Model 3 Battery size

[JeffK]

2+2=4

Unless you're in base 4, in which 2 + 2 = 10

 

[Model 3]

base 4

I think you meant base 2?

 

[wagonwheel]

A person can't be 100% sure. Mathematically impossible.

Thank you kindly.

Are you sure of that?
Dare I say it...... Are you 100% sure??

 

[JeffK]

I think you meant base 2?

In base 2, four is represented as 0100 but also in base 2 the problem 2 + 2 wouldn't make any sense. It'd have to be 010 + 010

We're so nerdy haha. I love this forum.

 

[Model 3]

In base 2, four is represented as 0100 but also in base 2 the problem 2 + 2 wouldn't make any sense. It'd have to be 010 + 010

We're so nerdy haha. I love this forum.

Ye ye, your right.... I was mixing it with the old joke about 1+1=10 (base 2).... I blame it on it been weekend, and my brain has some free-time after a long Friday night

 

[Topher]

Well, I'm 100% sure that this isn't true. I'm also 100% sure of my
name.

Do you know how many children are mixed up in hospitals? How many children are adopted and their adoptive parents never tell them?

Thank you kindly.

 

[alseTrick]

Do you know how many children are mixed up in hospitals? How many children are adopted and their adoptive parents never tell them?

Thank you kindly.

I'm 100% sure I don't know the answer to those questions.

 

[S3XY]

Do you know how many children are mixed up in hospitals? How many children are adopted and their adoptive parents never tell them?

Thank you kindly.

i never said I was was 100% certain that I was given to the right parents. I said I was certain of my name which was given to me by the only parents I know.

 

[Topher]

i never said I was was 100% certain that I was given to the right parents. I said I was certain of my name which was given to me by the only parents I know.

No, you actually didn't. You see how, in order to maintain your illusion of 100% surety, you had to add some caveats? If I began questioning how you were sure that your memory is accurate, you would need to add more, instead of just admitting that you aren't 100% sure.

The simple mathematical truth (as sure as 2+2=4) is that 100% surety requires infinite evidence (see Baye's Theorem), and there is no way to either gather infinite evidence, or to store it in your brain if you did have it.

Thank you kindly.

 

[S3XY]

Okay, I'm 100% certain that I'm done arguing an absurd nitpicking point in a thread about battery size. My guess (as a guess I'm saying I'm not certain) is 55/70/90. Hopefully we'll find out their intentions by the end of next month.

 

[boiler81]

I'm done arguing an absurd nitpicking point in a thread about battery size.

There is so many strong opinions on so many unknown aspects of the M3, it's a shame there's not Vegas betting lines on them

 

[daniel]

There is so many strong opinions on so many unknown aspects of the M3, it's a shame there's not Vegas betting lines on them

Are you 100% sure there isn't?

 

[Model 3]

is that 100% surety requires infinite evidence

Are you 100% sure about that?

 

[daniel]

Certainty is an attitude. A scientist or a skeptic may retain an open mind and never feel 100% certain of anything. Most people hold the attitude of certainty about many things. Certainty is not the same as knowledge. One might say that certainty is the belief that you possess knowledge of a thing. And belief is something the human mind is very good at. Often when it is wrong. We all know people who are 100% certain when they are demonstrably wrong. Other times it is justified. To make a point raised earlier in this thread, but putting it in less ambiguous terms, I am absolutely certain that two plus two equals four.

 

[S3XY]

Certainty is an attitude. A scientist or a skeptic may retain an open mind and never feel 100% certain of anything. Most people hold the attitude of certainty about many things. Certainty is not the same as knowledge. One might say that certainty is the belief that you possess knowledge of a thing. And belief is something the human mind is very good at. Often when it is wrong. We all know people who are 100% certain when they are demonstrably wrong. Other times it is justified. To make a point raised earlier in this thread, but putting it in less ambiguous terms, I am absolutely certain that two plus two equals four.

Thank you kindly.

 

[WATTS-UP]

@JeffK In base 2 I'm sure the number 4 is written 20

 

[alseTrick]

I had to put someone on ignore. Good lord. You're wrong. Not one single person agrees with you. Stop your shtick. Or don't. Because I don't have to read your drivel anymore.

 

[Yggdrasill]

@JeffK In base 2 I'm sure the number 4 is written 20

100

1 = 1
2 = 10
3 = 11
4 = 100
5 = 101
6 = 110
7 = 111

 

[Yggdrasill]

Most likely scenario is 55 and 75 kWh versions. I'm 100% sure the base model will be 55 kWh and 90% sure the largest battery will be 75 kWh. There is 10% chance it will be 80 kWh. There is 0% chance the largest battery will be anything other than 75 or 80 kWh. Even the Model 3 75D will have at least 300 miles EPA rated range based on my detailed calculations here, earlier in this thread.

I'm also leaning towards 55 and 75 kWh packs now. This is based on the 100 kWh pack architecture, the powerwall specs, and various data. My post on the matter: 2017 Investor Roundtable:General Discussion

I've been looking at the probable Model 3 and Powerwall/Powerpack 2 architecture based on the pictures wk057 provided of the P100D pack architecture, and I think I've previously overestimated the amount of cells needed per pack. Which also means that I've underestimated the capacity per cell, at least for Tesla Energy.

First some assumptions, I've assumed that Tesla will be using the same cooling architecture as the 100 kWh pack, which means cooling in between the cells, but significantly more compact coolant loops. I've also assumed the powerwall battery contains two modules, identical to the ones found in the Model 3 (eight in number), totalling around 700x700 mm.

I estimate that a gen 3 module would have 30 cells in each row and 16 rows, 480 cells in total. Probably arranged in a 12s40p, but potentially it could be arranged in a 48s10p configuration. This means the pack module could have two cooling loops just like the 100 kWh pack.

Both the more traditional 12s40p configuration and a 48s10p configuration offers some interesting properties, especially the 48s10p configuration, in my view.

12s40p

In this case, the Powerwall has a 100V battery voltage with two modules in series. The powerpack can have a 800V voltage with 16 modules in series. (~800V jives with AudubonB's observation of 900V markings.) The Model 3 would have a 400V pack with 8 modules in series.

48s10p

In this case, the Powerwall 2 could have a 400V battery voltage with two modules in series, which means you don't need a lot of DC conversion to reach the specified DC output voltage. The powerpack can have a 800V operating voltage with a 4s4p module configuration. The Model 3 could have a 400V pack with a 2s4p module configuration. This allows for different pack sizes without doing anything to the number of cells in each module. You could have one pack with six modules (2s3p) and one with the full eight modules (2s4p). (On the largest pack, you could also have support for 800V charging, if you could switch between a 4s2p configuration and a 2s4p configuration.)

Each module would end up slightly larger than a gen 1/2 module, roughly 690 mm x 330 mm vs 685 mm x 280 mm. And the total Model 3 pack would be roughly 1.6 meters by 1.4 meters, containing 3840 21-70 cells.

A powerwall would contain 960 cells, which means that with 14 kWh, it would have 14.5 Wh/cell. This would mean a ~34% improvement in battery chemistry over the Powerwall 1, which is a lot, but not impossible, as the NMC chemistry hasn't been close to the NCA chemistry in terms of energy density. There could be significant untapped potential there.

Assuming a ~10% improvement in chemistry for the NCA cells, or 20 Wh/cell, the base 2s3p pack could have 57.6 kWh, and the top spec 2s4p pack could have 76.8 kWh (this would be the same ragerdless of pack configuration.) This would work out to ranges in the area of ~250 miles and ~330 miles. I know this is less than some people are hoping for, but it's still acceptable for Tesla, and the available data supports it.

The benefit with the 48s10p configuration is the following: One module architecture across the Powerwall/Powerpack and Model 3 with two pack sizes, changing only the cell chemistry and number of modules per product. This should simplify production substantially.

TL;DR: I now expect two packs for the Model 3, one with roughly 57.6 kWh (marketed as "55" kWh) and 2880 cells in a 96s30p configuration, and one with roughly 76.8 kWh (marketed at "75" kWh) and 3840 cells in a 96s40p configuration. Ranges could be around ~250 miles and ~330 miles.

 

[WarpedOne]

+1