-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Battery defect for IT brainstorming BMS_u029 - P85 MS 2013
- Thread starter BIZTEam
- Start date
Amazing. lol.As is the case with this analogy, I think pretty much all BBQ is great. Unless of course you put mayo on BBQ. Then you should be arrested. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Straight to jail.
Unfortunately there's some shops out there putting mayo on BBQ. 
Should probably avoid those and stick with Texas and Carolina. 
I think it's a Bama (Alabama) thing, but I don't object to using mayo on the grill. The tartness cooks off and prevents sticking and burning which is great for fish and elote. As for me, I'm use lump charcoal and a chunk of wood for smoking in my kamado grill. I recently learned to not soak the wood beforehand and to let the initial smoke clear before smoking the food...it's less acrid and bitter. Also, can't go wrong with Korean BBQ, but sending my Tesla to Korea of battery service is completely out of the question.
As is the case with this analogy, I think pretty much all BBQ is great. Unless of course you put mayo on BBQ. Then you should be arrested. Do not pass go. Do not collect $200. Straight to jail.
Hello @Recell , in the former pics of battery modules with #29 and #18 errors/warnings, the upper left module has 46 bad cells (if I counted correctly). You are saying that the lower one with 1 bad cell is already a danger. How come the BMS hasn't flagged this 46 bad cell module earlier? Have a hard time believing that 40+ cells went bad at the exact same time.
Comments?
Thanks
Comments?
Thanks
Certainly, the purpose of the two sample modules is simply to illustrate the end cases. the module on the top left with 15 defective cells in brick #6 is clearly an outlier - it is the “worst-of-the-worst” if you will, and there’s clearly some kind of manufacturing defect in the original batch or specific environmental condition that has caused this. we may go back and look deeper into the logs at some point to see if there is anything that stands out.
What we do know about this module however, is that these issues happened over time, not all at once. this module is from a pack that had been through repetitive failure cycles, prior to the BMS_u029 error being latched, and quite possibly prior to improved detection logic, in 2022.8.4 [note: we’ll double check that revision number before anyone cites it]
(It is important to note as well that not all the cells in the module suffer from the same failure mode. some have dropped completely to 0V, others have discharged but remain stable at 2V. Again, we simply included this module because it is the “worst-of-the-worst”)
We hope that helps round out the story.
What we do know about this module however, is that these issues happened over time, not all at once. this module is from a pack that had been through repetitive failure cycles, prior to the BMS_u029 error being latched, and quite possibly prior to improved detection logic, in 2022.8.4 [note: we’ll double check that revision number before anyone cites it]
(It is important to note as well that not all the cells in the module suffer from the same failure mode. some have dropped completely to 0V, others have discharged but remain stable at 2V. Again, we simply included this module because it is the “worst-of-the-worst”)
We hope that helps round out the story.
Last edited:
Thanks @Recell for the reply. That brings some good light, especially the software better detection algorithm.
Reading through this forum I had the impression that battery packs (90KWh maybe?) up to and including 2015 builds are prone to the "8 years and 3 months" failure. Overall earlier batteries seem to be more error-prone, is it? From your experience, do you see some better reliability of packs post some build date/time? Thanks again
Reading through this forum I had the impression that battery packs (90KWh maybe?) up to and including 2015 builds are prone to the "8 years and 3 months" failure. Overall earlier batteries seem to be more error-prone, is it? From your experience, do you see some better reliability of packs post some build date/time? Thanks again
Reliability history on 2015 and newer Model S HV batteries is currently masked by still being under warranty. Therefore, any issues are being covered under warranty without any owner cost.
However as each month goes by, we are starting to hear about 2015's being affected by either BMS_u029 or BMS_u018 alerts as owners are having to pay for out of warranty HV battery replacement.
To be clear, 029 and 018 are also happening before the 8 year warranty expires. It's just we don't hear about them as much because Tesla's paying for replacement HV batteries.
Last edited:
Problem is fully reverse engineered and debunked. It is safety mechanism because battery is in defect. Repair the battery and then reset BMS.
Full procedure here.
evclinic.eu
BMS reset algo here.
evclinic.eu
Full procedure here.
S X Battery Master training operation manual #2023612001
Parasitic cell damage. Water ingress . Wiring. Crash incident / mechanical damage. Normal tear&wear BMS_f107, BMS_u025, BMS_u029, BMS_f123, BMS_f098, BMS_f097, BMS_u018 -XX Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright C
evclinic.eu
Model S and X BMS File Reset u029 u025 f107 f123
Model S and X BMS File Reset u029 u025 f107 f123
evclinic.eu
brainhouston
Active Member
What's the point of posting ur restricted links here??Problem is fully reverse engineered and debunked. It is safety mechanism because battery is in defect. Repair the battery and then reset BMS.
Full procedure here.
BMS reset algo here.S X Battery Master training operation manual #2023612001
Parasitic cell damage. Water ingress . Wiring. Crash incident / mechanical damage. Normal tear&wear BMS_f107, BMS_u025, BMS_u029, BMS_f123, BMS_f098, BMS_f097, BMS_u018 -XX Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright Copyright C
Model S and X BMS File Reset u029 u025 f107 f123
Model S and X BMS File Reset u029 u025 f107 f123
I'd be cautious using EV clinics services..
I told them already that F123/W123 (isolation errors) doesn't require reset as proven by me n few others on TMC but they still claiming it needs reset...
Which means they either don't know what they're doing or charging for unnecessary services...
How exactly is a reset "solution" still being pushed?
www.autoevolution.com
It's to the point where I think TMC might need to add some moderator notes promoting safety on posts that mention BMS_u029, or anything related to BMS resetting without proper repair.
BMS_u029 Error Reset Causes First Confirmed Blaze on a Tesla Model S
On April 25, I wrote about an appeal Jason Hughes made on Twitter. The Tesla Hacker urged people not to reset their Model S units with BMS_u029 or BMS_u0...
www.autoevolution.com
It's to the point where I think TMC might need to add some moderator notes promoting safety on posts that mention BMS_u029, or anything related to BMS resetting without proper repair.
Hi, where can i buy this device which erases the u029 error ? Is this performed via the diagnostic port or is needed fizical access to the bms board?
Don't do it. You don't want to create a fire bomb.
xAgyex
Member
I agree with you that resetting the U029 error without inspecting and fixing what caused it is dangerous. But after a battery repair is a must and Tesla toolbox doesn`t clear this error .
Similar threads
