Gateway replacement

[ctslc]

Last week I got a call from Tesla saying that they needed to replace the Gateway on my Powerwall2 system, citing some issue with a batch of Gateways. Although my GW was working fine and passed their testing, they were directed by Engineering to replace it - a tedious process since they had to "de-install" several other boxes around it because they can't just replace the backplane (e.g. "guts") in the GW's box and the surrounding conduits "locked" it into place.

After several hours of unwiring and rewiring, they replaced the GW - but they have since spent several hours over several days trying to commission it, going through all sorts of gyrations, including multiple power-cycles and firmware changes: Apparently the wireless metering on the PV system, located some distance away, won't handshake with the new GW and the system remains offline until they can come back later this week with a kit to (temporarily?) hard-wire the two and, hopefully, get them to talk to each other to finish commissioning.

Anyway, I digress: Anyone else heard about GWs needing to be replaced after the fact due to some "issue"?

CT

 

[Shygar]

When did you have your system installed originally?

 

[ctslc]

It was originally installed in early October.

When did you have your system installed originally?

 

[Shygar]

It was originally installed in early October.

Mine was installed end of Sept. Mine seems to be working fine and I haven't got any requests yet to have it replaced. Interesting to hear though.

 

[ctslc]

A follow-up:

Last Thursday (after a week of the PW being offline) they (Solar City/Tesla) were able to schedule time to come out. After one final attempt to get the Nuerio in the garage that monitors the PV system to talk to the GW via wireless failed, it was decided to "hard wire" the two together temporarily, running wires across the yard: The system immediately commissioned as it should. (In my system there are two Neurios - one in the GW to monitor the power to/from the mains and another in the garage at the sub-panel that provides feed-in for the PV system.)

Fortunately, I'd previously installed some underground conduit between the house and the garage for running an Ethernet cable and it was easy to run another CAT5 in that same conduit for a permanent, wired comm link - of which only single pair was needed for the Neurio, which (apparently) uses 2-wire RS-485 to communicate.

This hard-wired connection is practically fool-proof and less tenuous and fickle than a wireless one - particularly since the WiFi antenna of the Neurio in the GW is located in the GW's enclosure - which is a metal box - its aerial being behind a metal dead-front and behind a metal door - something that seriously impacts its usable range! To get the old one to work an external aerial had been mounted at the "far" (PV) end of the link - and it took hours for them to get that one to talk at the time of the initial installation. (That antenna is now superfluous.)

Despite the fact that the previous GW had worked for several months, more or less (maybe its link being flaky was one of the problems that Tesla Engineering had spotted) there seemed to be something about the "new" one that prevented this from ever working in the first place. In asking why they couldn't put an external WiFi antenna on the GW end (4G antennas are already on the top of the GW) they mentioned something about not wanting to modify a "stock" GW in that way.


At the moment the F/W on the new GW is the older 1.5.1 (it had been gotten to 1.9.1 on the original GW, IIRC). As noted in other posts, I've observed that the maximum charging rate of the two PWs, together, now seems to be limited to a few hundred watts with this version of firmware when in "Backup-only" mode. It also seems to behave quite differently when in "Self-Powered" mode in terms of its recharging from "excess" PV production (e.g. it doesn't seem inclined to top off to 100% when it is at 93% charge - even when excess power is being sent to the grid.) I suspect that it will eventually be updated to a newer version.

While all of this has been a bit of a PITA, having been involved with the design/production of electronic devices in the past and considering the consequences of making a mistake (e.g. leaving a customer in the dark, damage to the PWs and/or electrical system in some way, etc.) I can understand the cautiousness involved on the part of their engineering department. This was clearly an "unusual" event with circumstances unfamiliar with the field technicians - and I lost count how many times that they apologized for the inconvenience. In the end, I believe that removing this wireless component of the system will probably improve its reliability overall.

CT

 

[Shygar]

Interesting. I ended up running an Ethernet to my gateway before they came for the install, so I was never on wireless. I agree that it's the best way to set it up if you are able to do it.

 

[GenSao]

Interesting. I ended up running an Ethernet to my gateway before they came for the install, so I was never on wireless. I agree that it's the best way to set it up if you are able to do it.

For my case, there is no connection to WiFi or Ethernet. A direct cellular connection that was used instead.

 

[MP3Mike]

Interesting. I ended up running an Ethernet to my gateway before they came for the install, so I was never on wireless. I agree that it's the best way to set it up if you are able to do it.

For my case, there is no connection to WiFi or Ethernet. A direct cellular connection that was used instead.

You are both talking about something different. He isn't talking about a connection to the Internet, he is talking about the Neurio connection to the CT devices. (The things that let the Gateway know how much power you are drawing the grid and/or producing from solar.)

 

[Shygar]

You are both talking about something different. He isn't talking about a connection to the Internet, he is talking about the Neurio connection to the CT devices. (The things that let the Gateway know how much power you are drawing the grid and/or producing from solar.)

Thanks for the clarification