Recalling the Underlying Problem
Research Paper

     Mechanical engineers face a variety of challenges in their day-to-day life. Whether it be pondering mathematical concepts or invoking thought into the Laws of Physics, their time is spent using numbers and symbols to communicate the meaning of complex problems to other professionals in their field (Geisler 173-76). However, this method of communication becomes a serious issue when a defect is found within a product and consumers must be notified of the problem. To put this dilemma into context, a recent flaw was found within Gasoline Direct Injection (GDI) engines and it’s causing controversy throughout the automotive industry (Howlett). Mechanical engineers at major automakers are working to resolve the issue, but many consumers are unaware of what may be lurking under the hoods of their cars. First, it is important to identify the major problem facing GDI engines and how this problem gradually begins to surface. Next, it is essential that consumers understand how automakers are resolving this issue, and lastly, how engineers are helping automakers resolve mechanical maladies and preventing new ones from cropping up. Communication plays a central role in explaining a multifaceted problem to the average consumer, especially when it comes to automobiles. Therefore, it’s essential that mechanical engineers explicate their findings to the consumers of automobiles and to the general public in an easy-to-understand way, a challenge that many engineering companies still face throughout the world. 

     GDI engines have a number of key benefits that attract both automakers and consumers. First of all, GDI engines are able to produce more power and consume less fuel than comparable Port Fuel Injection (PFI) motors, since they have their fuel injectors located within the combustion chamber rather than above the intake valves. This design benefit leads to a reduction in wasted fuel in the combustion process, since the fuel travels less distance and touches less parts of the engine before being combusted versus the process in a PFI motor. However, this benefit is short-lived, as the main issue facing GDI engines is the fact that fuel never comes in contact with the intake valves, which need routine cleaning to clear off carbon deposits that form over time. Since gasoline is injected above the intake valves in PFI engines, the intake valves are constantly being cleaned by the spray of fuel as the engine runs. This is why PFI motors do not experience a buildup of carbon deposits on top of the intake valves, unlike GDI engines.

     These carbon deposits have many adverse side affects that become a detriment to engine performance over time. Drivers of vehicles that have GDI engines and that have a buildup of carbon deposits on top of the intake valves will first notice intermittent issues during ignition and longer crank times during startup. In addition, vehicles with GDI engines will suffer significant power losses as air becomes restricted from entering the combustion chamber, due to carbon deposits blocking the flow of air around the intake valves. Lastly, drivers may also experience catalytic converter damage if large chunks of carbon break from the intake valves and pass through the combustion chamber (ADPTraining). Automakers are aware that carbon buildup in GDI engines is a major problem that needs to be addressed, and numerous solutions have been proposed and implemented within the automotive industry (Spiegel, et al.).

     It may be a surprise, but automakers have known about carbon buildup on the intake valves of GDI engines for at least twelve years. In 2002, Leo Spiegel, Günter Sōhlke, and Gerrit Suck of Volkswagen Auto Group filed a patent for a catalytic surface that keeps carbon deposits from forming on the intake valves and injectors in a GDI engine (Spiegel et al.). This was one of the first solutions proposed to rid direct injection motors of carbon deposits, but unfortunately, this proposition never surfaced, because carbon deposits are still a major issue in today’s cars and trucks. One of the least expensive and most creative methods for cleaning carbon off the intake valves in GDI engines involves the use of a walnut shell blaster. Mechanics simply remove the intake manifold in the engine bay and fill a compressed air blasting tool with walnut shell granules. From there, the blasting tool propels the walnut granules at the tops of the intake valves, removing carbon deposits and preserving engine parts coated in the hardened black substance. This is a very effective solution and it has become a standard BMW service provided by repair shops and dealerships across the United States (“BMW N54 Engine”). Despite the initial savings accumulated from performing this service, customers are penalized by having to do this service on a regular basis, which adds up to hundreds of dollars within just a few years of driving. Lastly, mechanical engineers at various automakers have responded to the problem of carbon buildup in an entirely different manner. Instead of engines using either gasoline direct injection or port fuel injection, engineers at companies like Volkswagen, Subaru, Toyota, and Lexus have devised a way to utilize both technologies in one engine. This method locates two injectors in each cylinder of the engine, one above the intake valves, like in a PFI motor, and one within the combustion chamber, like in a GDI motor. This allows fuel to spray onto the intake valves and wash away carbon deposits every time the engine is running (“2013 Scion FR-S”). The main downside with this technology is that it’s not quite as efficient as pure gasoline direct injection, which leads to a decrease in fuel savings.

     This decrease in fuel efficiency becomes a concern for consumers looking for a new vehicle, and unfortunately, it is relatively difficult to understand what type of fuel injection a vehicle may have. For instance, Volkswagen’s nomenclature for gasoline direct injection is “FSI”, which stands for Fuel Stratified Injection, while other manufacturers, such as Subaru, named their gasoline direct/port fuel injection combination “D4-S”. The utilization of these acronyms leads to confusion for consumers who want or do not want gasoline direct injection in their vehicles. In fact, engineers have a variety of options as to how they can communicate GDI technology to consumers and allow car buyers to become aware that this new technology has pitfalls that are still being addressed.

     One of the main ways that engineers and automakers could notify the public about gasoline direct injection is by placing information on the EPA Fuel Economy Labels. Consumers tend to look at these labels for fuel economy information, and so engineers could explain the technology on the labels as a way to make consumers more aware and better informed about the product they may purchase. This is an entirely feasible proposition, as the Environmental Protection Agency revised fuel economy labels for all passenger vehicles sold in the United States in 2012 with the intent of including more information that consumers could use to help find a vehicle (“Learn About the Label”). Another method of informing the public is by issuing a recall for vehicles that have early forms of gasoline direct injection. The issuance of a recall can be relatively expensive for an automaker, but it may be necessary in order to preserve the image and stigma of a brand, especially one that is a luxury nameplate. For example, Toyota/Lexus hesitated to initiate a recall regarding accelerator pedals sticking under floor mats in their vehicles in 2009. However, after numerous complaints and widespread media coverage of the problem, Toyota finally issued a recall to address the problem. It is suspected that Toyota attempted to save money by not immediately issuing a recall, and that lack of communication to consumers about a vehicle defect hurt the brand’s image in the long run (“Why ‘Modern Family’ still drives” 1). 
     The use of advertisements is also imperative when it comes to raising awareness about the problems with gasoline direct injection. Through the use of advertisements, engineers can explain the downsides or upsides of different fuel injection methods as a way of either promoting certain vehicles, or criticizing others in order to spur competition. For example, Ford has promoted its "EcoBoost" technology for the last few years by using heavy commercial advertising. "EcoBoost" technology is essentially the combination of turbocharging and gasoline direct injection, and instead of allowing Ford to proclaim all of the benefits associated with GDI, it would be advantageous for another auto manufacturer to criticize Ford's "EcoBoost" technology by questioning its longterm reliability and by showing images of carbon buildup on the engine's intake valves. This competition between auto manufacturers could catch the attention of car buyers, who would most likely factor GDI or PFI technology into their next vehicle purchase.
     The automotive landscape is becoming increasingly more diverse as automakers design and employ different methods of increasing fuel efficiency in production vehicles.  By identifying the key problem facing GDI engines and the reasons for how this problem gradually begins to surface, the ways consumers can learn how automakers are resolving this issue, and the methods engineers use to help automakers resolve mechanical maladies and prevent new ones from cropping up, we can be better-informed consumers. In addition, the carbon buildup associated with GDI technology exemplifies just one of many possible problems in which mechanical engineers would have to translate their findings into easy-to-understand advertisements and explanations. By utilizing these methods to communicate complex problems to the public, engineers will help consumers become more educated on GDI and PFI technologies, thus enabling them to make a better choice when purchasing a new car. 

Annotated Bibliography:

2013 Scion FR-S D-4S Technology Explained. Prod. Scion. 2013 Scion FR-S D-4S Technology Explained. YouTube, 18 June 2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. This is a video that explains the inner workings behind the combination direct/port fuel injection in the engine of the Scion FR-S. The video describes the benefit of having both types of fuel injection and how each port and direct fuel injector works in synch to increase engine efficiency and reduce engine emissions. The author’s intended audience is Scion enthusiasts and potential buyers who are curious about the engine technology implemented in the vehicle. The video makes no assumption about the viewer, but their does seem to be a slight bias toward supporting the technology, because no downsides were listed as far as having both port and direct fuel injection within the engine.

ADPTraining. "GDI Injection Failures." YouTube. YouTube, 17 July 2012. Web. 03 Mar.

2014.  In this video, ADP Training describes the benefits of direct injection and how newly designed GDI engines suffer very little from carbon build up around the neck region of the intake valves. The video describes how carbon forms on the intake valves in a GDI engine and a possible solution to the problem, as well as the major automakers that have alleviated this issue. The author is targeting technicians and people who fix vehicles, and the video emphasizes the importance of finding a solution to the carbon build-up. The video assumes that the viewer is already aware of GDI technology and how a GDI engine works, and there doesn’t seem to be any bias in the video.

BMW N54 Engine Intake Valve Cleaning with Walnut Shell Blasting Equipment. Prod. BMW Excluservice. YouTube. YouTube, 14 Jan. 2014. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. This video shows the process of walnut shell blasting the intake valves in a direct fuel injection engine. There is a profound emphasis on how easy it is to perform this process and what the benefits are in having this service completed on a car with a GDI motor. The intended purpose of this video is to sell the walnut shell blasting service to BMW customers at a particular repair shop in Maryland. The author assumes that customers enjoy the power of the BMW engines, since the credits at the end of the video list only the power benefits associated with the service. Through the use of a visual demonstration and the accreditation of the BMW service shop, the validity of the video can be vindicated.

“Continued Growth Expected for Direct Fuel Injection Systems.” Internet Wire 19 July 2010.

            Business Insights: Essentials. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. The articles explains how direct fuel injection will be growing more popular in future vehicles, as well as how a GDI engine works. The author describes how heightened emissions standards have required automakers to implement GDI in their engine designs. The author wrote this article to inform potential buyers of what to expect from vehicles in the next few years and the reasons behind new vehicle technologies, such as GDI. The author of the article doesn’t make any assumptions and he/she emphasizes the cleaner emissions provided by GDI technology. There does seem to be a slight bias toward supporting direct fuel injection, as the author only mentions the benefits of GDI technology, and not the downsides. However, the main points made by the author are justified through the use of data that the author readily presents in the article.

"Edmunds.com Updates on Issues in Car Recall Process." Entertainment Close-up16 May 2012. Biography in Context. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. The article discusses how many used vehicles are still under recall and have not been repaired, despite numerous letters to owners of the affected vehicles. The article goes on to say that a new VIN tracking system would allow potential buyers to find out whether a certain used car has had recall work done to it. The author wrote the article to make used car buyers aware that many used vehicles are still under recall and the author emphasizes that used car buyers bring their vehicles into a dealer to find out whether they need recall work done. The author assumes that the reader knows how to register his/her used car with an automaker and the author uses sufficient evidence to back up his/her main points in the article.

Evarts, Eric. "EPA Finds Hyundai Exaggerated Fuel Economy Claims, Refunds Coming to

Customers." EPA Finds Hyundai Exaggerated Fuel Economy Claims, Refunds Coming

to Customers. Consumer Reports, 2 Nov. 2012. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. The article describes

how an error in the lab-test procedure led to unrealistic fuel economy estimates for a

number of Hyundai vehicles. As a result, Hyundai is refunding owners of these vehicles

for gas, plus 15 percent based on the number of miles driven by each individual owner.

The purpose of this article is to inform owners of Hyundai vehicles that they will be

 refunded for additional fuel costs associated with not achieving the promised fuel

economy estimates made by the company. The article emphasizes the error in the lab-test

 procedure and the author uses data from a nonprofit testing center to verify the lower

fuel economy estimates than what Hyundai initially promised to its customers.

Gaylord, Samuel. "Direct Fuel Injection Carbon Buildup." YouTube. YouTube, 11 Aug.

2013. Web. 03 Mar. 2014. In this video, I describe a possible method of cleaning the intake/exhaust valves by revving a GDI engine over 3,000 rpm for the course of 20 minutes. I also describe how I came about this possible solution through various forms of research. Lastly, I demonstrate the solution by driving a 2008 Volkswagen Passat 3.6 4motion, a vehicle that has direct-fuel injection and that suffers from carbon build-up, on the highway at 4,500 rpm. This helps demonstrate to viewers what the process is like in order to burn off carbon deposits on the necks of the valves in a GDI engine. This video is intended for viewers who already know about the problems associated with direct-fuel injection or who have GDI vehicles. The video emphasizes the method of revving an engine over 3,000 rpm to burn off carbon deposits on the intake valves and the author assumes that viewers have a general knowledge about the process of internal combustion. Lastly, the video seems to mention more problems with European vehicles, but this does not elicit bias toward finding a solution to the carbon build-up in a GDI engine. The video also backs up the proposed method of removing carbon deposits with numerous examples and pieces of evidence.

Geisler, Cheryl. "The relationship between language and design in mechanical

            engineering: some preliminary observations." Technical Communication Feb.

            1993: 173+. Business Insights: Essentials. Web. 20 Jan. 2014. In this article, Cheryl Geisler discusses the role of communication in the design process of engineering. She conducts research on a group of students enrolled in a Design of Mechanical Systems course and she comes to various conclusions about how communication is integrated into college engineering courses and how students use communication to work on class-related projects and activities. In her findings, Geisler discovers that engineers portray writing as the final step when completing a design project and that their methods of using communication vary, depending on whether or not they are in a social or personal setting. Lastly, Geisler found that research and writing consumed nearly 35 percent of engineering team members’ time, second only to the amount of time they spent in oral interaction with one another. These results point to the fact that communication plays an enormous role throughout the design process, and not just at the end of a completed task or project. The purpose of this article is to educate those who don’t study engineering about the way communication plays a role in the engineering design process. The article emphasizes the discrepancies between the expected and the actual ways that communication is used in engineering, and the author assumes that the audience members have no affiliation to mechanical engineering. This assumption is validated by the fact that the author is talking to the audience about engineers as if they were objects that needed to be studied. There is very little bias in this article, because the author accepts the fact that her initial expectations surrounding communication in mechanical engineering were quite different from her research findings. Lastly, the author correctly supports her own main points with plenty of valid evidence from the article.

            

Howlett, Bob. "Direct-Injection Issues & Carbon Deposits." Underhood Service. Business Insights: Essentials, Dec. 2013. Web. 03 Mar. 2014. In this article, Howlett describes his experience with removing carbon from an engine using a walnut shell blaster. He has been using the device ever since carbon began plaguing Saabs in the 1980s and he finds it to be a relatively inexpensive, effective way of cleaning an engine of deposits. He also explains the methods of diagnosing engine problems related to camshaft followers and the high-pressure fuel pump in Audi and VW 2.0L turbocharged FSI engines. The intended audience of the article are people who desire to learn more about engine design and who are not complete experts in the field of automotive technology. The article emphasizes the use of a walnut blaster to remove carbon deposits on intake valves and how direct injection is major problem in new vehicles. The author makes no assumptions about the article’s topic or the audience, and there seems to be a slight bias in that the author discusses how complicated and problematic the engines have been with Volkswagen and Audi vehicles without mentioning other vehicle manufacturers. Lastly, the article’s evidence clearly supports the author’s main points.

Huffman, John Pearley. "Double Take: Fun-Loving Twins Separated at Birth." New York

            Times 18 Nov. 2012: 1(L). Biography in Context. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. The article

describes a first drive involving the Subaru BRZ and Scion FR-S sports coupes, which feature both direct and port fuel injection in their engine designs. During the initial drive Huffman talks about how the car handles, it’s fuel economy, and the power of the vehicle’s engine, to name just a few of his points of discussion. The purpose of this article is to inform potential buyers of how a highly anticipated car drives and if it is worth your money. The article focuses on how the car handles and how much fun it is to drive and the author makes no assumptions about the topic or audience. There doesn’t seem to be any bias in the article and there’s plenty of technical data to support the author’s main points about the two cars he’s driving.

"Learn About the Label." EPA. Environmental Protection Agency, 4 Mar. 2014. Web. 31 Mar. 2014. In this brief article from the Environmental Protection Agency, the new 2012 fuel economy labels are described and the key differences between the new and old label are pointed out. There is an overall emphasis on how the new label helps consumers shop for vehicles with the best mileage, and there is even a slight bias toward favoring the new label and not the old one. In addition, there is an overall message that consumers should be shopping for a fuel-efficient vehicle, which hurts the credibility of the source. However, the information pertaining to the features of the new fuel economy label do not contain bias and the provided information is proven using images of the new labels themselves.

Progress Report for the Spark Ignition Direct Injection R&D Program. Rep. Washington, DC:

            U.S. Department of Energy - Office of Transportation Technologies, 2002. Progress

            Report for the Spark Ignition Direct Injection R&D Program. U.S. Department of Energy

 - Office of Transportation Technologies, Mar. 2002. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. This progress

 report discusses the current state of the development of direct fuel injection, the

problems it’s posing, and the expected benefits and downsides to implementing the

technology. The purpose of this report is to inform officials who don’t extensive car

knowledge about the new technology, how it works, and why it could have a             significant impact on the automotive industry. The report makes no assumptions

about direct fuel injection or about the reader of the report, there doesn’t seem to be

any bias in the report, and there’s plenty of evidence to support the main points

about GDI technology that are made.

Spiegel, Leo, Günter Sōhlke, and Gerrit Suck. "Patent US6866031 - Direct Injection Internal Combustion Engine - Google Patents." Google Books. N.p., 15 Mar. 2005. Web. 03 Mar. 2014. This is a patent filed by three engineers at Volkswagen Auto Group who invented a catalytic surface for a direct-fuel injection engine. The surface is designed so that carbon deposits would not be able to form on the valves and injectors in a direct-fuel injection engine. In addition, the patent describes the negative effects of carbon deposits on engine valves and the other methods of reducing or eliminating carbon from a gasoline direct-fuel injection motor. This patent is directed towards vehicle manufacturers and automotive product companies seeking to find new solutions to reducing carbon deposits in GDI engines. The patent emphasizes the negative effects of carbon build-up on the intake valves of GDI engines and how a new catalytic surface would reduce carbon deposits on the intake valves and the direct injectors. The patent makes the assumption that the audience doesn’t have extensive knowledge on direct-fuel injection technology and there doesn’t appear to be any bias portrayed within the patent or patent description. Lastly, the patent lists many pieces of evidence that support the inventors’ main points stated within the patent description.

United States. Cong. House. Committee on Oversight and Government Reform. By Ron

            Stroman, Michael McCarthy, Carla Hultberg, and Larry Brady. 111th Cong., 2nd sess. H.

            Rept. N.p.: n.p., n.d. Gale Biography in Context. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. This Congress

            hearing is lengthy, but the important takeaway is that Toyota was found to be minimizing

the complaints pertaining to sudden acceleration, while purposely avoiding expensive NHTSA investigations into the reason behind the incidents. The purpose of this congress hearing was to bring light to the fact that many automakers to do not openly communicate to consumers about design problems in vehicles, especially when it could cause the automaker to lose a large amount of money. The intended audience for the congress hearing is lawmakers and government/automotive officials, and the hearing often emphasizes the fact that Toyota attempted to cover up sudden, unintended acceleration incidents in order to save money and not initiate a recall. There is some bias in the hearing, since it is a written record of all of the words said by the people who attended, but there is plenty of evidence to support each person’s claims and main points that were made throughout the hearing.

“Why ‘Modern Family’ still drives Toyota; Product-placement deal struck well before automaker’s massive recall.” Advertising Age 8 Mar. 2010: 1. Business Insights: Essentials. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. This article describes how despite the large number of recalls on Toyota vehicles, the automotive company continues to be a sponsor on a hit television series. The main purpose of this article to inform viewers of the TV series and potential new car owners that Toyota vehicles are safe and that the company is taking care of all recall repairs as quickly as possible. The article emphasizes that Toyota is trying to build its image back up by using the series to promote its vehicles and the author also assumes that the reader knows about the extensive Toyota recalls that tarnished the brand. There’s a little bias in the article, in that the author has a distasteful view of Toyota following all of the recalls, but the evidence presented does support the author’s main points in the article.