Can 120kW Superchargers be “retrofitted” to lower watt “Urban” style Superchargers?

[nwdiver]

Actually, I do get it. And I get your points too. My point is your first one, and that is the guy who arrives and gets 25kW, who is otherwise capable of getting much more. This is incredibly common at these congested chargers, pretty much a guarantee, and almost unheard of to arrive and get more than 72.

But you're ignoring the car that's at ~70% SOC and can only charge at ~40kW; if that car is sharing with a low SOC car at a standard SC ~32kW can go to charging its neighbor at ~100kW. At an urban SC that energy just isn't delivered. In terms of getting more cars through the supercharger there's no advantage to an urban SC.

 

[Saghost]

Actually, I do get it. And I get your points too. My point is your first one, and that is the guy who arrives and gets 25kW, who is otherwise capable of getting much more. This is incredibly common at these congested chargers, pretty much a guarantee, and almost unheard of to arrive and get more than 72.

While this is true, it isn't the whole picture, or even the important part. If the car that arrives only gets 25 kW, that means someone else is getting ~120 kW from the paired charger.

The shared set delivers more total power to cars in a lot of conditions, and I don't think there's any circumstance where it delivers less power.

That means in a place where the bays are routinely full, the shared sets gets more people on the way faster with a higher state of charge overall, despite the cases where a car plugging in only gets 25 kW to start with.

 

[nwdiver]

While this is true, it isn't the whole picture, or even the important part. If the car that arrives only gets 25 kW, that means someone else is getting ~120 kW from the paired charger.

The shared set delivers more total power to cars in a lot of conditions, and I don't think there's any circumstance where it delivers less power.

That means in a place where the bays are routinely full, the shared sets gets more people on the way faster with a higher state of charge overall, despite the cases where a car plugging in only gets 25 kW to start with.

Yep; Math

 

[eladts]

Yep; Math

The urban supercharger have two advantages:

1. They are cheaper to built, because the wires need to deliver 72kW instead of 120kW.
2. The give a more consistent charging time.

While it should be technically possible to convert a 120kW supercharger to a 72kW one, this usually makes no sense as:

1. Tesla has already paid the higher cost.
2. Consistency only matters in places where people do shopping etc. On a highway supercharger you want to be able to get out ASAP.

 

[nwdiver]

The urban supercharger have two advantages:

1. They are cheaper to built, because the wires need to deliver 72kW instead of 120kW.
2. The give a more consistent charging time.

While it should be technically possible to convert a 120kW supercharger to a 72kW one, this usually makes no sense asL

1. Tesla has already paid the higher cost.
2. Consistency only matters in places where people do shopping etc. On a highway supercharger you want to be able to get out ASAP.

True....

In terms of getting more cars through the supercharger there's no advantage to an urban SC.

 

[4SUPER9]

Yes, the math is correct in getting more people through a supercharger. I have no argument with that. Globally, this makes sense. The point I am trying to make is that if one was to arrive at a busy supercharger, likely actually waiting in line, it is basically a crap shoot as to whether one would pair with someone who has also just started charging and grabs all the juice, or if they are nearing completion. Still, I agree with you. Math is math, and your position still holds true. Where the math fails is that you are assuming that each new person wants to stay long enough to take advantage of the ramp up in juice as the paired vehicle tapers down. That is not always the case. Typically, I want just enough to make it to my next destination. I may only want to charge for 15 minutes. If I arrive at a Urban stall and start off at 72kW (or higher if I am lucky enough to grab a classic paired stall, with someone near the end) I can get on my way quickly. If I arrive to only 25kW, I will be there much longer than I wanted.

 

[Saghost]

Yes, the math is correct in getting more people through a supercharger. I have no argument with that. Globally, this makes sense. The point I am trying to make is that if one was to arrive at a busy supercharger, likely actually waiting in line, it is basically a crap shoot as to whether one would pair with someone who has also just started charging and grabs all the juice, or if they are nearing completion. Still, I agree with you. Math is math, and your position still holds true. Where the math fails is that you are assuming that each new person wants to stay long enough to take advantage of the ramp up in juice as the paired vehicle tapers down. That is not always the case. Typically, I want just enough to make it to my next destination. I may only want to charge for 15 minutes. If I arrive at a Urban stall and start off at 72kW (or higher if I am lucky enough to grab a classic paired stall, with someone near the end) I can get on my way quickly. If I arrive to only 25kW, I will be there much longer than I wanted.

Statistically, your average charge rate should still be higher on the paired system, even for your fifteen minute charge.

There is a lot more variability in the paired outcome, though. With the 72 kW system, the result of fifteen minutes of charging should be very predictable unless there's a site issue or a battery temperature problem. With the paired set, you'll usually get more, but sometimes get less.

 

[nwdiver]

Yes, the math is correct in getting more people through a supercharger. I have no argument with that. Globally, this makes sense. The point I am trying to make is that if one was to arrive at a busy supercharger, likely actually waiting in line, it is basically a crap shoot as to whether one would pair with someone who has also just started charging and grabs all the juice, or if they are nearing completion. Still, I agree with you. Math is math, and your position still holds true. Where the math fails is that you are assuming that each new person wants to stay long enough to take advantage of the ramp up in juice as the paired vehicle tapers down. That is not always the case. Typically, I want just enough to make it to my next destination. I may only want to charge for 15 minutes. If I arrive at a Urban stall and start off at 72kW (or higher if I am lucky enough to grab a classic paired stall, with someone near the end) I can get on my way quickly. If I arrive to only 25kW, I will be there much longer than I wanted.

If you decrease the throughput to increase the consistency you're also increasing the probability there will be a line... especially if you see the advantage of this being at congested sites. Which would you prefer? 3rd in line or charging at 20kW for the first 10 minutes?

 

[Rocky_H]

If you decrease the throughput to increase the consistency you're also increasing the probability there will be a line... especially if you see the advantage of this being at congested sites. Which would you prefer? 3rd in line or charging at 20kW for the first 10 minutes?

Yeah, I think people are focused on how their rate would be slow if they are the secondary car, but they are forgetting that if the first car gets to have 100kW instead of 72kW, they get done and out of the way faster.

 

[David99]

Yeah, I think people are focused on how their rate would be slow if they are the secondary car, but they are forgetting that if the first car gets to have 100kW instead of 72kW, they get done and out of the way faster.

Bingo! That's what people forgot. If the other (paired) car is done charging faster because they got the faster rate, it means they will leave earlier and you get the full power. Possibly more than the 72 kW, meaning you are not waiting any longer than had you gotten 72 from the start.

My theory about the urban charger is they decided to do the 72 kW hard split to limit the max rate which is better for battery life. They expect the urban chargers to be used lot more than travel superchargers.

 

[MP3Mike]

My theory about the urban charger is they decided to do the 72 kW hard split to limit the max rate which is better for battery life. They expect the urban chargers to be used lot more than travel superchargers.

I think it is partly that, and partly because they can use cheaper wire, making the installation cost lower. The connector on the stalls might last longer and require fewer replacements as well.

 

[GWord]

Actually, that's not always true. Some locations, such as Estes Park, have an odd number of Supercharger stalls.

This is the best. I love getting the unpaired stall where available. It's like getting an extra candy bar from the vending machine.

 

[David99]

I think it is partly that, and partly because they can use cheaper wire, making the installation cost lower. The connector on the stalls might last longer and require fewer replacements as well.

The cables and handles/plugs seem to be the same size/thickness as the normal Superchargers.

 

[Saghost]

The cables and handles/plugs seem to be the same size/thickness as the normal Superchargers.

Are you sure? I've only been to one city charger, but it seemed noticeably slimmer and more flexible to me. I didn't measure either one, though.

 

[MP3Mike]

The cables and handles/plugs seem to be the same size/thickness as the normal Superchargers.

Exactly but passing less current that generates less heat. So they might last longer.

 

[mociaf9]

To help answer the original question instead of chasing the monkeys/weasels around the mulberry bush... While I can't state categorically that the two types of Supercharger cabinets are materially different inside, Tesla does mark them differently and they have different part numbers. So, my guess is that there is some actual difference internally, though it could be small enough to allow "retrofitting". See attached picture of a Urban Supercharger cabinet sticker tag from the Victoria, BC thread (originally sourced from reddit). And recently from the Santa Ana, CA thread @Ed Trotter posted the picture of the spec sheet for a new "temporary" or "mobile" urban supercharger pallet which presumably has the same type of cabinet--

• the full TPN (Tesla Part Number) is the same on both: 1133063--00--A (Part #--?--Revision?)
• both say: "Cabinet, UC, SC, 072x2" (Cabinet, Urban Charger?, Super Charger?, feeds 2 charging posts at 72kWmax dedicated).

Searching for the same info for "Traditional" SCs, I did a by google image search of the first spec sheet and found a pic of a similar one on chargemap.com for a site in the UK, then searched the TPN from that and found a set of plans for the install of the Supercharger station in Madison, WI @ 3801 East Washington Avenue; which included the Tesla Part Numbers for the various hardware being installed (screencapped the relevant portion).

• Tesla Part Number for a traditional supercharger in WI: 1033026--04--E
• TPN for SC cabinet at Royal Vic. Docks: 1033026--01--B
  
• The UK SC spec sheet says: ASY, SUPERCHARGER, GEN II, 135KW, EU, CE

My overall impression is that if Tesla wanted to change a Traditional SC into an Urban SC, they would have to switch out the cabinets as well as the charging posts. The former to enable proper operation and the latter to avoid confusing their customers.

 

[4SUPER9]

To help answer the original question instead of chasing the monkeys/weasels around the mulberry bush... While I can't state categorically that the two types of Supercharger cabinets are materially different inside, Tesla does mark them differently and they have different part numbers. So, my guess is that there is some actual difference internally, though it could be small enough to allow "retrofitting". See attached picture of a Urban Supercharger cabinet sticker tag from the Victoria, BC thread (originally sourced from reddit). And recently from the Santa Ana, CA thread @Ed Trotter posted the picture of the spec sheet for a new "temporary" or "mobile" urban supercharger pallet which presumably has the same type of cabinet--

• the full TPN (Tesla Part Number) is the same on both: 1133063--00--A (Part #--?--Revision?)
• both say: "Cabinet, UC, SC, 072x2" (Cabinet, Urban Charger?, Super Charger?, feeds 2 charging posts at 72kWmax dedicated).

Searching for the same info for "Traditional" SCs, I did a by google image search of the first spec sheet and found a pic of a similar one on chargemap.com for a site in the UK, then searched the TPN from that and found a set of plans for the install of the Supercharger station in Madison, WI @ 3801 East Washington Avenue; which included the Tesla Part Numbers for the various hardware being installed (screencapped the relevant portion).

• Tesla Part Number for a traditional supercharger in WI: 1033026--04--E
• TPN for SC cabinet at Royal Vic. Docks: 1033026--01--B
  
• The UK SC spec sheet says: ASY, SUPERCHARGER, GEN II, 135KW, EU, CE

My overall impression is that if Tesla wanted to change a Traditional SC into an Urban SC, they would have to switch out the cabinets as well as the charging posts. The former to enable proper operation and the latter to avoid confusing their customers.

Best and most educated response of this thread. Thank you.