OK, now I'm concerned about my setup. I have 400 amp service (two 200 amp panels). I have a 100 amp breaker for my HPWC AND a 50 amp breaker for a 14-50 outlet. They are both on the same panel. Since 100 + 50 is less than 200 I assume I am OK especially since the big stuff ( ACs and ovens) are on other panel. Legal?
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
From how I read your setup, absolutely. You're saying you've got a 200 amp panel with a 150 amps worth of service coming out of it (or thereabouts). You should be able to oversize that panel, relative to the service, by some amount (someone here can probably saw how much), but in your case it appears you're not using the full 200 amps anyway.
Yes. It would also come down to what else is on that panel, whether the 14-50 and HPWC were expected to operate at the same time, etc. When 150 < 200, you don't have to worry.
It would be an easy matter to build an interface that plugs into the extra connector in each HPWC linking multiple units together that would enable circuit sharing. The HPWC's firmware would likely need updating, but the same interface could also perform this when first connected. It would be programmable such that it could split the available ampacity between the units or prioritize one. Done, no new product needed except the relatively simple interface.
Tesla: If you'd like to hire me to develop this, feel free to contact me. =)
Tesla: If you'd like to hire me to develop this, feel free to contact me. =)
OK. Thanks ohm-man and FlasherZ. I don't think I'll operate both together. I only got the 14-50 as a backup and in case I follow thru on my reservation and get the X for my wife so we don't have to switch garage places to charge. I'll just make sure she doesn't use the arc welder if we are both charging. :smile:
Bill D
Member
If Tesla updated the car's software to add a "circuit sharing" setting on the touchscreen, the car's software could check to see if two or more Teslas are on the same WiFi sub-network and if so, they could communicate with each other to avoid simultaneously drawing more than the highest charge setting selected on the touchscreen of any one of the Teslas in the group.
This would allow two, three or any number of Teslas to share a single breaker of any size. It could also allocate charging between Teslas based on SOC.
This would not require any changes to the HPWC and would work with all existing HPWCs and/or UMCs. It may also comply with the NEC, but I'm no FlasherZ (at best, I'm a Flasher C or D):smile:
This would allow two, three or any number of Teslas to share a single breaker of any size. It could also allocate charging between Teslas based on SOC.
This would not require any changes to the HPWC and would work with all existing HPWCs and/or UMCs. It may also comply with the NEC, but I'm no FlasherZ (at best, I'm a Flasher C or D):smile:
Good idea but it would be nice if there was a standard that would allow all plug-in electric cars to communicate, not just Teslas. That way no matter who manufactured the vehicle, they would be able to negotiate and share the capacity efficiently.
The other issue with this is relying on WiFi connectivity, which may be unavailable for any number of reasons. Negotiation should take place through the powerline.
ArtInCT
Always Learning
This coming Fall, I will have a brand new 200A service installed in my barn and garage outbuildings and remove them from the 200A home service.
At present, the barn and attached garages are on an old and lengthy underground 30A service from the house.
I am going this route for a number of reasons, largest of which is a very costly and disruptive cost avoidance excavation to run a new 100A underground
line from the house to the garage/barn for the upcoming Tesla.
Second reason is that my home 200A service panel is pretty crowded already.
Third reason is that the stand alone new service will provide sufficient headroom for any future power requirements, such as a second HPWC or some such.
At present, the barn and attached garages are on an old and lengthy underground 30A service from the house.
I am going this route for a number of reasons, largest of which is a very costly and disruptive cost avoidance excavation to run a new 100A underground
line from the house to the garage/barn for the upcoming Tesla.
Second reason is that my home 200A service panel is pretty crowded already.
Third reason is that the stand alone new service will provide sufficient headroom for any future power requirements, such as a second HPWC or some such.
Bill D
Member
I suggested WiFi because it was how Tesla could accomplish circuit sharing with only a software update. But yes - negotiation through a standard powerline protocol would be the ultimate solution. In addition to EVs, other devices that could "wait their turn" could have it built-in - pool & sprinkler pumps, clothes washers and dryers, dish washers and air compressors. Even Powerwall chargers.
Of all the solutions, even my first one, I like the "powerline" idea, though that would require all-new hardware. What would work though is communication through extension of the J1772 Pilot signal, that would work with only software. Though on the Superchargers they use single-ended CAN there, which is even better. This may require new hardware however, but would be limited to a new bard for the HPWC. Maybe even just n add-on accessory board.
