Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

New Wall Connector :)

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Personally, I feel Tesla will be using this in the destination program to install 2-4 HPWCs wired to 1-2 100 amp circuits and banking that "most" of the time, a 48 amp max car will be plugging in. Couple that with SOC differences, and the chances that either vehicle is artificially limited are lessened. At scale, this is much cheaper overall and helps either Tesla (if paying installation) or the business hosting the destination chargers (if they are paying for it). Either way, I think it will be quite popular.

SOC difference will make _no difference_ for HPWC charging. At most you could hope for the other car is done charging and just parked there, otherwise you will get fractional charging. 20@200V? Could happen, could be common.

Sort of a side note, IMHO Tesla should have a software update to recognize HPWC's and unlock the charging handle when charging is complete, even if the car is locked.
 
SOC difference will make _no difference_ for HPWC charging.

I thought upthread it was stated that the new HPWCs will query SOC every minute to split power between master-slave, with lower SOC cars getting a greater share of the available power (capped at the cars software-set charge limit)? In that case, if car A has SOC of 20% and car B has SOC of 70%, but car B needs to head out quickly while car A won't go out again today, wouldn't it be best to just plug in car B in a master-slave charger setup?
 
  • Helpful
Reactions: SW2Fiddler
I rather buy this instead of another UMC. Any objections to wiring this into a short cable with a NEMA 14-50 plug (the NEMA 15-50 socket is already there)?
I see cord choices, but: anyone know one made with the plug upside down? (all 90dev. plugs send the cable down, I need to send the cable up)
 
I rather buy this instead of another UMC. Any objections to wiring this into a short cable with a NEMA 14-50 plug (the NEMA 15-50 socket is already there)?
I see cord choices, but: anyone know one made with the plug upside down? (all 90dev. plugs send the cable down, I need to send the cable up)

There's another thread on this, but here's the summary:

Tesla has indicated to me before that the Wall Connector was designed to be connected to permanent wiring methods only. They were considering adding language to the instruction manual that would make that a requirement under NEC 110.3.

While 625.44(B)(1) says that the EVSE must be intended for connection to receptacles, adding a plug to it would achieve that. The Code does not demand that it be listed as a cord-and-plug connected device, and the wording is vague at best. The consensus I've heard from the various inspectors I polled is that they would not balk at attaching a 6/4 SOOW cord to the device. 625.44(B)(3) requires it be less than 6' long if you do.

Because it's a gray area, you might consult with an electrician in your area.

I'm not aware of a plug that plugs-in ground UP on a 14-50.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Ulmo
I thought upthread it was stated that the new HPWCs will query SOC every minute to split power between master-slave, with lower SOC cars getting a greater share of the available power (capped at the cars software-set charge limit)? In that case, if car A has SOC of 20% and car B has SOC of 70%, but car B needs to head out quickly while car A won't go out again today, wouldn't it be best to just plug in car B in a master-slave charger setup?
You're right, but that doesn't necessarily make it better for a public scenario, it may make it worse. What if you have 70% but need 90% to get to your destination? Someone comes in with 10% and needs 20% to get to their destination. Now you're charging very slowly. Now let's say a crowd of people with low SoC come in, you're waiting for a long time.
 
There's another thread on this, but here's the summary:

Tesla has indicated to me before that the Wall Connector was designed to be connected to permanent wiring methods only. They were considering adding language to the instruction manual that would make that a requirement under NEC 110.3.

While 625.44(B)(1) says that the EVSE must be intended for connection to receptacles, adding a plug to it would achieve that. The Code does not demand that it be listed as a cord-and-plug connected device, and the wording is vague at best. The consensus I've heard from the various inspectors I polled is that they would not balk at attaching a 6/4 SOOW cord to the device. 625.44(B)(3) requires it be less than 6' long if you do.

Because it's a gray area, you might consult with an electrician in your area.

I'm not aware of a plug that plugs-in ground UP on a 14-50.

Why/how would an inspector inspect an appliance that is likely not even present?
 
You're right, but that doesn't necessarily make it better for a public scenario, it may make it worse. What if you have 70% but need 90% to get to your destination? Someone comes in with 10% and needs 20% to get to their destination. Now you're charging very slowly. Now let's say a crowd of people with low SoC come in, you're waiting for a long time.

I agree with you.

In my earlier statement that you quoted, I was telling another poster I think he was overthinking it for home use. In the scenario he just outlined and the one you just did, in a home-use scenario, just don't plug in the "non-urgent" car until the urgent car is done. Presumably, they are close enough that the urgent car driver can plug that one in when unplugging the urgent car.
 
The new HPWC installation manual calls for #2, doesn't that automatically make #3 violate code because it's less than MFG instructions?
edit - I see it's:
For 80A operation, use 2AWG 194°F
(90°C) rated copper wire or follow local regulations.
Ok I guess the "or" makes it fine?


Here is the NEC chart of allowable Amperage based on conductor size. Note that 80% de-rating is required for continuous use.

upload_2016-4-15_14-33-41.png
 
Why/how would an inspector inspect an appliance that is likely not even present?

Good question. :)

This is what lends credence to the argument that EVSE really is part of the appliance (the EV) rather than part of infrastructure. Occasionally, I've had inspectors ask what's going to be installed, specific equipment names, etc. But if it's not there, then it is what it is. :)
 
Here is the NEC chart of allowable Amperage based on conductor size. Note that 80% de-rating is required for continuous use.

While this is true (and the one you posted was very, very old), you have to know how to read it properly.

First, a word of caution: you are not derating the conductor to 80% when you consider continuous loads. Instead, the rating of the circuit, after derating factors, must be sized at 125% of the load. It makes a difference when you need to stack other derating factors in the mix or combining continuous and non-continuous loads. Most of the time it works out the same way, but the distinction can be important - just a nit-pick. :)

Ok, so let's talk about that table you posted. There are two factors you need to worry about: conductor rating and termination rating. If you need to use derating factors like ambient temperature correction, you do it against the conductor rating, but then the maximum circuit rating is the lower of the two factors.

For example, that table will show you that #6 is good to 55A (60 degC), 65A (75 degC), and 75A (90 degC). Most wire in conduit - THHN/THWN - has a 90 degC insulation rating. However, almost all residential equipment (NEMA receptacles, panelboards, etc.) has termination ratings at 75 degC. This means that a circuit relying upon #6 can never exceed 65A (even though the conductor's rating says it's good to 75A).
 
Flasher, thanks for the clarification ... always great information with your example.

While this is true (and the one you posted was very, very old), you have to know how to read it properly.

First, a word of caution: you are not derating the conductor to 80% when you consider continuous loads. Instead, the rating of the circuit, after derating factors, must be sized at 125% of the load. It makes a difference when you need to stack other derating factors in the mix or combining continuous and non-continuous loads. Most of the time it works out the same way, but the distinction can be important - just a nit-pick. :)

Ok, so let's talk about that table you posted. There are two factors you need to worry about: conductor rating and termination rating. If you need to use derating factors like ambient temperature correction, you do it against the conductor rating, but then the maximum circuit rating is the lower of the two factors.

For example, that table will show you that #6 is good to 55A (60 degC), 65A (75 degC), and 75A (90 degC). Most wire in conduit - THHN/THWN - has a 90 degC insulation rating. However, almost all residential equipment (NEMA receptacles, panelboards, etc.) has termination ratings at 75 degC. This means that a circuit relying upon #6 can never exceed 65A (even though the conductor's rating says it's good to 75A).
 
The consensus I've heard from the various inspectors I polled is that they would not balk at attaching a 6/4 SOOW cord to the device. 625.44(B)(3) requires it be less than 6' long if you do.

Let's say we replace a 100A wall connector with a subpanel with 4x 100A breakers in there...Then can we run SOOW to 4x wall connectors as long as they are within 6ft away? Thanks!
 
Let's say we replace a 100A wall connector with a subpanel with 4x 100A breakers in there...Then can we run SOOW to 4x wall connectors as long as they are within 6ft away? Thanks!

I doubt you'd get away with that.

One reason: the cord ampacity tables - 400.5(A)(1) lists up to 95A capacity for 2/4 cable in column B, and that's not enough for 80A charging (100A required). The table doesn't go any higher, but it's likely that you'd have to find some #1/3 cable.

Probably the largest reason - under 400.7 ("Uses Permitted"), you can get away with using it on a NEMA 14-50 based on 400.7(A)(6), which permits it for "connection of utilization equipment to facilitate frequent interchange" for UMC backup purposes. Your installation would probably be considered permanent, and the #1 "use not permitted" where there is no permitted reason is as a substitute for fixed wiring of a structure.

I see no other reason in 400.7 that you'd be permitted to use flexible cord -- it's "subject to damage" and will be scrutinized especially heavily in commercial installations.
 
But flex conduit would be ok, as long as it's metal/non-flammable. ??

Correct, for now according to the letter of the law when it comes to their instructions, you could use rigid (pipe), IMC, EMT, flexible metallic (FMC), and liquidtight flexible metallic (LFMC).

I'm hearing that it was an oversight to specify metal conduit and that updates should remove that restriction.