would likely also extend the warranty to 100k miles like they did for the DSG temp sensor issue for the affected vehicles. So, we could still be looking at an expensive repair beyond 100k miles.

Only time will tell whether rev 2 or rev 3 extends the life of the HPFP on US 520 wear scar fuel. Bosch should have test data on this. But IMHO, this alone probably will not negate a misfuel with large amounts of gasoline and a subsequent expensive repair. That UK diesel fuel cap is looking better and better especially for those that let others fuel your car.

Until the dust settles and probably even after, lubricity, lubricity, lubricity.

zambaq said:

But I sure hope that the NHTSA eventually forces them to do just that

Click to expand...

Monkeys will fly out of our collective butts before a recall for the HPFP occurs. Period. Unless NHTSA is convinced that a fuel pump failure is a safety concern, it won't happen. VW will continue to silently handle them on a case by case basis. If a more robust part is developed, we won't hear about it...that will happen silently, too. Silence is golden when you are trying to limit your liability and financial exposure.

FYI ... I called VWoA about a change for the Fuel Filter replacement interval. I have an A3 with a CBEA. Audi released a bulletin that has the first change at 15K then 20K there after. VW still has the 20K interval.

The reason told to me by the care specialist was that they did not want a special interval for just for the Fuel Filter. Audi is on the 5's starting at 15K.

bhtooefr said:

VW should've looked at the realities of fuel distribution in the US, and done one or more of the following:

1. Gasoline detection, refusing to start - that way, damage is averted, and it's made really, really obvious what happened.
2. Beefed up the fuel system to handle the occasional gasoline incident.
3. Partnered directly with major fuel companies to guarantee fuel quality - require an additional US-market-specific VW fuel spec above and beyond ASTM D 975, including processes that a fuel station must follow when filling the underground tanks, before fuel is authorized to be used in a TDI.
4. Not sold the TDI in the US until our fuel standards and distribution networks are up to snuff.

Click to expand...

IMO, number 4 is what most likely should have taken place until fuel quality was deemed adaquate unless #2 was implemented from the get go. Since #2 seems to not have taken place, I totally put the blame on VW for releasing these ticking time bombs and then act as if the consumer is to blame.

With the effort and cost to implement #1, they may as well have gone for #2 and possibly be done with it. Remember, PDs create higher overall pressures than these CRs do so, I ask all here how many PD fuel systems were totally destroyed as a result of a fricken full tank of gas mistakenly put in? Hint: NADA, at least with the dozens I have personally dealt with over the years.

#3 was quashed by powerful big oil lobbyists in the first go round and the cost to comply only to accomodate such a small percentage of vehicles which they most likely hate to begin with due to such consumers using nearly 50% less of their product comparatively to begin with will most likely not happen in our lifetime unless unconstitutionally forced to do so by the Feds. Later!