Sounds good Rick. Please try this also.

Get into EV and coast 25-35 MPH on a flat road in N.

Then turn on the defroster and pay close attention.
I swear I can feel a slight, 1 second jolt of acceleration as MG1 kicks the engine on. If this is true in your car too, then there is no physical disconnect in N.

Also, ever wonder why you cannot start the car in N under 6 MPH but you CAN start the car in N over 6 MPH? It's exactly because the wheels are still connected. If they were not, then MG1 would only spin the planet gears, now disconnected from the wheels, since they would be the path of least resistance, instead of the carrier which is connected to the engine, and has substantial resistance. Standing still ( or under 6 MPH ) it is possible the wheels would have less resistance to turning backwards than the engine spinning forward. During an attempted start, MG1 could actually spin the wheels in reverse. A very scary, and potentially dangerous situation, as the average driver would never expect this behavior. Thus, an attempted start in N under 6mph has been dis-allowed. When the wheels, connecetd to the ring gear are moving forward, there is enough force ( momentum ) to resist the engine start, and thus the engine now is the path of least resistance and spins up and the wheels are unaffected.
This is how a planetary power-split device works.

Standing still in park, there is a parking pawl that locks the ring gear, wheels, and MG2 in place, providing resistance, and thus the only pathway for MG1 to spin is the engine. In N there is no parking pawl locking the ring gear, thus the ring gear must be moving forward (more than 6mph) to provide enough resistance during an engine re-start in N.

 

gpsman1 — By the way, ScanGaugeII does exactly the same! In this case, however, where the ICE is "off" and the vehicle is stationary, being picky (I'm a mathematician!) it's actually an indeterminate fraction of the form "0 divided by 0" (0 liters and 0 kilometers), which is undefined in a mathematical sense. As you say, it's a programming error, and the readout really ought to be "nulled" to show 0 L/100 km (the same goes for SG, which shows 9999 L/100 km and 0.1 L/h — both should be nulled). If the ICE is "off" while the car is moving (EV mode), the fraction is a fully determinate 0/# which equals 0 (where # is some nonzero number), and the correct answer should be 0 L/100 km, as reported by econoline (SG shows speed-dependent L/100 km readings, and a fuel consumption reading of 0.1 L/h — both are errors which should be nulled). If the ICE is running while the car is stationary, the correct answer is infinity, shown as 99.9 L/100 km, as reported by econoline (SG correctly shows 9999 L/100 km).

Stan

 

I can't help it if the "statements" you found are wrong, or you mis-understood them, or, in all probability, you are quoting something from the standard Escape that does not apply to the FEH. That's why I'm trying to correct your mistake, so you don't perpetuate a myth.

You've shown zero proof.
I've DEMONSTRATED over the road, very strong evidence.
What are you going to trust? Some obscure document printed years before the FEH went into production, or what people can see, hear, and feel for themselves? Do you really need "documentation" to know water is wet and it's dark at night? You are being absurd. Not to mention many of the items we are probing into may be trade-secret in nature, and are deliberately NOT published. Have you ever seen a PUBLISHED coefficeint of drag for the FEH? No. I asked Ford directly, and was told something as simple as that was secret. Anything you may have seen about Cd of the FEH did not come from Ford.

 

econoline — In your Post #50 you said that you'd seen 0 L/100 km CLOSED-LOOP while coasting. In Post #54 you confirmed the 0 L/100 km reading, but said nothing about open- or closed-loop. Did you really get closed-loop AND 0 L/100 km simultaneously? That would be worrying and puzzling! Please confirm.

GaryG — In your Post #53 you speak about your FEH "going EV." Can you please clarify what you mean by this? Does the FEH have some gauge that indicates EV, like the blue (negative) EV region of the TCH's FE gauge? In the TCH, the FE gauge never indicates EV when the ICE's rpm > 0. Instead, it reads 0 L/100 km (in the metric versions; it reads its lowest positive value, 60 mph, in the US version). This indicates very clearly to me when fuel-cut is in effect. Does the FEH display information differently? I'm hearing that you're getting an EV indication even while the ICE's rpm > 0. Please clarify!

You also say "... the ICE is restarted by the battery using MG1 as you glide above 40 mph in "N" ..." with wheel disconnect in effect. Now, this is generally impossible unless the FEH electrically drives MG2 at the same time so as to "lock" it, and prevent its rotation. Otherwise MG1 would just spin MG2 and not the ICE. Of course, if wheel disconnect is not in effect, the linkage to the wheels will ensure that the ICE will turn over. Even so, there will be a "jolt" (or worse) felt by the passengers during such an engine restart. Toyota apparently pulse MG2 at the same time to minimize this jolt, and it's generally not prominent.

You also talk about run-up sometimes being caused by regeneration in 'L,' and imply that the normal situation is for the run-up to be powered by the battery. How do you know this? It doesn't make sense to me to use battery power for this, since it wouldn't provide any braking at all! When in 'L,' you're requesting extra "engine braking," and the only sensible source for the electrical power needed by MG1 to spin up the ICE to provide this engine braking is MG2, and not the battery, no matter what the latter's SOC may be. And I reiterate, spinning the ICE in this way causes genuine engine braking, since the torque (or, at least, most of it — some may go to battery charging) exerted on the wheels by MG2 while generating this braking power is being directly tranferred to the ICE by MG1.

rmcmast — In Post #44 are you saying that you saw open-loop operation when the ICE started and idled using fuel, while gliding/coasting above 40 mph in 'N'? I can see brief periods (a few seconds) of open-loop until the catalytic converter is back up to temperature, but are you saying that the ICE continued to run open-loop? Or, was this fuel-cut spinning of the ICE that you're referring to? I suspect that what you saw was EV (fuel-cut and open-loop) when your speed had dropped below 40 mph. Please clarify!

gpsman1 — In your Post #56 you refer to MG1 being "maxed out" when you're travelling at speeds above 60 mph. I disagree! Surely Ford is using the scheme that has been termed "heretical mode" in the Toyota hybrids? What happens at high speeds in heretical mode is that MG1 is driven backwards in order to drive up the wheel speed while simultaneously driving down the ICE's speed, and thus improving the ICE's efficiency. This is like a "super overdrive." In the Toyota vehicles, the power to spin MG1 backwards actually comes from MG2, bleeding it off the wheels, and not from the battery! Doesn't the FEH do the same? If only ScanGauge could display MG1's speed, one could monitor it as the vehicle's speed increases, and see it go from positive, through zero, to negative! Only if the vehicle's speed got very high, so that MG1's speed was in danger of being "maxed out" at its negative maximum, would the ICE have to rev up to speeds well above its most efficient operating range. At normal speeds this doesn't occur in the TCH.

Stan

 

Yes. That is what I'm saying. At greater than 60-65 mph MG1 is maxed out in the reverse direction. EVERY time you coast at high speed, even in N, over about 60 MPH the ICE rpm will ramp up in direct proportion to wheel speed.
This would reduce MG1 speed.
This could occur for two reasons.
A. The wheels are never actually physically disconnected.
B. The computer is ramping up the ICE "just in case" you shift back into D at high speed. This would waste gas, battery power, or both. This does NOT seem to be true.

In a traditional tranny, when you shift from N to D when traveling, there is some clutch slippage, some "forgiveness" if you went to a sudden change. Does the eCVT have this same forgiveness? If not, then the wheels cannot disconnect at speed.

Also, if the wheels were disconnected at high speed in N, this would allow the ICE to spin down to idle and stay there. This is never the case.
Shifting to D (from N) a high speed should mean an immediate increase in ICE RPM. This is never the case. If fact, you never feel anything, no jolt, shock, vibration, noise, nothing. Again, I state that Neutral is "simulated" and there is no physical disconnect.

GaryG has never shown WHERE the physical disconnect is.
The only way to convince me and most others this happens will be a picture or video. The car DOES NOT behave like there is a physical disconnect. ( and I've spent a lot of time looking for it )

Stan, I'm sure the TCH and the FEH have different gear sizes and ratios.
( Even different tire diameters, something not often discussed )
Comparing one to the other is probably not wise.
-John

 

Stan,
What I thought I saw was a fuel-cut after the run-up (initially in L). Then in D, followed by N. I did not have the Scan Gauge set to LP so I don't know if it was open loop or not.

This was a downhill glide at well over 40mph, in L initially. When the run up started, I reset the ave econ gauge on the dash and shifted to D. Econ showed 0.0L/100km for an extended period. Out of curiosity, I shifted to N and it stayed at 0.0L for about a 1/4 mile. At the very end I did drop below 40mph and go EV, shifted to D and then accelerated up the next hill. At that point, econ went above 0.0L.

I have not been able to trigger a run-up since, so I have not been able to confirm anything.

-- Rick

 

Yes, I just confirmed, closed-loop and 0 L/100km simultaneously. I was coasting down a long hill at 40mph, in D, foot off the gas completely, 1100rpm, and saw closed-loop on the SG and 0L/100km on the dash econ gauge following an econ reset. I reset the econ several more times to confirm the reading was indeed 0, and the SG continued to read closed-loop.

 

econoline — Very interesting and puzzling! I've seen no reason to doubt ScanGauge's RPM and OPEN/CLOSED LOOP readouts. So, given that they are correct, and given that the ICE should not stay closed loop when it's not burning fuel (do you agree?), one is forced to deduce that the ICE is burning fuel. This is contradicted by your FE readouts from the FEH's display. So, which of these readouts is wrong?

GaryG — It seems to me that the following three scenarios could justifiably be called "EV mode":
(a) ICE not spinning (and therefore using no fuel); vehicle either stationary or moving under purely electrical power from the NiMH battery. I call this case "pure-EV" mode. In the TCH, the FE gauge reads "negative" in the blue EV-area.
(b) ICE spinning at approximately idle speed (~1000 rpm in the TCH) in fuel-cut mode, powered only by electrical power; vehicle moving (coasting) in 'D.' The required electrical power comes from MG2 driving MG1 to spin the ICE, and/or from the NiMH battery. I don't know what you call this case. In the TCH, the FE gauge reads precisely 0 L/100 km (or 60 mpg in the US version), on the borderline between the positive and negative FE areas.
(c) ICE spinning at well above idle speed (3000+ rpm in the TCH) in fuel-cut mode, powered only by electrical power; vehicle moving (coasting) in 'L' ('B' in the TCH). The required electrical power comes from MG2 driving MG1 to spin the ICE, and/or from the NiMH battery. You call this case fuel-cut run-up, if I understand correctly. In the TCH, the FE gauge again reads precisely 0 L/100 km (or 60 mpg in the US version), on the borderline between the positive and negative FE areas.

What are the FEH's display readouts in the three cases above? Please tell me, as I'm not sure what your gauges and displays can show. Do you consider all three cases above to be EV mode, and is this also what the FEH says? What on earth would be the point of having ICE run-up in 'L' if there's no wheel braking?

gpsman1 — You're right; one must be careful not to stretch the comparison of the behaviors of the FEH and TCH too far. But in the TCH one can shift from 'N' to 'D' at speed without seeing any significant change in the ICE's rpm. It will stay around 1000 rpm, as the car shifts almost imperceptibly from gas-powered idling of the engine in 'N' to protect MG1, to fuel-cut idling of the ICE at the same rpm in 'D' for the same reason.

This is all rather puzzling!

Stan

 

Why is there any contradiction? I do not see any.

I do not agree that OPEN LOOP = NO FUEL.
Open loop occurs during the first 30 seconds of a cold start, when the car is for sure burning fuel.
Open loop occurs at Wide Open Throttle, when the car is for sure burning fuel.

So I think it is possible to have closed loop and zero fuel in rare conditions.

Agian, here are the terms defined by Ford:

"Open Loop: An operating condition based on instructions not modified by PCM feedback."

"Closed Loop: An operating condition or mode which enables operation based on sensor feedback."

There's no mention of fuel status under these modes.

 

I was always under the impression that "closed loop" was when the engine controls were being managed using feedback from the O2 sensors. And "open loop" meant that conditions were not right for O2 sensor feedback. (During warmup-sensors not at temp yet, WOT, etc.)