MASTER THREAD: 2021 Model 3 - Charge data, battery discussion etc

[AlanSubie4Life]

If its limited for some reason the cell voltage should be lower than 4.20V/cell

Could also be a low-end limit.

At this point, I can only see the differences in nominal full pack capacity between 00-T and 0L-P being one of a few things:

1) High-end software limit (doesn't seem supported by the data?)

2) Low-end software limit (no data)

3) Binned cell capacities, assembling lower capacity cells to slightly lower capacity packs, as needed. If they are having problems meeting their 5% capacity increase design target, then it would make sense they could have a range of cell capacities and they could sort them, theoretically. That way they don't have to worry about yield.

4) No actual differences - day-to-day pack capacity estimate variation, combined with normal manufacturing capacity variation. (I think we have insufficient data to say one way or the other.)

No idea which it is or whether there are other possibilities.

 

[conv90]

About NFP , I don't think is a BMS/ imbalace mV thing.
I think the imbalance is more related to rated range on SMT
Often I have 79.6 NFP and 504 rated range and sometimes I have 79.7 and 503 rated range.
Today I had briefly a 79.9 value and 503 Rated range.

 

[eivissa]

Made an attempt to charge the 00-T to 100% this morning, but had to leave early.
The Charge rate was just above 1KW, so not much more to be expected.

• 60% SoC limit would not go above 80,0kWH.
• At 101% it would go to 80,7/80,8kWH Nominal Remaining and 507km.
• Nominal Full Pack would correct its-self upwards to 80,4kWh, but drop again to the old value (80,0kWh) after a couple of hours.
• 00-T and 0L-P would go around 0,5kWh above Nominal Full Pack when fully charged.
• 00-T and 0L-P peak at 4,2V, so I guess no SW lock to be expected.
• Very small sample size, but pretty much all 00-T Performance drivers report lower ranges (495km-507km) than the 0L-P drivers who are almost always at the peak 508km-509km. Also some Q2/2021 LR drivers with SMT all report values in the 79-80,0kWh Range.

Still a chance, that the 00-T can slowly calibrate upwards to match the 0L-P, but I will be honest. I am starting to doubt it.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

00-T and 0L-P peak at 4,2V, so I guess no SW lock to be expected.

Maybe someone should look at the low end and compare between the two packs in question, with SMT. Take a few ~open circuit (no driving or accessories!) voltage vs. SOC points from 10% to 0%. For science?

 

[AAKEE]

Probably it can be seen as the battery minimum voltage. If that doesnt differ I guess theres inst any difference there either.

 

[Korgmatose]

I'm gonna do a real world range test in summer with the 1104423-00-P from 100% next week so let's see what the range actually will be.
Bjørn Nyland did a range test with the LG variant in winter so there should be some observable differences.

 

[AAKEE]

We have had really nice/warm weather the last days, last three-four days.
My NFP is down at 79.5kWh.
Went on a trip, charged to 90% before leaving a few days ago and that put my NFP down to 79.5. Still there, temps have topped around 30 degrees C.

It feels like a clear connection between the NFP and ambient temps.

[Edit]Most teslaowners seems to dream about a NFP of 81.5 kWh or more.
We Scandinavians close to the Artic circle dream of a NFP of 79.5, or less

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

We have had really nice/warm weather the last days, last three-four days.
My NFP is down at 79.5kWh.
Went on a trip, charged to 90% before leaving a few days ago and that put my NFP down to 79.5. Still there, temps have topped around 30 degrees C.

It feels like a clear connection between the NFP and ambient temps.

[Edit]Most teslaowners seems to dream about a NFP of 81.5 kWh or more.
We Scandinavians close to the Artic circle dream of a NFP of 79.5, or less

Will definitely be interesting to see what happens when things cool down, and whether it recovers. If the characteristics are like the prior packs, I’d expect to see capacity loss soon and I would guess this is normal capacity loss with age.

But we don’t know how these will behave.

 

[Tazzman]

I took a picture of my 6/21/21 Model 3 LR battery sticker and was wondering what information you guys could tell me about the battery in my car? Since it has the (P) in front does that mean it is the 00-P that I see talked about? I also figured this could be a good data point for the thread. EDIT Since the forum keeps making my picture unreadable the number on the battery is (P) 1104422-00-W

 

[AAKEE]

Will definitely be interesting to see what happens when things cool down, and whether it recovers. If the characteristics are like the prior packs, I’d expect to see capacity loss soon and I would guess this is normal capacity loss with age.

But we don’t know how these will behave.

Yes, it will be really interresting to see.

What I learned during this half year owning a Tesla (and using Scan My Tesla) is that the NFP value sometimes is not that close to the real capacity as one might think.
So Im sure it cannot be used as a source for ”true” degradation and it probably can be at least 5% off the real capacity of the battery.

I had the NFP at 81.5kWh for quite some time/miles. It was rock steady. Then I ”lost”2kWh during quite short time and not very many miles driven. Also I only charged to 55-60% and had small DOD exept for one charge to 80%.
So the battery was used/stored/charged in a way that should produce minimum degradation, which I still is positive that this is the case.

For the battery ”true” capacity it probably starts quite close to a typical value( the real ”typical” for the ”82.1 full pack when new” isnt really known by us, I guess?) and then we have a slow degradation.
The battery true capacity more or less newer really increases.

So we have a true battery capacity that starts high and slowly degrades from calendar aging and cycles and we have the NFP that doesnt really follow this but jumps around and at least seems to be, quite temperature dependent.

My conclusion is that the NFP is a not very exact indicator of the degradation. If one have the history and can see in the long term that it is decreasing then it can be used to calculate approximate degradation.
“Me think”, the NFP value is not of a very high value for us.

 

[eivissa]

Yes, it will be really interresting to see.

What I learned during this half year owning a Tesla (and using Scan My Tesla) is that the NFP value sometimes is not that close to the real capacity as one might think.
So Im sure it cannot be used as a source for ”true” degradation and it probably can be at least 5% off the real capacity of the battery.

I had the NFP at 81.5kWh for quite some time/miles. It was rock steady. Then I ”lost”2kWh during quite short time and not very many miles driven. Also I only charged to 55-60% and had small DOD exept for one charge to 80%.
So the battery was used/stored/charged in a way that should produce minimum degradation, which I still is positive that this is the case.

For the battery ”true” capacity it probably starts quite close to a typical value( the real ”typical” for the ”82.1 full pack when new” isnt really known by us, I guess?) and then we have a slow degradation.
The battery true capacity more or less newer really increases.

So we have a true battery capacity that starts high and slowly degrades from calendar aging and cycles and we have the NFP that doesnt really follow this but jumps around and at least seems to be, quite temperature dependent.

My conclusion is that the NFP is a not very exact indicator of the degradation. If one have the history and can see in the long term that it is decreasing then it can be used to calculate approximate degradation.
“Me think”, the NFP value is not of a very high value for us.

I surely can attest to the NFP being everywhere and dont see a real pattern, apart from maybe a calibration process in the first 1000miles maybe...

• This is my NFP since I took delivery on the 21st of June.
• Since then I daily charge it to 60% with a 100% charge once (orange spike / nominal remaining at 80.8).
• After that back to 60%...today it seems to have remembered that Nominal Remaining value of 80.8 and projected the NFP to that value.
• I am logging outside air temperature during the same timeframe and can project it in the graph, but there is no correlaction to the NFP to be seen.
• I will soon do another 100% charge to charge complete and see if the nominal remaining still is NFP+0,5kWh.

Nominal Full Pack

Outside Air Temperature

SoC

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

My conclusion is that the NFP is a not very exact indicator of the degradation

So Im sure it cannot be used as a source for ”true” degradation and it probably can be at least 5% off the real capacity of the battery.

I think 5% is high - it probably can be off by that much but I suspect an error that large is rare (I’m assuming the battery is balanced and is generally healthy).

I guess it depends on what you are expecting.

Personally, it seems to me that the estimate is probably within about 3% of the true value, and of course jumps around because it is an estimate. It can be thrown off a percent or two by huge temperature swings, the balance of the battery may be slightly off temporarily and affect the effective remaining capacity and estimate of NFP, etc.

Therefore, since it seems likely to be within 2-3% of the true pack capacity most of the time; I think it’s an excellent indicator of pack degradation.

Obviously it is not useful for confirming a 1-2% loss of capacity. But no one cares about that much…

I even think it’s reasonable to take a bunch of measurements, and if they are always around 79-80kWh, while another pack is always reporting around 81-82kWh, that likely indicates a true difference in capacity, even though the difference is within the error bars of a single measurement.

 

[AAKEE]

I think 5% is high - it probably can be off by that much but I suspect an error that large is rare (I’m assuming the battery is balanced and is generally healthy).

I had a brain farth. Usually quite good at mental arithmetic but today I proved the opposite 2/80 is not 5%

But 2.5% is still much, if you are thinking ”Have my car got 2.5%, 5% or 10% degradation ? The 2.5% uncertainness can move the value from 7% to about 10%, so if the car did 100K km or 60K miles, one might either see 7% and think “thats ok” or see 10% and think

I do not mean that a NFP Value within 2.5% is a bad measurement, but as most people probably will calculate degradation and be between a couple of percent up to about 10%, then 2.5% variation is big.

I had a period with 80.1 kWh, after that 81.5kWh and now 79.5. I do not think this has been the true capacity of the battery.

We also se regularly( at least on the 2170L) that a full charge often reach above NFP with about 0.5kwh.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

I had a brain farth. Usually quite good at mental arithmetic but today I proved the opposite 2/80 is not 5%

But 2.5% is still much, if you are thinking ”Have my car got 2.5%, 5% or 10% degradation ? The 2.5% uncertainness can move the value from 7% to about 10%, so if the car did 100K km or 60K miles, one might either see 7% and think “thats ok” or see 10% and think

I do not mean that a NFP Value within 2.5% is a bad measurement, but as most people probably will calculate degradation and be between a couple of percent up to about 10%, then 2.5% variation is big.

I had a period with 80.1 kWh, after that 81.5kWh and now 79.5. I do not think this has been the true capacity of the battery.

We also se regularly( at least on the 2170L) that a full charge often reach above NFP with about 0.5kwh.

Sure. No one should expect this is a precise measure of degradation. I do think it is accurate though!

My point is that if you observe a bunch of estimates around 10%, say 8.5% to 11.5%, over a period of several months, then you can probably say you have 10% capacity loss, roughly. Not 7.5% or whatever.

To the point of this discussion of the 2021 pack differences, I still think the observed behavior of some owners of seeing NFPs in the 79kWh range vs. you in the 80.5-81.5kWh range, likely represents a real difference in the initial pack capacity. But I say that only because we have multiple estimates that have been fairly consistent for both packs.

And I would guess yours is on a downwards trajectory which is why you are seeing lower values now (but I could be wrong!!!), but it will be interesting to see what changes with yours, as temperature changes. We will see.

 

[thinger]

Tesla is shipping first time LR from China to Europe.

WLTP seems to be 580km.
Not yet confirmed is there LFP battery or this LG 75/77kwh which Europe got on Q1/2021.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1412292282699689985

 

[eivissa]

Tesla is shipping first time LR from China to Europe.

WLTP seems to be 580km.
Not yet confirmed is there LFP battery or this LG 75/77kwh which Europe got on Q1/2021.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1412292282699689985

Actually the LG is confirmed. The option code on all those vehicles is BT38 -> LG with ~ 75kWh.

The CATL LFP pack has too little energy density anyway to be put into a LR or P.

 

[thinger]

Actually the LG is confirmed. The option code on all those vehicles is BT38 -> LG with ~ 75kWh.

The CATL LFP pack has too little energy density anyway to be put into a LR or P.

Thanks for update.

 

[Jibjab]

Actually the LG is confirmed. The option code on all those vehicles is BT38 -> LG with ~ 75kWh.

The CATL LFP pack has too little energy density anyway to be put into a LR or P.

Can 580km/360 miles be extracted from only 75kwh?

 

[eivissa]

Can 580km/360 miles be extracted from only 75kwh?

If you do magic with the efficiency during your WLTP run, you get away with reducing the usable capacity...yes.

 

[Jibjab]

If you do magic with the efficiency during your WLTP run, you get away with reducing the usable capacity...yes.
View attachment 681858

I wonder why the Europe/UK LG/capped Panasonic never showed even 353 miles (the advertised epa at the time) then? Not sure what’s changed so that they are advertising 360 miles with a 75kwh battery? Although advertised and what ends up being displayed on the screen are two different things I guess