Another Nifty tool! - This time for better range/charging estimates

[Khan3]

So I've been reading a lot of posts around battery charging, car range and long term battery life, so I decided to put together a tool to better help understand how that all works together. It's been eye opening. Started off by looking at the range and charging data on the Tesla website. Since I had no other data source I decided to use those numbers as a base and then scale them to the range characteristics of the Model 3 (assumption is that the batteries should behave similarly or better, but be scaled to the new dimensions and weight of the Model 3). I fit the resulting behavior curves to match all the public data that Tesla has released about the car range and charging and the results look reasonable.

Also found more data on forums about impact of driving style (high acceleration high octane driving) on estimated range complete with crowdsourced watt-hours per mile, and also found another very detailed crowdsourced google spreadsheet of battery degradation over time. Seems it would be useful to think ahead about what future range the car battery will have down the line, especially based on my driving style and volume of driving the owner does with the car.

Take a look at the link below and give me any feedback you have. Thanks.

model3guru . com / charge-estimates

model3guru.com/charge-estimates

 

[C141medic]

Thanks again for these informative tools. Can you include the amount of time to charge based on specific amperage of the "charger" installed. Ie, I have a 240V 32A Leviton that I had purchased for a Leaf. Would like to see charging estimates for higher amp. units.

 

[Khan3]

In terms of higher amp units, Model 3 hardware is limited to 32A charging on the 220 mile model and 40A charging for the 310 mile model. The NEMA plugs i have on the page right now represent those available options. I will update the labels to show this better. Only higher option would be supercharger which has the advantage of being able to charge at a higher voltage (with same current limitations) and produces a faster charge.

 

[T34ME]

Very useful tool and fun to play with! Thank you. I have a couple of comments.

- I suspect that EPA range is based on 18" wheels using the aero wheel covers. So range would depend on combination used. Therefore, 19" wheels would be range - 8%. Nobody knows for sure right now how EPA was configured so your guess is as good as mine.

- Your algorithm is based on the Model S. I think there might be some efficiencies in the Model 3 (like less weight, lower Cd, etc.) that may have a positive effect on range at higher speeds, for example.

I understand that your site is a work in progress and can be updated as we learn more about the 3 in the weeks and months ahead. Keep up the good work.

 

[Gtosnipey]

So I've been reading a lot of posts around battery charging, car range and long term battery life, so I decided to put together a tool to better help understand how that all works together. It's been eye opening. Started off by looking at the range and charging data on the Tesla website. Since I had no other data source I decided to use those numbers as a base and then scale them to the range characteristics of the Model 3 (assumption is that the batteries should behave similarly or better, but be scaled to the new dimensions and weight of the Model 3). I fit the resulting behavior curves to match all the public data that Tesla has released about the car range and charging and the results look reasonable.

Also found more data on forums about impact of driving style (high acceleration high octane driving) on estimated range complete with crowdsourced watt-hours per mile, and also found another very detailed crowdsourced google spreadsheet of battery degradation over time. Seems it would be useful to think ahead about what future range the car battery will have down the line, especially based on my driving style and volume of driving the owner does with the car.

Take a look at the link below and give me any feedback you have. Thanks.

model3guru . com / charge-estimates

model3guru.com/charge-estimates

You, sir, are the man I definitely appreciate all of the tools you put together. They are all bookmarked in a little "Tesla" folder in my browser, thank you again! I will definitely be playing with these options. Definitely, will give us all a better sense of what to expect!

 

[Chewy3]

I like it! However you may want to change the 310m model from 'First Production' to 'Long Range', I realize you most likely re-used that portion from the cost estimator, but it makes more sense to call it what it is vs production order.

Thanks for making these!

 

[Khan3]

Thanks for all the great feedback. I'll update the thread as I make the requested updates.

So far:
- Updated chargers to indicate - Voltage, Amperage
- Fixed 310 mile version to read "Long Range Battery" instead of "First Production"

 

[Dr. J]

@Khan3, this is cool! I'm a newbie, so I may be completely off in questioning your assumptions (below).

1. Shouldn't the 40A charging be listed as NEMA 14-50 (i.e., you get 80% of the rated amps), and so on? I also thought this was a dryer plug, but I guess most people call it a "campground" outlet.

2. I expected the EPA rated mileage to be associated with a lower avg. driving speed than 65 mph, climate control OFF, and 18" Aero wheels (which I believe is closer to the EPA test conditions). However, if your numbers are right, this is a phenomenal car!

Thanks for putting this together.

 

[Sportstick]

Very interesting tool. I note you allow variables for speed and driving style. But, can you consider that an average speed could be cruising on suburban roads or the result of repeated accel/decel in stop-and-go traffic, likely with different results overcoming intertia. Could you develop a variable for traffic conditions?
- Light, relatively constant throttle
- Heavy, repeating accel/start-decel/stop

 

[Khan3]

@Dr. J , @T34ME - Based on the data on Tesla's model S range page, I verified that "standard conditions" matched range for :

Driving Speed = 65 mph
Outside Temparature = 70 F
Climate control = ON

Until Tesla releases more data I have no definitive way to confirm if the aero wheels are included in the Model 3 EPA estimate (i also looked through all 12 pages of the EPA filing, but couldn't find anything in there related to tires).

That said I suspected that since the "aero" wheels are actually just special covers on top of regular 18" tires, I'm not sure EPA rating would allow the use of such "props" to boost ranges (imagine all the other such external "props" car manufacturers could employ to boost their numbers if this was allowed)

I also think it would be somewhat deceptive advertising for Tesla to advertise "aero-assisted" ranges and offer upgrades to non-aero wheels which reduce that range - especially without explicitly indicating this.

If anyone has access to any additional information about the above please let me know and I can update

 

[Khan3]

@Sportstick , the driving style is meant to embody what you described. Rapid acceleration/deceleration would fall into the "aggressive" driving style. Note that we capture two metrics - speed and driving style. You can drive at lower average speeds like 40 mph , but do so aggressively. The lower speed would boost range, but the rapid acceleration would cost you range. Both factors are accounted for independently.

Light relatively constant throttle matches the "passive" driving style - and is a real range saver.

One thing i wonder is if I'll be able to switch from my usual aggressive driving style when i'm doing city driving and tone down to passive when i need to do the long trip from dallas to houston ..... only time will tell

 

[KarenRei]

Hmm... I don't think you're handling plugs right. I just tested one of your NEMA plugs, and I don't think you're taking into account that voltages averages slightly below nominal, that maximum sustained current is 80% of nominal, and that there's parasitic loads in charging, which have more impact the slower speed you charge at. And then I see no signs of internal charging losses. What is your algorithm, really?

 

[Sportstick]

@Sportstick , the driving style is meant to embody what you described. Rapid acceleration/deceleration would fall into the "aggressive" driving style. Note that we capture two metrics - speed and driving style. You can drive at lower average speeds like 40 mph , but do so aggressively. The lower speed would boost range, but the rapid acceleration would cost you range. Both factors are accounted for independently.

Light relatively constant throttle matches the "passive" driving style - and is a real range saver.

One thing i wonder is if I'll be able to switch from my usual aggressive driving style when i'm doing city driving and tone down to passive when i need to do the long trip from dallas to houston ..... only time will tell

Actually, there is still a difference to consider. There is a difference between "repeating" and "aggressive". One can manage heavy traffic with repeated throttle applications with a light or a heavy foot. These two dimensions can be matrixed against each other:

Light traffic/cruising, gentle driving style (constant throttle pressure)
Light traffic/cruising, aggressive driving style (more throttle variation into turns, passing, etc.)
Heavy traffic/repeated accel, gentle driving style ("eggshell" throttle technique [does driver ed still teach this?] for each accel)
Heavy traffic/repeated accel, aggressive driving style (heavy throttle application for each accel - carsick bags needed)

 

[ahagge]

Very useful tool and fun to play with! Thank you. I have a couple of comments.

- I suspect that EPA range is based on 18" wheels using the aero wheel covers. So range would depend on combination used. Therefore, 19" wheels would be range - 8%. Nobody knows for sure right now how EPA was configured so your guess is as good as mine.

Based on what I've been reading, I concur - I think Telsa used the aero wheel covers for their testing, as that will be the "standard" wheel for the Model 3. So the 19" wheels should be a range decrease.

Definitely an informative page - I look forward to increasing accuracy as we all learn more.

 

[T34ME]

That said I suspected that since the "aero" wheels are actually just special covers on top of regular 18" tires, I'm not sure EPA rating would allow the use of such "props" to boost ranges (imagine all the other such external "props" car manufacturers could employ to boost their numbers if this was allowed)

I also think it would be somewhat deceptive advertising for Tesla to advertise "aero-assisted" ranges and offer upgrades to non-aero wheels which reduce that range - especially without explicitly indicating this.

@Khan3 you could very well be right. The only reason I throw that out there is because Prius ICE had aero wheel covers for their base 15" wheels and their EPA range was based on using those base wheels with wheel covers. I don't think it was specifically stated anywhere that EPA range was based on using the wheel covers. Some Prius owners have been disappointed with their ICE mpg when they removed the wheel covers. Perhaps Toyota was being deceptive but it is not unprecedented. I would prefer that Tesla put a disclaimer that says, "EPA estimates based on 18" standard wheels with wheel covers installed" - if that is indeed the case.

 

[ahagge]

Sorry, one other thing - the charge time estimate for 120v, 15A wall plug charging is way off. Level 1 in the US gives about 1.5 kW per hour (they usually don't pull more than about 13A, to avoid tripping 15A breakers), so a full charge of a 75 kWh pack will take about 50 hours, not 17.2.

 

[Khan3]

Thanks for all the feedback, especially concerning the charger types, power ratings and times. I've reviewed the models and found and corrected my reference curve and scaling factors so that this should reflect correctly now for all the issues that were identified above. Also tried to update the options to make them clearer to understand.

Please take a look and see if you still see issues. I'll make a post below to explain the logic behind the charging time logic

 

[Khan3]

One fix that is left - removing the 240v, 40A option when the 220 mile Model 3 is selected ... because that version is unable to charge at 40A. I'll update that.

 

[Khan3]

Fixed the remaining issue to hide the 240V, 40A charger option when the 220 mile M3 is selected.
Let me know if you guys see anything else that needs fixing. Thx.

 

[JoeCoolMan24]

877 miles in the perfect situation? Wow, can that be accurate? Even with my actual choices, it has be pegged at like 260 miles.