How to double the supercharging speed for Tesla future cars ...

[richkae]

.. without increasing charging voltage or current or even changing the supercharger hardware.

Its really simple.
Just cut the energy consumption ( wh/mile ) of the car in half.

If the Model S is rated at 320 wh/mile and charges at 300 mph from the supercharger, a car that consumes 160 wh/mile will charge at 600mph with the same charging power.

A car that only consumes 160 wh/mile is impossible you say?
In order to do the cars need to be smaller, more aerodynamic, and lighter.
A 3000 pound car with a 0.19 coefficient of drag and small frontal area can achieve 164 wh/mile at constant 60mph.
They've already been made, in the late 1990s. http://avt.inel.gov/pdf/fsev/eva/genmot.pdf
The good news is that back then they needed a 1200 pound pack to have an 80 mile range and a modern Tesla pack that achieves 200 miles in such a car might be as small as 500 pounds with today's technology. The only caveat is that it is unknown if the 32kWh pack needed can charge at 96kW ( which would be 600mph ).
The cells that can charge at that rate may be different from the ones used today by the Model S.

 

[brianman]

Tesla has intentionally focused on Safety. If you start with the EV1 specs as a guideline, there's a lot of work to do to reach Tesla safety standards:

GM EV1
1998
FRONTAL IMPACT PASSENEGER: 3
FRONTAL IMPACT DRIVER: 3
SIDE IMPACT DRIVER: Not Tested
SIDE IMPACT REAR SEAT PASSENGER: Not Tested

http://car-safety-ratings.findthedata.org/d/a/GM/EV1

Note that if you pan down to the Crash Data section you can click on each row to see a comparative chart with other vehicles.

 

[richkae]

Tesla has intentionally focused on Safety. If you start with the EV1 specs as a guideline, there's a lot of work to do to reach Tesla safety standards:


http://car-safety-ratings.findthedata.org/d/a/GM/EV1

Note that if you pan down to the Crash Data section you can click on each row to see a comparative chart with other vehicles.

True. I am just trying to show what a small car with good aerodynamics can achieve. If they used 3000 pounds, 0.19 Cd and same frontal area as constraints, they would have 700 more pounds to play with because of the gains in battery energy density. That could add a lot of length, which is aerodynamically free and provides the needed safety space.

I'm also not saying that that size should be the target - just that efficiency gains = charging speed.

 

[widodh]

I think it's a bit of all worlds. We might be able to increase the efficiency of the drivetrain a bit, have batteries with more Wh/KG and decrease rolling resistance.

There is a lot to win here, but the best thing for increasing range: drive slower

 

[wycolo]

> the best thing for increasing range: drive slower [widodh]

Service reduced my tire pressure to 'normal', and with this I took my usual 180 mile trip. Next trip I will restore 51 pounds pressure, drive at the same speeds and see what I arrive home with. You may enter your bets now.
--