CCS Adapter for North America

[stopcrazypp]

Good job. Thank you.



Short of side-by-side bench-top dissection, that is a strong indication that the two adapters are equivalent and quite possibly identical. The densest parts of the adapter should, of course, be made of metal--e.g., and fasteners and electrical contacts and transfer pieces. If conductive pieces were larger in the North American version, I'd like to think that it would show up as a noticeable weight difference.

Differences in labeling are puzzling, but not particularly worrisome, at this point. Explanatory speculations are offered here and by others.

I raised this issue on the third party ones also. It's kind of worthless to just have the number without knowing test conditions (how many minutes it can handle at the given current). It could easily be that the test standards are different.
CCS Adapter - ?

 

[garrett5688]

We’re approaching tin foil hat level regarding the Korean vs NA adapter…

 

[henderrj]

We’re approaching tin foil hat level regarding the Korean vs NA adapter…

We need to have someone go to a 250 KVA DCFC charge point and have them test both.

 

[Genie]

We need to have someone go to a 250 KVA DCFC charge point and have them test both.

I don”t get it. Both passive by Pegatron for Tesla, weigh the same, likely are the same. Some youtuber will no doubt test anyway for a 20 minute video.

 

[VT_EE]

I agree they are almost certainly identical. It is odd that the electrical rating is so different - 250kW at 500V would imply at least a 500A capability, and in reality considering the cars are at more like 350v when pulling 250kW, you’re talking more along the order of 700A.

It's possible Korea is more strict with the max current rating (i.e. must sustain max current for a decent amount of time as opposed to 10min). I suspect you could only pull 500amps through this adapter for a few minutes vs 30min to an hour before things get too hot.

 

[Jeremy3292]

We need to have someone go to a 250 KVA DCFC charge point and have them test both.

Well since you asked...I stopped by my local EA station today to test out the NA adapter. The EA app has apparently been down for 2 weeks per the gentleman next to me in the ID4, so EA charging is currently free. Just plug in and it starts, no tap to pay.

Since the app is down, I don't have the session charging history (which would show the peak kW I received), but I did see it on my Tesla app (and EA station screen) at 190 kW at one point. This is a 500 amp EA station with a 350 kW nameplate. I arrived around 22% SoC and preconditioned by inputting in the nav the local SuC down the road.

So it looks like it works exactly the same as the Korean adapter, which there are plenty of videos of people getting above 150 kW with.

 

[generalmilk]

I don”t get it. Both passive by Pegatron for Tesla, weigh the same, likely are the same. Some youtuber will no doubt test anyway for a 20 minute video.

Even these do not matter. The Korean one is already taking 540A maximum charging current you can find on any CCS station until the battery can’t take it. What can you even prove with NA adaptor?

 

[stopcrazypp]

Even these do not matter. The Korean one is already taking 540A maximum charging current you can find on any CCS station until the battery can’t take it. What can you even prove with NA adaptor?

If someone has the equipment, they can do a voltage drop test running high current through the adapter. They can also do a thermal test running high current and compare temperature rise. That will compare side by side if there are any resistance or thermal differences between the two.

 

[generalmilk]

If someone has the equipment, they can do a voltage drop test running high current through the adapter. They can also do a thermal test running high current and compare temperature rise. That will compare side by side if there are any resistance or thermal differences between the two.

Anyone with such a powerful equipment probably knows better not doing this trivial test

 

[stopcrazypp]

Anyone with such a powerful equipment probably knows better not doing this trivial test

That "trivial" test was likely done to establish the ratings put on the adapter. The problem is we don't know the test conditions and criteria. The same question can be asked about third party adapters.

The fact of the matter is the two ratings are not consistent. One is only 300A. The other is 250kW, which suggests 500A even at 500V (which is higher than the packs charge at, so that suggests even higher current).

Note, the current Tesla cars are not even close to maxing out the connection (there are CCS cars that can charge at high currents for longer than Teslas). I imagine the Cybertruck would be Tesla vehicle that will push the limits and maintain high current for longer. Keep in mind this is just getting started, we have a long road ahead for vehicle changes.

 

[cwerdna]

Although there are reports on Plugshare of free EA juice ending, others have reported it's still going on/back. I can confirm (posted at Electrify America complimentary sessions (stations set...) it was still free (or back to it) at a site in the SF Bay Area.

So, if you have a CCS adapter and you happen to pass by an EA site, you might want to check to see if it's showing complimentary session. If it shows that, don't use their app, CC or NFC to start a session. Just plug in.

 

[norcalbowler94]

We need to have someone go to a 250 KVA DCFC charge point and have them test both.

I1Tesla

Not the factory one but close

 

[generalmilk]

That "trivial" test was likely done to establish the ratings put on the adapter. The problem is we don't know the test conditions and criteria. The same question can be asked about third party adapters.

The fact of the matter is the two ratings are not consistent. One is only 300A. The other is 250kW, which suggests 500A even at 500V (which is higher than the packs charge at, so that suggests even higher current).

Note, the current Tesla cars are not even close to maxing out the connection (there are CCS cars that can charge at high currents for longer than Teslas). I imagine the Cybertruck would be Tesla vehicle that will push the limits and maintain high current for longer. Keep in mind this is just getting started, we have a long road ahead for vehicle changes.

It’s trivial because such a person knows to trust physical evidence than a useless sticker. It’s 99.99% the same thing, one with conservative rating one without. How the hell can you make two connectors of same shape with vastly different rating yet landed at less than 0.03% weight difference!

Cars charging at high power rate for longer than tesla may not charge at high current, more often than not they are charging at much lower current than Tesla. They use high (800v) voltage instead.

 

[Randy-12]

I have an under seat drawer under the driver seat. Both CCS and J1772 adapters lie in there. Just remember to push it back before stepping on them (did a few times at the beginning).

Do you have a picture of this drawer or link to it?

 

[DeepBlueMN]

It’s trivial because such a person knows to trust physical evidence than a useless sticker. It’s 99.99% the same thing, one with conservative rating one without. How the hell can you make two connectors of same shape with vastly different rating yet landed at less than 0.03% weight difference!

Cars charging at high power rate for longer than tesla may not charge at high current, more often than not they are charging at much lower current than Tesla. They use high (800v) voltage instead.

Yep, agreed, it is simply an arbitrary labeling choice (maybe even accidental). There is too much over-thinking going here. The evidence so far points to both adapters are the exact same thing. Any further testing will simply be skewed by other environmental factors (And therefore useless).
Just enjoy that we have an easy choice now (Finally).

 

[Jeremy3292]

Yep, agreed, it is simply an arbitrary labeling choice (maybe even accidental). There is too much over-thinking going here. The evidence so far points to both adapters are the exact same thing. Any further testing will simply be skewed by other environmental factors (And therefore useless).
Just enjoy that we have an easy choice now (Finally).

Additionally, if the label on the Korean adapter was indeed factually correct, then how did anyone get above 120 kW with the adapter then? It says "300 amps" on the sticker and you can't pull more than 400 volts on a M3/MY (slightly more with MS). 400 volts x 300 amps = 120 kW at best. There are numerous YouTube videos of people pulling 200 kW. My Korean adapter wasn't even warm when I was pulling over 120 kW.

 

[pb2000]

300A is the continuous power rating, so the peak is probably higher, similar to superchargers; V3 connectors are rated for 350A continuous 631A peak

 

[israndy]

Although there are reports on Plugshare of free EA juice ending, others have reported it's still going on/back. I can confirm (posted at Electrify America complimentary sessions (stations set...) it was still free (or back to it) at a site in the SF Bay Area.

So, if you have a CCS adapter and you happen to pass by an EA site, you might want to check to see if it's showing complimentary session. If it shows that, don't use their app, CC or NFC to start a session. Just plug in.

Please post this to:
Electrify America Complementary Session Check-in

One thread to rule them all, so we don't have to rely on the Bolt site

An aside, I was doing a search yesterday and saw a thread titled Bolt vs Semi and I was so excited to read the EV comparison, boy was I surprised where it took me.

 

[stopcrazypp]

It’s trivial because such a person knows to trust physical evidence than a useless sticker. It’s 99.99% the same thing, one with conservative rating one without. How the hell can you make two connectors of same shape with vastly different rating yet landed at less than 0.03% weight difference!

Cars charging at high power rate for longer than tesla may not charge at high current, more often than not they are charging at much lower current than Tesla. They use high (800v) voltage instead.

I agree it's likely the same, but that's different from empirical testing. At the very least it will answer questions of how many minutes the adapter can withstand at the two given ratings.

 

[Jeff N]

Additionally, if the label on the Korean adapter was indeed factually correct, then how did anyone get above 120 kW with the adapter then? It says "300 amps" on the sticker and you can't pull more than 400 volts on a M3/MY (slightly more with MS). 400 volts x 300 amps = 120 kW at best. There are numerous YouTube videos of people pulling 200 kW. My Korean adapter wasn't even warm when I was pulling over 120 kW.

The adapter is passive so it is the car and charger that normally limit the current and total power used during charging.

Tesla cars will happily pull 500A at low states of charge with proper pre-conditioning which is the peak limit for almost all existing CCS chargers (one CCS model can now apparently put out 540A).

The new 250 kW is probably just meant to imply 500A x 500V. The kW figure isn’t really relevant to the operating conditions of the adapter itself, only the ~500A current is at issue since that is what generates heat during charging and all existing Teslas charge at under 500V.

I have used my Tesla Korea OEM adapter, with its putative 300A rating, to charge at 350 kW labeled chargers that pulled 500A and reached ~184 kW on my Model Y LR even at ~100F on sun-baked afternoons in Nevada. After a minute or two of charging at around 180 kW, the power dropped to near 100 kW for awhile and then returned to around 150 kW before settling into the usual Model Y Supercharger charging curve. This strongly implies that the charger and/or the car measured excess heat at the adapter and temporarily reduced the charging current. Such thermocouples are widely thought to exist in the CCS plug and in the Tesla charging inlet to allow the measurement of temperatures at the charge pins.

Any thermal protections built into the adapter itself would work by entirely disconnecting the circuit (perhaps permanently with a fuse) and so never came into play. The adapter protection would be there as a fallback to prevent catastrophic failures.

If future CCS chargers begin to support output well above 540A or Tesla begins to deliver cars that charge well above 500V then the car itself might have to limit CCS charging to 500V and 500A to avoid exceeding the real capabilities of the passive adapters that people are using.