It's perfectly normal balancing. It's actually easier to see it happening at a Supercharger where at the end you'll see the amps cycle through the low numbers 9-8, 8-7, etc.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
It's perfectly normal balancing. It's actually easier to see it happening at a Supercharger where at the end you'll see the amps cycle through the low numbers 9-8, 8-7, etc.
Didn't you report before that you have lost significant max range?
This process is exactly what will help regain those "lost" miles. On my 60 I recovered 5-6 miles (estimated) 90% range during a recent trip with multiple nearly full Supercharges, and discharging into the 20s to 40s miles several times. When you need a range charge, let it finish at least 1 1/2 hours before you leave so it can go through its entire "balancing act". Doing this a few times seems to be even more effective. I wouldn't do it without needing the range charge though, to avoid the penalty of long-term battery degradation.
According to the thread about disassembling and the guts of the battery, it seems that balancing bleeds off higher voltage cells into resistors, and the battery AC probably removes that heat. Drawing a few kW during balancing probably reflects that.
(Just my personal conclusions from reading about others' diligent work).
islandbayy
Active Member
The bleed resistors were bleeding off power from the bricks of cells that had a higher voltage, while simultaneously adding more power to bring up the voltage in the lower bricks of cells. The resistors are small, so it can take a while.
Here are my updated numbers:
216-220 Rated Miles at 90% Charge:
244-248 Rated Miles at 100% Charge:
Refurb B Battery
VIN 3236: 12/2012 28,000 Miles
I typically charge to 70% 5 days a week, and 90% two days a week.
The range in RM is because I do see the numbers creep up a bit if I do a few deep discharges several days in a row. I never get back more than a few miles though.
I was pissed at my low numbers for a long time, but finally just accepted it and stopped worrying for the most part. Still perturbed at the early advertising when I bought the car, thinking I could actually eek out 300 miles, and 265 was the WORST case scenario.
216-220 Rated Miles at 90% Charge:
244-248 Rated Miles at 100% Charge:
Refurb B Battery
VIN 3236: 12/2012 28,000 Miles
I typically charge to 70% 5 days a week, and 90% two days a week.
The range in RM is because I do see the numbers creep up a bit if I do a few deep discharges several days in a row. I never get back more than a few miles though.
I was pissed at my low numbers for a long time, but finally just accepted it and stopped worrying for the most part. Still perturbed at the early advertising when I bought the car, thinking I could actually eek out 300 miles, and 265 was the WORST case scenario.
I know some are saying that your battery is being balanced, but I don't believe that is the case. What you are describing is the end of the taper curve. Your Amps will gradually drop into the single digits as the battery fills up, and it will take a longer time towards the end. This has nothing to do with battery balancing. Tesla has said that battery balancing occurs in the background and at all charge levels, not just 100%, and it's not something that can be initiated or observed by the user.
For the sake of argument, let's assume that this is the battery pack balancing the individual cells. If true, then it only does this at 100% because that is the only time the slow charging behavior is observed. If that's true, then most Model S cars' batteries will drift way out of balance - potentially to a dangerous point - because many owners don't charge their cars to 100%. What if you NEVER charge to 100%, does that mean your cells will never balance and at some point your pack will become toast? The balancing argument doesn't make much sense if you think about it logically.
The long wait at the end is just the end of the taper curve. The reason some see a recovery of range is because the battery resistance changes more obviously as you get closer to the empty or full endpoints, so the algorithm can make better guesses when it knows the high and low endpoints.
mknox
Well-Known Member
What I had reported is that I seemed to have lost quite a few miles at 90% after having charged most of the summer to 70% each day. I would charge to 70% and end the day at about 30%, then repeat. I had heard it was best to operate the battery in the middle of its range. When I needed to go on a trip and charged to 90%, I was concerned about how much it had dropped (from 245 miles at 90% to around 218 miles). I began charging to 90% daily again and saw the miles come back to about 220, but no more.
I have charged to a full 100% a handful of times times since getting the car. It would sit at the "1 minute remaining" mark for maybe 15 or 20 minutes, but this last time it was there for between 1 and 2 hours before I decided to bail. I'm not sure if there is a relationship, but I have not been able to obtain full braking re-gen under any conditions for a few months now too. I get about 45 kW but the scale goes up to 60.
Maybe somewhere in the past 197 pages and 1966 posts someone else has had this observation, but I'll risk repeating here....
Over the past week while on vacation I left my Model S with 46,000 miles on the 50% charge level while away. Prior to this trip I'd been consistently seeing 227 miles on the 90% charge level that I use day to day.When I set the charge level back to 90% after my vacation it charged to 238 miles. This was prior to updating to Firmware 6.1.
I'll try to report back tomorrow after a second charge to 90%.
Over the past week while on vacation I left my Model S with 46,000 miles on the 50% charge level while away. Prior to this trip I'd been consistently seeing 227 miles on the 90% charge level that I use day to day.When I set the charge level back to 90% after my vacation it charged to 238 miles. This was prior to updating to Firmware 6.1.
I'll try to report back tomorrow after a second charge to 90%.
Pilot_51
Member
My experience with increased range has always been after a low SoC.
Nearly all my driving had been within about 50 miles a day. My range at 80% had dropped from about 162 miles at delivery down to 147 and appeared to settle there, until last month when I had to pick up and drop off a friend 22 miles away for 88 miles total and I intentionally didn't charge between trips. Finished the day with 37 miles. After charging back to 80%, I had 148 miles. A week or two later, I magically gained another mile.
Last week, for some reason it failed to charge overnight and I got in the car on Friday to find 62 miles (about 12 less than when I got home, mostly due to preheating), for a 46 mile round trip with temps in the teens (F). That was the first time in 7 months, since driving ICE, that I had any real range anxiety, but at least I had a backup plan to charge at a station about a mile from work if I decided I needed it. It was undoubtedly my fault entirely for not making sure it was ready to charge after plugging in, albeit because I was distracted by pulling dashcam footage of an accident that evening. I delayed a few minutes to bring it up to 67 miles and double-check with VT how much I've historically used, figuring I could make it to work and back no problem if I go into hypermile mode. Got to work without using heat (not too bad since it was preheated) with 42 miles and made it back home with 10 miles, using comfortably low heat on the last half.
After that experience, it was a no-brainer to charge to 90% during the winter when a sizable chunk of energy is lost to HVAC and friction brakes, and I don't want any range anxiety when it inevitably doesn't charge overnight again. So, I charged back to 80% since I expected another small jump in range that I wanted to log, which was 150 miles. Then on Sunday night, I set it to 90%, which has since yielded 169 miles.
Nearly all my driving had been within about 50 miles a day. My range at 80% had dropped from about 162 miles at delivery down to 147 and appeared to settle there, until last month when I had to pick up and drop off a friend 22 miles away for 88 miles total and I intentionally didn't charge between trips. Finished the day with 37 miles. After charging back to 80%, I had 148 miles. A week or two later, I magically gained another mile.
Last week, for some reason it failed to charge overnight and I got in the car on Friday to find 62 miles (about 12 less than when I got home, mostly due to preheating), for a 46 mile round trip with temps in the teens (F). That was the first time in 7 months, since driving ICE, that I had any real range anxiety, but at least I had a backup plan to charge at a station about a mile from work if I decided I needed it. It was undoubtedly my fault entirely for not making sure it was ready to charge after plugging in, albeit because I was distracted by pulling dashcam footage of an accident that evening. I delayed a few minutes to bring it up to 67 miles and double-check with VT how much I've historically used, figuring I could make it to work and back no problem if I go into hypermile mode. Got to work without using heat (not too bad since it was preheated) with 42 miles and made it back home with 10 miles, using comfortably low heat on the last half.
After that experience, it was a no-brainer to charge to 90% during the winter when a sizable chunk of energy is lost to HVAC and friction brakes, and I don't want any range anxiety when it inevitably doesn't charge overnight again. So, I charged back to 80% since I expected another small jump in range that I wanted to log, which was 150 miles. Then on Sunday night, I set it to 90%, which has since yielded 169 miles.
Well, my 90% charge was down to 229 miles rated this morning--more consistent with my norm. Appears it was a transient bump due to the week long 50% charge.
mknox
Well-Known Member
Downloaded and installed 6.1 yesterday afternoon. This morning, my 90% charge yielded 217 miles. Yesterday on 6.0 I got 218 miles and the day before that 217 miles. Once again, no "new firmware" bump for me!
EDIT: You'll notice a few posts up I mentioned creeping back up to about 220 miles at 90%. I've started charging to 60% or so on weekends again, and leaving my car at 50 or 60% when it's parked for a few days, and have seen my 90% range drop back down to to the 217 I mention above.
EDIT: You'll notice a few posts up I mentioned creeping back up to about 220 miles at 90%. I've started charging to 60% or so on weekends again, and leaving my car at 50 or 60% when it's parked for a few days, and have seen my 90% range drop back down to to the 217 I mention above.
same experience w/6.1. Had false bumps with prior updates but this time holding with all charges proportional to 265 max. Have not done full charge tho, and that will tell the tale. Have not had over 255 since mid '13. Not complaining at all just reporting. It is clear there has been a lot of messing w algorithm so hard to ever compare to other eras.
conjecture: many reports of owners with rated drops who bring in car and tesla does all the metrics and pronounces battery healthy. I think they are trying to figure out and address whatever it is that causes rated to get out of synch. Thus new behavior each release.
mknox
Well-Known Member
So why do I never see this? I have an A-pack and about 41,000 miles in case that matters. As posted above I see zero change over these firmware updates. Really curious to know why this is. I have also never seen the snowflake icon/blue bar on my power meter either even though the car may have sat unplugged at near 0 F for 8+ hours. I will have a Re-Gen Disabled message and a Power Limit line, but no snowflake. It's not a problem for me as far as I can tell, but what could possibly be different with my car???
For what it's worth I have never seen the range increase after a firmware update either.
I have only seen the range increase with a service call update. OTA updates never reset the bms in my experience so maybe a service visit is your solution.
Jaff
Active Member
Similar threads
- Question
