A Better Routeplanner

[blincoln]

More charging models - Model 3 LR and the Unicorn BTX8

Lacking enough logs from Model 3 owners in ABRP, I was happy to see that @TonyWilliams made a nice charging curve measurement for the Model 3 in the post Supercharger speed: 116kW . So, using this as a foundation and double checking it against the ABRP data points, I have now updated the ABRP model according to the plot below. Also, the usable battery capacity for the M3 LR has been adjusted to 76 kWh since this is what both data and EPA docs indicate.

The lucky BTX8 owners (85 kWh battery in a 75 car) have provided really good data (thanks to e.g. Kulingen @ TCS) to ABRP. The measurements and ABRP model now looks like this:

So, updated legal Cannonball Run benchmark trip times looks as follows (slightly improved for all cars thanks to bug fixes and/or new chargers)

1. New leader: Model 3 Long Range: 49 hours 51 minutes
2. Model S100D: 50 hours 41 minutes
3. Model X100D: 53 hours 22 minutes
4. Model S75D (85 kWh, BTX8): 53 hours 27 minutes
5. Model S75D: 54 hours 23 minutes
6. Model X75D: 58 hours 43 minutes

Albeit the practical consumption of the Model 3 is still somewhat unclear, it is clear that consuming less kWh/mile and charging at the same speed (in kW) as the larger battery MS100D does bring a clear advantage!

 

[TonyWilliams]

So, updated legal Cannonball Run benchmark trip times looks as follows (slightly improved for all cars thanks to bug fixes and/or new chargers)

1. New leader: Model 3 Long Range: 49 hours 51 minutes
2. Model S100D: 50 hours 41 minutes
3. Model X100D: 53 hours 22 minutes
4. Model S75D (85 kWh, BTX8): 53 hours 27 minutes
5. Model S75D: 54 hours 23 minutes
6. Model X75D: 58 hours 43 minutes

Albeit the practical consumption of the Model 3 is still somewhat unclear, it is clear that consuming less kWh/mile and charging at the same speed (in kW) as the larger battery MS100D does bring a clear advantage!

I made just two logged data points for Model 3 LR consumption in ideal conditions (level hard surface road, no wind, warm weather, no significant battery / cabin heating or cooling):

70mph - 4.0 miles/kWh (250 watthours/mile)
112km - 6.43 km/kWh (155.5 watthours/km)
17.5kW consumption rate

90mph - 2.7 miles/kWh (370 watthours/mile)
145km - 4.35 km/kWh (230 watthours/km)
33kW consumption rate

Calculating for aerodynamic drags, we should have double the consumption rate at 90mph than we do at 70mph, using a simple calculation of velocity cubed:

(90 / 70) ^3 = 2.12 (about double)

 

[Peter_M]

I think drag is proportional to the square of the speed, not the cube: Drag equation - Wikipedia

 

[blincoln]

I made just two logged data points for Model 3 LR consumption in ideal conditions (level hard surface road, no wind, warm weather, no significant battery / cabin heating or cooling):

70mph - 4.0 miles/kWh (250 watthours/mile)
112km - 6.43 km/kWh (155.5 watthours/km)
17.5kW consumption rate

90mph - 2.7 miles/kWh (370 watthours/mile)
145km - 4.35 km/kWh (230 watthours/km)
33kW consumption rate

Calculating for aerodynamic drags, we should have double the consumption rate at 90mph than we do at 70mph, using a simple calculation of velocity cubed:

(90 / 70) ^3 = 2.12 (about double)

I think drag is proportional to the square of the speed, not the cube: Drag equation - Wikipedia

You are both right - the force is proportional to the velocity squared (in Newtons or whatever interesting imperial unit there is, lbf?). The power is force times velocity, i.e. velocity cubed (in W). And then finally, the energy/distance is power divided by velocity, so back to velocity squared (in Wh/mile or Wh/km).

Thanks @TonyWilliams for the data, very useful! 155 Wh/km at 112 km/h is a bit lower than the ABRP model, and 230 Wh/km is 145 km/h is slightly more than the ABRP model. But close enough!

 

[Robocheme]

I'm not sure if this helps or not, but I did a simple speed vs. efficiency test last month on a road trip to Portland.

Test basis -

Model 3 LR with 18" wheels and aero covers
44F, 82% humidity
Little wind
No drafting
Flat straight stretch of I5 in central Oregon

Test procedure - I put it cruise control and then reset the odometer B. After a few minutes, the efficiency would stop changing and I would note the value.

65 mph - 239 wh/mile
70 mph - 266 wh/mile
75 mph - 303 wh/mile

 

[blincoln]

I'm not sure if this helps or not, but I did a simple speed vs. efficiency test last month on a road trip to Portland.

Test basis -

Model 3 LR with 18" wheels and aero covers
44F, 82% humidity
Little wind
No drafting
Flat straight stretch of I5 in central Oregon

Test procedure - I put it cruise control and then reset the odometer B. After a few minutes, the efficiency would stop changing and I would note the value.

65 mph - 239 wh/mile
70 mph - 266 wh/mile
75 mph - 303 wh/mile

Excellent, thanks! I will collect data points and update the model accordingly. Yours and @TonyWilliams' data looks quite consistent.

 

[blincoln]

I have adjusted the ABRP Model 3 consumption model based on the Model 3 measurements by @TonyWilliams and @Robocheme as follows:

(Same plot, different units)

The default reference consumption for Model 3 with Aero Wheels is now lowered to 160 Wh/km @110 km/h (247 Wh/km @ 65 mph).
I have also added a choice for Model 3 Long Range 19" Wheels, where I (lacking real world data) applied a scaling based on Tesla 3: 18” or 19” wheels? • r/teslamotors of 16% up from the 18" Aero Wheels.

If you have more or better measurements, let us all know!

Edit: The updated consumption model leads to this legal Cannonball Run leader board:

1. Model 3 Long Range with Aero: 49 hours 34 minutes
2. Model S100D: 50 hours 41 minutes
3. Model X100D: 53 hours 22 minutes
4. Model S75D (85 kWh, BTX8): 53 hours 27 minutes
5. Model S75D: 54 hours 23 minutes
6. Model X75D: 58 hours 43 minutes

 

[TonyWilliams]

Edit: The updated consumption model leads to this legal Cannonball Run leader board:

1. Model 3 Long Range with Aero: 49 hours 34 minutes
2. Model S100D: 50 hours 41 minutes
3. Model X100D: 53 hours 22 minutes
4. Model S75D (85 kWh, BTX8): 53 hours 27 minutes
5. Model S75D: 54 hours 23 minutes
6. Model X75D: 58 hours 43 minutes

Can you describe "legal" in the context above? Is it at one speed, or more than one (since the legal speed limit changes many times along that route).

 

[blincoln]

Can you describe "legal" in the context above? Is it at one speed, or more than one (since the legal speed limit changes many times along that route).

Simple, follow all speed limits. In ABRP, this is done by leaving Reference Speed at 100%. Like this: A Better Routeplanner

 

[vigge50]

I have adjusted the ABRP Model 3 consumption model based on the Model 3 measurements by @TonyWilliams and @Robocheme as follows:

(Same plot, different units)

View attachment 278239
View attachment 278240
The default reference consumption for Model 3 with Aero Wheels is now lowered to 160 Wh/km @110 km/h (247 Wh/km @ 65 mph).
I have also added a choice for Model 3 Long Range 19" Wheels, where I (lacking real world data) applied a scaling based on Tesla 3: 18” or 19” wheels? • r/teslamotors of 16% up from the 18" Aero Wheels.

If you have more or better measurements, let us all know!

Edit: The updated consumption model leads to this legal Cannonball Run leader board:

1. Model 3 Long Range with Aero: 49 hours 34 minutes
2. Model S100D: 50 hours 41 minutes
3. Model X100D: 53 hours 22 minutes
4. Model S75D (85 kWh, BTX8): 53 hours 27 minutes
5. Model S75D: 54 hours 23 minutes
6. Model X75D: 58 hours 43 minutes

First when I looked at that I thought it most be wrong as Model 3 wish is smaller and have better drag coefficient wish should gives smaller changes then speed rises compare to Model S and X but the curve is rising faster. But this probably have to do with that Model 3 have a different motor and if you look at the MPGe numbers I believe Model 3 is the first Tesla that have lower consumption at city driving then highway driving. Wonder at wish speed Model 3 would consume as mush energy as Model S if this graph is accurate?

 

[blincoln]

First when I looked at that I thought it most be wrong as Model 3 wish is smaller and have better drag coefficient wish should gives smaller changes then speed rises compare to Model S and X but the curve is rising faster. But this probably have to do with that Model 3 have a different motor and if you look at the MPGe numbers I believe Model 3 is the first Tesla that have lower consumption at city driving then highway driving. Wonder at wish speed Model 3 would consume as mush energy as Model S if this graph is accurate?

Yes, I am also a bit unsure about this part of consumption curve being steeper than Model S. You may be right in your explanations, but we won't know for sure until we get some Model 3 owner driving really fast (I do appreciate that 90 mph i pretty fast, though).

 

[ORB]

Hello Blincoln et. Al.,

I’ve started using A Better Route Planner on both my iPad and the Tesla browser (about to depart Needles CA for Barstow CA). Could someone please advise me on how to show the elevation profile on the iPad or Tesla browser after a route has been set?

Thanks!
ORB

 

[LCR1]

I've noticed that when planning some very long distance routes, the planner now has me stopping multiple times to charge to about 45% instead of charging to 80ish% and skipping some chargers.

 

[Peter_M]

I've noticed that when planning some very long distance routes, the planner now has me stopping multiple times to charge to about 45% instead of charging to 80ish% and skipping some chargers.

Charging more times may actually result in a shorter overall trip (even factoring in a bit of extra driving off & on the highway) because charging is faster when the battery level is lower. That's probably what's happening here.

 

[MorrisonHiker]

I've noticed that when planning some very long distance routes, the planner now has me stopping multiple times to charge to about 45% instead of charging to 80ish% and skipping some chargers.

Since the battery charges faster when it isn't as full, it is often faster to stop and charge multiple times instead of one long charge. You can try changing the Time to Open Charge Port value and see if that gives different results. If the value is small then it encourages more frequent charges. If it is larger, it might be enough to recommend one longer charge instead.

 

[LCR1]

Charging more times may actually result in a shorter overall trip (even factoring in a bit of extra driving off & on the highway) because charging is faster when the battery level is lower. That's probably what's happening here.

i figured but on my last trip plan back in december it didn't do that, I'd skip chargers all the time.

 

[LCR1]

Nevermind, I remember now. I get way better efficiency than what the planner estimates. I was getting like 320 going 75-80 so when it was running in the car so I was skipping chargers it didn't need.

 

[blincoln]

Hello Blincoln et. Al.,

I’ve started using A Better Route Planner on both my iPad and the Tesla browser (about to depart Needles CA for Barstow CA). Could someone please advise me on how to show the elevation profile on the iPad or Tesla browser after a route has been set?

Thanks!
ORB

Simple - plan a route and then click the route line. You will get a pop-up window showing elevation profile and other goodies for that leg. It may be a bit tricky to actually tap the right point on a touchscreen, though.

 

[ORB]

Blincoln,

Thank you! Clicking on the route line was the missing piece.

ORB

 

[blincoln]

Tesla browser issue is back - no lines or markers are visible on map.

Google has retired the working version of Maps, and has marked the issue Sign in - Google Accounts as won't fix.

Feel free to inform Google and/or Tesla that this needs some attention