Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

CCS Adapter for North America

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
I believe this is the correct, by-design function, no?

The J-1772 adapter is a simple pass-through connector, there's no electronic wizardry involved--so there's no way for the EVSE to "talk" to the car beyond the J-1772 standard protocols (which do not, as far as I know, include any sort of Tesla-specific items, such as "unlatch the connector").
You are making statements bridged by incorrect assumptions.
Yes, it's a pass-through.
Yes, it is only using the standard J1772 protocols.
Unlatching the connector, though, is not a Tesla-specific function.
While plugged in, pressing that lever does send a J1772 signal through to the car that includes "stop power" and "unlatch the connector".

Inside the vehicle to "unlock charge port" is one answer; pressing & holding the "trunk" on your keyfob is another; and pressing the little black button next to the charge port (with the key in range) is another. (I think the button may not exist in earlier models??)

None of those are necessary. It's already released from the J1772 lever signal, which is why you can just grab the adapter with your other hand and pull it out while that lever is still pressed.

This is actually a good thing: would you want anyone to be able to walk up to your car, disconnect your power (which they can do*), and walk away with your adapter (which they cannot do, since it's still latched)?
That's a separate thing. That seems to be something Tesla has programmed in, to not respond to those J1772 signal commands while the car is locked/asleep.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: tps5352
@Rocky_H, that sounds like the Urban supercharger setup at 72kW using a 150kW cabinet, but using the previous 120kW cap per cabinet. Maybe they decided that for a fleet (which will always be supercharging) this was nicer on the battery?
Two purposes, I guess. That was probably a consideration, since these use cases are vehicles getting charged almost exclusively with these, so lower power might be for being a bit easier on the batteries.

Other factors may be that since these aren't for the public, they don't really have the standard Supercharger motivation of "Get done quickly and get out so the next person can use it." It probably also doesn't have idle fees turned on either. These are all being used by the same "person" (organization) who owns all the cars, so if he/she wants to leave one of the cars on there longer, that's fine. And probably no reason to slow down a secondary car.

But my thinking is another factor, that it is kind of a thing of preserving the purpose of who should use it. We already see disdain on this forum among people warning others not to use those horrible, pathetic, slow, worthless 72 kW urban Superchargers. (My exaggerated descriptions added) So if people know that these can only do 60 kW, it probably helps keep the public from wanting to go in to use these stalls that aren't supposed to be available to the public. So that probably helps with the owner not having to put up gates or restricted access maybe.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wlee and GtiMart
Your attitude isn't helping here. There is information you aren't aware of, but you are stating as an absolute (and absolutely wrong) that it can't happen. It is rare, but there are already a few of these privately owned Superchargers known to exist, where someone with a very big use case of a fleet of Tesla cars contacted Tesla and directly paid a very large amount of money (usually not specified) for Tesla to install a Supercharger site exclusively for them, for their own private use that is not open to the public.

The easiest to find an article for was a taxi service around Montreal that uses Teslas. So they got a private Supercharger site built to run their taxis. These privately owned Superchargers always seem to be capped at 60 kW per stall for some reason though.

Another private Supercharger:

Semi-private:
 
You are making statements bridged by incorrect assumptions.
You may have missed the part where I said "as far as I know"....

Unlatching the connector, though, is not a Tesla-specific function.
While plugged in, pressing that lever does send a J1772 signal through to the car that includes "stop power" and "unlatch the connector".

[The adapter staying locked in the car] a separate thing. That seems to be something Tesla has programmed in, to not respond to those J1772 signal commands while the car is locked/asleep.

So, we're saying the same thing--this is a distinction without a difference. Sending the "unlatch" from the J-1772 does not (by itself) unlatch the connector. Tesla has programmed the car to follow its own logic. This actually makes sense, since the baseline J-1772 connector releases based on the physical latch from the lever and not an internal latch on the car (which is why I'm not sure why there'd be any "unlatch" signal in the J-1772 protocol to begin with). Do native J-1772 cars (non-Teslas) have any sort of latching mechanism for the J-1772 connector??

In any case, that's not how my car works (nor, I assume, yours--but who knows what differences slipped in between your 2014 & my 2020??). If the car is unlocked AND is not charging AND your key is within range... then the charge port unlatches. Any other signals the EVSE sends may start that ball rolling (specifically the "not charging" part), but it doesn't change the requirements of all three conditions.

I honestly can't recall testing this, but from memory at least some of the J-1772 chargers I've used don't appear to have anything beyond a simple plastic lever to lift the latch. I suppose there could be a switch buried in there, but I don't think so. Perhaps that's related to how high a current the given charger uses? "Low" power ones are just a simple physical release, whereas "high" power ones include a switch? In the latter case, would "how quickly" one pulls the plug impact whatever comms the switch is handling? What's the cutoff between "high" and "low" power, or whatever other criteria decides when there's a switch?

None of those [alternate methods of opening the charge port] are necessary. It's already released from the J1772 lever signal, which is why you can just grab the adapter with your other hand and pull it out while that lever is still pressed.

That part was in response to the OP stating he had to go inside the car to use the control screen to release his port, I was listing other methods (not requiring entry). As for "just grabbing," I suspect you're seeing that with your key in your pocket. As I said earlier, there are three conditions to be met for the automatic unlatch to occur. I just verified that behavior with my Wall Connector (no immediate access to a J-1772, but no reason to think it'd be different--indeed, I think there'd be reason to believe it'd be tougher, if anything, to remove the adapter without a key).
 
Last edited:
So, we're saying the same thing--this is a distinction without a difference. Sending the "unlatch" from the J-1772 does not (by itself) unlatch the connector. Tesla has programmed the car to follow its own logic. This actually makes sense, since the baseline J-1772 connector releases based on the physical latch from the lever and not an internal latch on the car (which is why I'm not sure why there'd be any "unlatch" signal in the J-1772 protocol to begin with).
Ah, possibly so. I guess this could be just the one signal of "stop charging". And then various cars decide what other steps they might take in addition to that.

Do native J-1772 cars (non-Teslas) have any sort of latching mechanism for the J-1772 connector??
Yes, some do have a pin of some kind that comes down onto the top of that J1772 latching part to prevent it from being raised while charging is going on. Which brings up an odd situation of one-upmanship where pressing that latch button is supposed to be able to stop charging, but the car is preventing pressing the latch until you use the car controls to tell itself to stop charging.

In any case, that's not how my car works (nor, I assume, yours--but who knows what differences slipped in between your 2014 & my 2020??).
I'm not sure exactly what you mean by "that". How exactly are you thinking of this working?
If the car is unlocked AND is not charging AND your key is within range... then the charge port unlatches.
Well, there you go. That is not how mine works. Given all three of those conditions, my port stays latched. It does not just unlatch itself in those conditions. It must get some kind of signal to make it unlatch.

Any other signals the EVSE sends may start that ball rolling (specifically the "not charging" part), but it doesn't change the requirements of all three conditions.
That's why I was thinking that there may be something more to the button press signals than just "stop charging", because with the case of my car, even when it is already not charging, it's not unlatched yet until told to do so.

I honestly can't recall testing this, but from memory at least some of the J-1772 chargers I've used don't appear to have anything beyond a simple plastic lever to lift the latch. I suppose there could be a switch buried in there, but I don't think so.
It's not just a physical lever. The movement of that lever is also connected to an internal change to an electrical signal on the communication line that sends a different signal to the car. That's part of the J1772 specification.

Perhaps that's related to how high a current the given charger uses? "Low" power ones are just a simple physical release, whereas "high" power ones include a switch? In the latter case, would "how quickly" one pulls the plug impact whatever comms the switch is handling? What's the cutoff between "high" and "low" power, or whatever other criteria decides when there's a switch?
There's no high or low categories within the J1772 AC charging. They all have that communication signal button built into when the latch is pressed to send the interrupt.
That part was in response to the OP stating he had to go inside the car to use the control screen to release his port, I was listing other methods (not requiring entry). As for "just grabbing," I suspect you're seeing that with your key in your pocket.
Reread what I said though. I didn't only say "just grabbing". I said "while that lever is still pressed". Pressing that is what releases the charge port latch on my car.
As I said earlier, there are three conditions to be met for the automatic unlatch to occur.
And as I said earlier, there is no automatic unlatching on my car.
 
Yes, some do have a pin of some kind that comes down onto the top of that J1772 latching part to prevent it from being raised while charging is going on. Which brings up an odd situation of one-upmanship where pressing that latch button is supposed to be able to stop charging, but the car is preventing pressing the latch until you use the car controls to tell itself to stop charging…..

….It's not just a physical lever. The movement of that lever is also connected to an internal change to an electrical signal on the communication line that sends a different signal to the car. That's part of the J1772 specification.
Yes, there is an electrical switch that is activated when the button or lever on a J1772 plug is pushed. Aside from mechanically unlatching and allowing the plug to be removed, it also signals the charging process to stop.

Separately from the latch on the plug, there is also a motorized latch on the vehicle which is used during DC charging to prevent the plug from being removed during charging to prevent arcing during DC charging. This vehicle-side latch is thus present on all CCS-capable vehicles and is also on some J-1772 AC only vehicles such as the Nissan LEAF to optionally prevent the J-1772 connection from being unplugged (by strangers) while the vehicle is locked.

I believe the latch on the plug side and the motorized latch on the vehicle side are independent. So, for instance, during DC CCS charging you can stop the charging by pressing the latch button on the plug handle which then stops the charging and causes the vehicle latch to also be disengaged. I have personal experience with doing this on a Chevy Bolt EV.
 
  • Like
Reactions: cwerdna
I'm fine, thx, just working on defense stuff here in Kyiv...

Hello,

I would normally have questions for you about your company’s Tesla adapters.

But all that can wait.

Please be safe.

But also, please be free.

My thoughts are with you and all freedom-loving Ukranians. PREVAIL!

Tim
(I hope my government is helping.)
 
Yes, all signs are pointing to the official CCS1 combo adapter to be coming out soon(ish).

I'm willing to bet that they will do something like in South Korea where you have to supply the VIN number as your buying the adapter so they can validate that your car is installed with proper Charge Port ECU. With the official Tesla adapter, it requires you to have the newer charge port ECU since the car will natively handshake with the CCS1 station. If your car was not installed with the CCS compatible charge port ECU, the store will probably not allow you to buy the adapter and refer you to the Tesla app to setup a service appointment to have the charge port ECU retrofit installed instead.

Long story short, CCS uses a different comms protocol then the J1172 protocol (AC Charging) & Supercharging protocol (Tesla Proprietary DC Fast Charging). Since the Tesla adapter is just a mechanical adapter with no additional electronics built in, the charge port ECU has to be responsible for communicating with the charge station. This is different from how the unofficial SETEC CCS1 adapter works where it has electronics and logic built in that actively translate between the CCS protocol and Supercharger protocol. With the SETEC adapter, the car and charge station are not handshaking with each other directly, they are both handshaking with the SETEC adapter and the adapter is translating between the two protocols. Thats why the SETEC one is bigger and expensive... and is prone to breaking when Tesla would update their proprietary Supercharger comms protocol.
 
Long story short, CCS uses a different comms protocol then the J1172 protocol (AC Charging) & Supercharging protocol (Tesla Proprietary DC Fast Charging).

More precisely, CCS requires a different comms protocol than the traditional analog J1772 AC charging signaling. However, the new digital protocol can also optionally be used for AC charging if the car and the charging cable are capable of it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FalconFour
More precisely, CCS requires a different comms protocol than the traditional analog J1772 AC charging signaling. However, the new digital protocol can also optionally be used for AC charging if the car and the charging cable are capable of it.
If we want to get extremely pedantic about it (and don't we all want to contribute our own "ackshuelly" to this?), CCS actually has two modes of communication co-existing simultaneously on the same single wire: both analog J1772 just like AC charging, as well as a high-frequency RF signal (PLC) over the top of that, much like treble & bass in audio. The PLC side emulates an Ethernet equivalent, both sides have MAC addresses and IPs, and they exchange (as I understand it) XML via HTTP. All the while, the station and car are still signaling analog J1772 as well (+/-12v PWM).

Put another way, CCS is (as it actually is, in standards) just a fancy extension to AC J1772 that adds a ton more granular data. Also worth noting: the digital side is ISO 15118, which can apply to AC stations as well... if anyone had a need/reason to want to do that.

Everyone is right - though I just want to see how deeply granular we can get on this funny little ackshuelly rabbit hole ;)
 
This is different from how the unofficial SETEC CCS1 adapter works where it has electronics and logic built in that actively translate between the CCS protocol and Supercharger protocol.

And as @FalconFour said:

If we want to get extremely pedantic about it (and don't we all want to contribute our own "ackshuelly" to this?),

The unofficial SETEC CCS1 adapter translates between CCS protocol and Tesla CHAdeMO adapter protocol, not Supercharger protocol (which is why it's limited to 50kW).
 
And as @FalconFour said:



The unofficial SETEC CCS1 adapter translates between CCS protocol and Tesla CHAdeMO adapter protocol, not Supercharger protocol (which is why it's limited to 50kW).
Good to know! Thanks for clarifying. I thought it translated between CCS and their proprietary Supercharger CANBUS protocol. Didn't know it impersonated a CHAdeMO adapter. But my point is still valid, the car is not natively talking to the CCS charge station while using the SETEC adapter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: FalconFour
If we want to get extremely pedantic about it (and don't we all want to contribute our own "ackshuelly" to this?), CCS actually has two modes of communication co-existing simultaneously on the same single wire: both analog J1772 just like AC charging, as well as a high-frequency RF signal (PLC) over the top of that, much like treble & bass in audio. The PLC side emulates an Ethernet equivalent, both sides have MAC addresses and IPs, and they exchange (as I understand it) XML via HTTP. All the while, the station and car are still signaling analog J1772 as well (+/-12v PWM).

Put another way, CCS is (as it actually is, in standards) just a fancy extension to AC J1772 that adds a ton more granular data. Also worth noting: the digital side is ISO 15118, which can apply to AC stations as well... if anyone had a need/reason to want to do that.
Yeah, but I left out a bunch of those lower-level details. Actually, I’ve never read the actual ISO 15118 spec with the high-level digital protocol details because I kept waiting for it to be updated (from 2014) before paying for it. The new version keeps blowing past the document schedule.

My impression is that it does use XML but I don’t know if it is literally using HTTP is a transport layer. I don’t know. With Plug and Charge, it will also have TLS wrapped around the communications.

Once the analog signaling mode state machine is placed into digital mode my impression is that only digital communications continue and the analog signaling becomes quiescent until the digital mode is ended and it reverts to analog again. But again, I’m not an expert on the topic.