-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I'm not saying CCS will orphan CHAdeMO. I'm saying once CCS is finalized (2012-2013 seems to be the timeframe at least for the J1772-DC side) the existing CHAdeMO stations can be easily configured to support it (see my Akerwade link). The signaling between CHAdeMO and CCS isn't that different (supposedly CHAdeMO is based on the IEC standard on the first place). The CCS connector may replace the CHAdeMO connector or be an addition (the latter is more likely). That makes the need for a CHAdeMO adapter on the car side unnecessary.
What does that make the chances of a 50kW CHAdeMO adapter being possible (I see the CHAdeMO adapter being even more complicated because of the need to emulate so many pins, with some being analog signals)?
Given the premise a DC adapter is legal (not just guideline-restricted) and can be used safety, I still see a CCS adapter being much more likely. If a DC adapter is completely illegal and/or can't be used safely then this whole thread and all this talk about DC adapters is basically moot.
For J1772-DC, I see the DC pins being directly attached to the power pins on the Model S connector. I haven't had a look at the standard (I don't think it is public yet) to see how the original J1772 power pins will be used in DC mode though (if they are not connected, then a direct pin-to-pin adapter can work; if not, then there will need to be electronics to handle it). Although it does seem like all 5 original pins will be used (the Mennekes version also has the other 5 pins besides from the two additional big power pins, for a total of 7 pins).
I don't see a pin-to-pin adapter being too dangerous, especially if half soda can sized like the level-2 J1772 adapter (so it'll just jut out from the car and physically lock on to the car until the cable is disconnected, almost as if it's part of the car; not just dangle on the ground).
Last edited:
CHAdeMO is very different to the SAE / IEC Combo standard. CHAdeMO is CAN based and has multiple signalling pins for that. CCS doesn't have the pins and supposedly uses PWC through the ground wire (there is an annex in the back of the 61851 doc). It will certainly require a different EVSE control board.
But we've been around this before.
But we've been around this before.
Then the best thing that Tesla can do is to:
- Support 44 kW three phase, to let their European customers use the Type 2 socket of the European non-Type 2 fast chargers
- Support J1772-DC and IEC 62192-DC if at all possible
- Build a network of Tesla superchargers in North America to try to make up for the lack of CHAdeMO support while J1772-DC/IEC62182-DC has not become available.
BTW, I still don't understand why Americans aren't pushing for 3-phase support - I realize that there aren't currently any 3-phase sockets over there, but there is really no reason for that to continue. As we all know, DC chargers require a 3-phase grid connection anyway. Americans could get access to almost the full power of the CHAdeMO charging stations at little extra cost if Tesla would switch to a three phase capable plug and quick charging stations were required to provide "raw" 3-phase power in addition to whatever other interfaces they have.
3-phase AC is the only cost-effective way of supporting charging between 10 and 50 kW. This is the "not invented here" syndrome.
Last edited:
Hope that Tesla will offer the Supercharger to the customer as well. A Supercharger with 3 internal charger would fit me best and i can do single or 3-phase as i like (No longer need for the 2 onboard charger). Or Even better, tesla offers a Supercharger with only one charger and you can move the 2 onBoard charger to the external charger.
Couldn't it just be that Tesla went for J1772-DC? On Wikipedia I found:
They designed their own connector, but they choose a 'standard' for the charging.
We know that the Model S will use EVSE for AC charging, but it would be a smart move for Tesla if they would adopt a kind of standard for the charging. For the looks they wen't with their own connector?
The J1772-DC goes up to 90kW, that exactly matches the 'Supercharger'.
The "European DC" will be exactly the same as J1772-DC, we only use the Type-2 connector with the 3-phase pins in there, but the signaling is the same.
Couldn't it just be that Tesla went for J1772-DC? On Wikipedia I found:
They designed their own connector, but they choose a 'standard' for the charging.
We know that the Model S will use EVSE for AC charging, but it would be a smart move for Tesla if they would adopt a kind of standard for the charging. For the looks they wen't with their own connector?
The J1772-DC goes up to 90kW, that exactly matches the 'Supercharger'.
The "European DC" will be exactly the same as J1772-DC, we only use the Type-2 connector with the 3-phase pins in there, but the signaling is the same.
EVNow
Well-Known Member
It is excruciatingly difficult to put up Quick Charger network. Even with funds available Ecotality is struggling and hasn't put up even ONE CHAdeMO in the last one year. Second, the CCS OEMs have not announced any EVs with QC.
Let us fast forward to 2013/14 and see how it plays out.
- We will have quite a few CHAdeMO chargers finally in place
- We have new near luxury cars like BMW i-3 & Infiniti EV coming up
- Ininfiti EV supports CHAdeMO
- What does BMW i-3 do ? Does it support CHAdeMO or CCS , given there are almost zero chances of a CCS charging network that does not also have a CHAdeMO connector in the next few years - but there are a lot of CHAdeMO chargers without CCS connectors ?
This is the reason why on the ground reality & first mover advantage is important.
Last edited:
EV_de
Model SP10/XP9 EU ZOE#47
EVNow
Well-Known Member
You didn't include a third option: adopt the Tesla standard.
OK, now that we've stopped laughing ... yep, those are the options. Tesla needs to stop seeing itself as exceptionalist and understand that it is part of an industry. "All fuel nozzles for my cars must be square, regardless of the fact that all other cars' are round."
A BMW guy told me they will support what the market asks for. Given that (I think it was) RWE is installing some CHAdeMOs on the autobahn network - but with 3 phase Mennekes in second tier locations - then I think they will go with this. VW seems to be going CHAdeMO now too.
EV_de
Model SP10/XP9 EU ZOE#47
I'am disapointed that Tesla move them selfe in a dead end with that small Plug and not enough space to adopt other standards ...
- Charge Port location - George say'd we will be suprised .. well I was , but not in a positiv way ...
- another Tesla unique Plug - again ???
- no space for other standards plugs - why ???
- Charge Port location - George say'd we will be suprised .. well I was , but not in a positiv way ...
- another Tesla unique Plug - again ???
- no space for other standards plugs - why ???
Last edited:
We are back to the connector discussion again
But to summarize the topic here:
We agree that is should be technically possible to create an adapter, but it could be a lot of work. The question is however if (safety) regulations would allow such an adapter, since it has to be capable of handling at least 50kW of power. You should not underestimate the fireworks 50kW can create.
If an adapter would be made, it has to come from Tesla, correct?
My fear is however (and I'm already hearing this) is that people assume the Model S can charge on a CHAdeMO charger since they don't know what CHAdeMO is, they only know that EV's can be fast charged and they think the standard is already there.
My biggest 'wish' is still 3-phase support, since that would be sufficient, but QC is always great to have. It would however be hard to explain to somebody and rather embarrasing that my 90k car can't fast-charge at the QC stations, while a 30k Leaf waves me goodbye after 30 minutes.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
Given how slow the CHAdeMO network is growing in NA, why do you talk as if CHAdeMO will have a huge head start in just the next two years? Tesla alone can top the CHAdeMO network in NA in just one year if they wanted to (I suspect this is what they are planning to do). The only place CHAdeMO has an huge head start is in Japan and some areas of Europe.
Frankly I don't think there is much to worry about CHAdeMO in NA. Looking at how quickly the older Level 2 infrastructure was replaced with J1772, I'm pretty confident that J1772-DC will overtake CHAdeMO as soon as cars come installed with it. Afterall, BetaMax didn't win over VHS, Magne Charge didn't win over AVCON, AVCON and the Roadster connector didn't win over J1772, even though they had first mover advantage.
This is becoming OT, but doing research, it seems like at least one BMW Active-E has a CCS socket:
http://www.siemens.com/sustainabili...vation/references/rapid-charging-for-cars.htm
And given the public statement BMW will be backing CCS (along with the other 7 large automakers), I see the probability of a CCS socket on the i3 being many times higher than a CHAdeMO socket. And the i3 is BMW's volume attempt at a BEV.
stopcrazypp
Well-Known Member
I finally found a J1772-DC diagram that shows how it is implemented! It seems only 5 pins from the car will be able to accomplish the connection, that makes the possibility of a J1772-DC adapter very, very high (like I suspected).
I took the diagram from slide 11 here:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/earthobservationsSCC/IEEE_SAE_J1772_Update_10_02_08_Gery_Kissel.pdf
In the middle, it shows 6 connections, but both #8 and #3 are chassis ground (if you see slide 10, it shows a connector diagram, and you will see there are two chassis ground). So only 5 is really necessary. #6 & #7 refer to the DC pins. It seems the L1 and L2/N pins are not used if it's a DC connection, but used if the car wants to charge in AC (the EVSE will detect it if there is AC present and switch appropriately). That makes both sides capable of DC and AC charging using the same connector.
Given how this is designed, it kind of makes sense why Tesla went with a 5-pin design with two larger power pins (since the L1+L2/N pins and the DC pins are not simultaneously used). I don't know if the Mennekes version is exactly the same, but it seems like at least J1772-DC should be possible.
From what I can tell, Tesla's socket is just a more compact version of J1772-DC, without the direct backwards compatibility with J1772 (needs an adapter to accomplish that).
I took the diagram from slide 11 here:
http://grouper.ieee.org/groups/earthobservationsSCC/IEEE_SAE_J1772_Update_10_02_08_Gery_Kissel.pdf
In the middle, it shows 6 connections, but both #8 and #3 are chassis ground (if you see slide 10, it shows a connector diagram, and you will see there are two chassis ground). So only 5 is really necessary. #6 & #7 refer to the DC pins. It seems the L1 and L2/N pins are not used if it's a DC connection, but used if the car wants to charge in AC (the EVSE will detect it if there is AC present and switch appropriately). That makes both sides capable of DC and AC charging using the same connector.
Given how this is designed, it kind of makes sense why Tesla went with a 5-pin design with two larger power pins (since the L1+L2/N pins and the DC pins are not simultaneously used). I don't know if the Mennekes version is exactly the same, but it seems like at least J1772-DC should be possible.
From what I can tell, Tesla's socket is just a more compact version of J1772-DC, without the direct backwards compatibility with J1772 (needs an adapter to accomplish that).
Last edited:
Similar threads
