Do you know that you must keep your battery charged?

[the scrub]

Yup, IMO this thread has it all. We've been through sadness, frustration, amazement, insults, speculation, manic laughter, boredom and espionage. Maybe there should be an "Oscar" for best thread?

P.S. As it seems we're now heading towards conspiracy theories....I just realized that *MPT* started the thread and and if you say that quickly it sounds like "empty", as in empty battery?

If this is going to win an Oscar, it needs a love interest and some conspiratorial tie in to 9/11 or WW2.

I would also probably need to be able to correct the embarrassing typos in my post.

 

[the scrub]

er... quite.

But you never said, did you know you must keep your battery charged?

I don't own one, but I would never leave my $100,000 EV sitting in a garage somewhere without RTFM.

Also, I have a law degree, so I am anal retentive about reading the stuff I am asked to sign. I am even more suspicious of the things I am asked to initial that are contained in a document I am also asked to sign. The implication there is that the drafting attorneys thought certain aspects of the document were so freaking important that they did not even want the signatory to claim that it was boilerplate and, by extension, may end up being a contract of adhesion and get thrown out. Hard to claim you "didn't know what you were signing" when your initials appear next a clause that was probably read to you by the person that handed you the paper.

 

[NigelM]

I would also probably need to be able to correct the embarrassing typos in my post.

I did wonder if some secret agency had deleted point #4.?

 

[Norbert]

The documents clearly state that at 21% SoC the car goes into idle mode when parked due to not being plugged in. From this point SoC continues to decline. Pumps and fans continue to operate as intended to maintain optimal storage temperature, while SoC is declining..

It has nothing to do with 21% specifically, that's just the level at which it was parked in this case. "Idle mode" just means that it is not plugged in and does not charge.

Pumps and fans stopping is not mentioned, which implies that they continue to operate until the battery dies. No matter how you twist the words they cannot possibly have stopped earlier than the next date listed, when SoC is 4 percent.

That's just your personal expectation and speculation, certainly not something that was "clearly shown", and I didn't interpret it in that way in the first place. It's left open, especially since the document mentions a "threshold" at 4%, at least twice.

To me this is absolutely crystal clear, but I'm beginning to understand why lawyers are useful when you need to write a contract, Norbert...

To me it suggests that there is a threshold at 4% where the behavior changes, and the letter does not attempt to answer the questions you are asking, for example whether the pump continues at 4%. It never says anything about the pump "continuing" at any point. Certainly at some point the pump must have stopped, and that point just isn't specified. I have no idea where you get the impression that some kind of "continuation" is implied. That is left open, and I think you are simply reading into it what your own expectation is. The letter only clarifies that this specific Roadster operated even better than what was described in the user manual.

Tesla has not promised any special behavior at low SOC, and it avoids making such a promise in this letter, but it also doesn't state the opposite. It isn't the subject of the letter. In this regard, there really isn't anything "absolutely crystal clear". Is there ever?

 

[the scrub]

I did wonder if some secret agency had deleted point #4.?

Probably the Chevy Volt people trying to sabotage my post.

I keed I keed.

Seriously though, I am getting ready to go to work, so now would be a great time for people to pile on and call me names because I will be unable to respond for several hours. Thanks for giving me an opportunity to join and defend myself, Tesla people.

 

[qwk]

Probably the Chevy Volt people trying to sabotage my post.

I keed I keed.

Seriously though, I am getting ready to go to work, so now would be a great time for people to pile on and call me names because I will be unable to respond for several hours. Thanks for giving me an opportunity to join and defend myself, Tesla people.

I find your posts rather interesting. I don't think many here are going to be calling you names because a lot of the info is supported by facts, and not just some random bs.

 

[doug]

I would also probably need to be able to correct the embarrassing typos in my post.

You are free to edit your own posts.

 

[eledille]

It has nothing to do with 21% specifically, that's just the level at which it was parked in this case. "Idle mode" just means that it is not plugged in and does not charge.

Sorry, I wasn't making myself clear. I should have written the following:

The document clearly states that:

• At 21% SoC the car goes into idle mode when parked due to not being plugged in.
• From this point SoC continues to decline.
• Pump and fan continue to operate as intended to maintain optimal storage temperature, while SoC is declining.

specially since the document mentions a "threshold" at 4%, at least twice.

To me it suggests that there is a threshold at 4% where the behavior changes, and the letter does not attempt to answer the questions you are asking, for example whether the pump continues at 4%.

That 4% SoC threshold is just the point where the car intensifies its warnings.

It never says anything about the pump "continuing" at any point. Certainly at some point the pump must have stopped, and that point just isn't specified. I have no idea where you get the impression that some kind of "continuation" is implied. That is left open, and I think you are simply reading into it what your own expectation is.

The document contains a technical description of the sequence of events that lead to the failure of a piece of equipment. If an entry describes a component as "continuing to operate" and there is no subsequent mention of that component, then it operated throughout.

I'm not going to discuss this any further.

 

[Norbert]

Sorry, I wasn't making myself clear. I should have written the following:

The document clearly states that:

• At 21% SoC the car goes into idle mode when parked due to not being plugged in.
• From this point SoC continues to decline.
• Pump and fan continue to operate as intended to maintain optimal storage temperature, while SoC is declining.

.

That's within the entry for November 22nd. There is no mention of the fans or any other "continuation" at December 28th or further on. And on November 22nd, "continue to operate" means only that entering the idle mode has not stopped the pump from coming on whenever needed to maintain the temperature. It would be (in my opinion) reasonable to assume that this continued until December 28th, but not more than that, in so far as this letter is concerned.

That 4% SoC threshold is just the point where the car intensifies its warnings.

That's all the letter mentions directly, but it doesn't say that's all that happens at that point. Anything else is pure speculation, and you are overstating what can be said based on the letter.

The document contains a technical description of the sequence of events that lead to the failure of a piece of equipment. If an entry describes a component as "continuing to operate" and there is no subsequent mention of that component, then it operated throughout.

Throughout what? Perhaps throughout its intended time of operation, if there were such a commonly known mode of operation, but as far as I know it doesn't say anywhere what the intended operation is, that's just your personal expectation. In absence of that, we can only make an assumption for the duration of the November 22nd entry [until Decmber 28th], but even that is more than the letter "clearly" says.

 

[stopcrazypp]

The document contains a technical description of the sequence of events that lead to the failure of a piece of equipment. If an entry describes a component as "continuing to operate" and there is no subsequent mention of that component, then it operated throughout.

I'm not going to discuss this any further.

I know you don't want to discuss this further.

But the document only provides enough information to show that it was working as specified by the manual. It doesn't provide much information beyond that. For example, it mentions the logging stopped at 250V pack voltage, but never mentions what else is stopped (I'm pretty sure the logging was not the only thing that stopped). It also says "Both the fan and coolant pump continue to operate as needed," but never specifies the conditions under which it operates (it certainly doesn't run continuously). So I don't think you can necessarily reach a clear conclusion about whether the pump and coolant stopped before the battery is "bricked".

However, I think the fan/coolant pump issue is beside the point. The Roadster wasn't over-discharged (250V pack voltage translates to 2.52V cell voltage given 99 cells in series) until after 14 days after 0% SOC. The Leaf, which has the cut-off that people up-thread says would eliminate the issue, also has a 14 day leeway after 0% SOC. That seems to indicate to me the cut-off doesn't eliminate the issue; at best, it delays it. The battery likely can still "brick" with the fan/coolant pump turned off earlier on. That means the best thing Tesla can do is inform people. That's likely more effective than any hardware/software change they make to delay the time to over-discharge.

 

[dpeilow]

James May on: instruction manuals - BBC Top Gear

 

[JRP3]

Seriously though, I am getting ready to go to work, so now would be a great time for people to pile on and call me names because I will be unable to respond for several hours. Thanks for giving me an opportunity to join and defend myself, Tesla people.

No pile on from me, I enjoy your style.

 

[3lectronica]

James May on: instruction manuals - BBC Top Gear

James May | "...Worst of all, I read, with the chill of pure terror in my heart, that attempting to adjust the brakes while the motorcycle is in motion could lead to loss of control and an accident. Thank God I took the trouble to find that out. I could have been killed.

Always read the manual."

Too funny, although there may be the one in a million that would attempt something like this (and be a great candidate for a Darwin award) and blame the manufacturer if they were injured! This, I presume, is why such a warning is published... because anything is possible

 

[Norbert]

So I don't think you can necessarily reach a clear conclusion about whether the pump and coolant stopped before the battery is "bricked".

We (or at least I) also don't know if that would be a good idea, depending on battery properties, there may be other factors/risks to consider.

 

[JRP3]

We (or at least I) also don't know if that would be a good idea, depending on battery properties, there may be other factors/risks to consider.

A laptop can sit, shut off, with no battery management or cooling, without risk. An EV should be able to do the same, and I think now the newer Tesla design allows this to happen instead of managing the cells to death.

 

[dsm363]

A laptop can sit, shut off, with no battery management or cooling, without risk. An EV should be able to do the same, and I think now the newer Tesla design allows this to happen instead of managing the cells to death.

If you left your laptop out in the sun would the battery still be ok? I think there's a reason why laptop batteries don't last very long (no thermal management at all). If Tesla designed a system that cut off all thermal management to the pack and the owner still ignored all warnings or didn't check on the car, would that help? If they got there after it had been sitting with no thermal management for an extended period of time and the heat degraded the pack to half of its prior SOC, is that a design flaw that Tesla or the owner is responsible for?

I prefer to have Tesla manage the pack as much as possible since I would hope I never leave it unplugged for months on end. If Tesla could write their warranty such that once the car goes into hibernation mode with no thermal management the battery warranty is void, would people accept that?

 

[Norbert]

A laptop can sit, shut off, with no battery management or cooling, without risk. An EV should be able to do the same, and I think now the newer Tesla design allows this to happen instead of managing the cells to death.

Perhaps that was a different battery type, but I have seen rechargeable battery cells take strange shape and have strange stuff come out of them when left on their own, partially charged. I also seem to remember advice to discharge some battery cell type before leaving them on their own for a long time, but that was some time ago and it may have been the other way around.

 

[strider]

This article did a good job of factually describing Max Drucker, gathering info publicly available on the net. Then it went off the rails when it went in started a blatant rumor that Max is part of a Mossad Israeli conspiracy with the only shred of evidence that he donates time, money and his home to causes that support Israel! Disgustingly ANTI-SEMETIC! The only room for pause, that made me think that this scrub guy had any scruples was that he told us that in the interest of protecting minors he was going to withhold publishing information on Mr. Drucker's kids; that was a classy move.

Point of order, criticizing the state of Israel does NOT make one an anti-semite. One can absolutely criticize the actions of the state of Israel and of Israeli citizens and have NOTHING to do with the religion of Judaism or discrimination of Jews. The Jewish faith does not equal Israel and vice versa. For example, if Israel attempts to attack Iran's nuclear facilities I can absolutely call them a bunch of war-mongering bastards and I am NOT an anti-semite as my view in no way corresponds to my view of Judaism or those who practice the faith.

Now I don't agree w/ this Scrub person's conspiracy theories but nothing in that article is anti-semetic.

 

[TEG]

A laptop can sit, shut off, with no battery management or cooling, without risk...

I tend to disagree with this. As other have said, temperature extremes can harm the cells even when "off". Also leaving it with high (100%) or low (0%) SOC is not good either.
I have been on projects with rooms full of laptops, and watched ones left off with nearly drained packs have the pack go bad prematurely, as well as many left plugged in 24x7 at 100% have the packs go bad too.
I think it is correct that you want to keep the pack at "middle" charge and at a happy temp for best lifespan. Letting it go empty or keeping it completely full for too long tends to be bad for the cells.
My casual attempt to make the LEAF pack last as long as (I think is) possible involves setting charge timers to only charge to 80% right before I need to leave on my commute, then leave the car all day at ~50% SOC (no at office charging opportunities), then back home at night and on trickle charge to be ready for the next morning.
I think/hope I am doing right by the pack by keeping the average SOC at ~50%, and trying to get it away from the extremes as soon as I can.

 

[strider]

A laptop can sit, shut off, with no battery management or cooling, without risk. An EV should be able to do the same, and I think now the newer Tesla design allows this to happen instead of managing the cells to death.

I disagree w/ this. I have a MacBook Pro that sat unused and uncharged for about 6 months and now that battery will not take a charge. I have another battery for it that works fine so the charging circuit works but this battery is flat and the laptop won't try to charge it.