-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
EV-lutioin
Active Member
According to plugincars.com
Tesla Model S
Hyundai Ioniq
Kia Soul EV
Charging rates:
Tesla MS - 10 kW
Kia Soul - 6.6 kW
Ioniq - 7 kW
Those are the onboard AC chargers.
The C rates being referring to above are the DC fast charge rates, IE the Ionic charging it's 28kWH pack at a peak of 100kW for a C rate of >3.
LargeHamCollider
Battery cells != scalable
LargeHamCollider
Battery cells != scalable
We'll see, the rumor is that the 2170s are 5.175Ah, that would be about a 5.5% improvement in volumetric energy density.
Any references for those rumors?
And incidentally, I think you may be calculating 5.5% based on the most recent silicon-anode chemistry cells.
The original cells are likely 3.2Ah cells. By my calcs that would make a 5.175Ah 2170 about 10% more energy dense (assuming same voltage).
And incidentally, I think you may be calculating 5.5% based on the most recent silicon-anode chemistry cells.
The original cells are likely 3.2Ah cells. By my calcs that would make a 5.175Ah 2170 about 10% more energy dense (assuming same voltage).
Last edited:
Don't forget that the original Model S pack, packed, 85kWh which really was more like 81 or so. +30% is then how much?
The bigger form factor is said to add 10% right there. Less aluminum, more content.
Then there is the added cell length. 7.7% nominally, JB may or may not have calculated that into his prediction. But on the inside, perhaps over 8%.
These two factor add up (multiply, actually), they don't get in each other's way.
Consider that since the introduction of the 90kWh (err....86?) pack, the chemistry has not been updated, at least not for energy density. What is a fair percentage for chemistry advancement between 2012 and 2017, in your opinion? That 6% or so from the "90" introduction? Those same cells are in the 100 pack.
Did you consider that the pack itself could be reconstructed? Now it's like 600-700kg for 102.4kWh, right? It was, what, 550kg for almost 85? A lighter construction would bring PACK DENSITY as quoted a nice boost. A lot of metal in there.
If you're making 500,000 Model 3 cars, and adding a Y or whatever, it may not hurt to deisng the packs with 5 years advanced insights. Modules seem to be larger and less numerous. Less non weight bearing metal.
JB's comment was pretty vague and seemed to imply pack level specific energy from the original Model S design to the Model 3 design. The 30% remark would then include the silicon anode step change and the 100 kWh pack change. The original specific energy density at the pack level was roughly 148 Wh/kg. Now, it's around 175 to 180 Wh/kg. That's already 20% or more. One more step change in battery chemistry, as well as some minor differences because of the form factor change and we're at the 30%, or 190-200 Wh/kg.
dhanson865
Well-Known Member
I'll guess some time in late 2018 like maybe October or so. My gut was to say 2019 but I pulled it forward a little.
Basically I think they'll wait for the back log of Model 3 to clear the queue before they bother to update the S/X packs to 2170 cells.
Yeah, I agree it was the cells at the time the Model S was being designed that he was referring to, hence in my reply I said the "original cells are likely 3.2Ah".
What do you mean by the "100kWh pack change" though? Wasn't this understood to be simply more cells of he silicon-anode enhanced (GEN3) flavor, and not a chemistry jump?
A 100kW pack has been torn down and found to have 88 cells per group (rather than 74) if I recall.. and that math accounts for the jump from 90 to 100kWh packs using the same chemistry...
With so much of the Model S pack being the pack, not the cells, and production numbers being so high now...isn't it time to move away from the 2012 way of making packs? The 100 pack improved the space utilization, but it didn't exactlybecome a lightweight construction. When would it be cool to update S&W, reshape the pack, be more clever about it? Few modules, less non-stress bearing material, lighter materials and design. Surely 50-100kg empty pack weight can be saved?
EV-lutioin
Active Member
OK, that makes sense there are different charge rates for AC and DC. Tesla claims a 120kW DC charge rate so I seems like it still beats out the Ioniq by a 20 kW, unless I am misunderstanding something.... again
OK, that makes sense there are different charge rates for AC and DC. Tesla claims a 120kW DC charge rate so I seems like it still beats out the Ioniq by a 20 kW, unless I am misunderstanding something.... again
Yeah, it can be a bit confusing. In terms of absolute charge rate, you are correct, the Tesla is king.
But what determines how safely a battery can charge is it's "C-rate"... which is typically defined as the amount of peak energy rate the battery can safely absorb in an hour as a ratio of it's capacity. (ignoring any necessary taper).
So a battery with a C-rate of 1.0 can charge to full in one hour. Thus:
- a 10kWh battery can charge at a rate of up 10kW
- an 50kWh battery can charge at a rate of up to 50kW
If the battery has a C-rate of 2.0 it can charge to full in 1/2 hour. Thus:
- a 10kWh battery can charge at a rate of up 20kW
- an 50kWh battery can charge at a rate of up to 100kW
And so on. This also demonstrates that larger batteries of the same chemistry can draw proportionally more energy.
The Tesla batteries have been demonstrated to charge up to ~1.7C (the 70kW pack can draw nearly the full 120kW output of a supercharger).
So, for the other batteries being referred to, although they draw less absolute power, their packs are substantially smaller. Thus a 28kWh Ioniq charging at 100kW would be a C-rate of 3.57. If the Ioniq had a 100kWh battery pack, it's conceivable it could safely charge at 357kW (cooling and other factors not withstanding).
Does that help?
I heard word from CEC anonymously that they are testing much higher than what Tesla is doing,something like 350kW or so. but I just heard this on a teleconference for FCEVs, no verification or company names sadly...maybe Tesla? :>
FlatSix911
Porsche 918 Hybrid
Like this ...
The first ‘High-Power fast-charging station’ (150-350 kW) is installed by EVgo and ABB right in Tesla’s backyard
There’s an exciting race to build high-power fast-charging stations for electric vehicles going on right now. Companies like Tesla, EVgo, Chargepoint, ABB, and many more are preparing for the next wave of EVs, which are expected to be able to charge at a much higher rate. It looks like EVgo and ABB are now taking a small lead in this race. They announced today that they are installing the “first High-Power fast charging station” (150-350 kW) and they are doing it right in Tesla’s backyard; Fremont, California.
EVgo wrote in a press release today:
“The installed system has the potential to reach charging speeds of up to 350kW with an upgrade. As automakers align on future hardware and service standards, the station will enable industry coordination and testing. EVgo is using the station to study utility impacts, installation standards, permitting, and building and safety requirements. It will also provide a demonstration platform for electrical certification committees and building code officials. “
The company reportedly chose to install the charger at its Lucky Supermarket station on Mowry Avenue in Fremont because “the area currently has the highest traffic in the EVgo network”. It’s currently only supporting 150 kW, which already makes it the most high-powered station in the US – beating Tesla Supercharger’s 145 kW, but the company claims it can be upgraded to 350 kW. It’s equipped with a CCS connection. Here’s the prototype:
And finally, Tesla is also expected to soon release the “version 3” of its Superchargers. Elon Musk hinted that it will put 350 kW to shame, but there’s no clear timeline at this point for the release of the technology – though speculation points toward the charge rate only working with Tesla’s new battery technology, which will first be released in the Model 3.
SabrToothSqrl
Active Member
How the new cells will be made or optimized for is all speculation. Ideally they are cheap, last very long, have a high capacity, charge faster, have higher efficiency, are easy to manufacture, use less expensive materials, allow high discharge rates, ...
The list is what they should be is long. Knowing what Tesla has done with the Model S/X batteries so far shows they are keeping everything on the safe side. Temperature, charge & discharge rate, limiting lowest point of discharge, limiting power (in certain conditions), all these things are kept within pretty safe conditions. It's clear they want these batteries to last a long time.
If the 2170's to be used for cars are all going to be fast charging, with compromise on energy density, that might explain 100kWh to remain the biggest.
But I could also imagine that the cells used in Powerwalls have optimized cost/kwh, and with that highest Wh/cell. Those cells might allow for the long range, modest charge speed 130kWh cars. Still around 150kW charging, but the new car cells might be much quicker if Elon didn't boast too much.
Similar threads
