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

Pics/Info: Inside the battery pack

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Yes! You get it! This the "active impedance" control is only enabled towards end of charge when the charge is slowing the the string voltage is more stable. Is it totally lossless? No of course not. But is is safer than true shuttling and it is more efficient than simple bleed balancing.

This is just a lighter form of charge shunting, here are that different types of cell equalization for your reference Cell Balancing and Battery Equalisation

This is no way like you said earlier that it's "lossless balancing" or "lossless equalization". No matter how you crunch the numbers energy is converted to heat when the power darlington transistor is active, either during the charge or after the charge.
 
I drew up this quick schematic to get an idea of what the balancing circuit looks like. There's a diode as well, but it appears to only be used for reverse protection/transients. (Might be a zener.) It's obvious that conducted noise was a concern to Tesla - I suppose when you're pulling 1000A from a battery at maybe 30kHz, there's going to be a little noise! So they appear to have a network of filters, starting with L7 and C24, and the network of 11.3k + C26/C27, and 10k + C56/C57. ...

Thanks for the quick schematic!
I really wish they put in the the network of filters orginally on the roadster BMB, as without it I kept blowing fuses due do an large inductive spike when you connect up ESS service disconnect. Though my case was unique, but that suggested to me that the existing design was already somewhat near the edge of requiring one.
 
There is a main BMS board in the rear of the pack, I just haven't gotten any good pictures of it yet.

Pack housing is heading to the scrap yard tomorrow now that it's down to the bare aluminum and I have no use for it.



I suppose the rest of this belongs in my other thread, but, figure I'll summarize my progress here.

I worked on very temporary setup for my lower voltage battery configuration (44.4V) where 8 sets of 2 modules are in series with each other (so 8 sets at 44.4V) and all of those hooked in parallel. I used 4/0 wiring and lugs to do a nice equal-length-to-load wiring of the setup to balance the current draw and it seems to work. I made sure the path from negative to positive through the load from any module is through the same total length of wire. (I'll probably post a pic in my other thread). I reused the main pack fuse for now, and an aftermarket 1000A/75mV shunt.

The best part is that I finally powered something off of the pack! .... a box fan! .... through a 48V->12V DC-DC converter and a 12V->120V inverter. My 48V 8kW inverter arrives Monday.
 
At least part of what he's saying makes sense, given the circuitry on the per-module management boards:



Think of it this way.. From the negative terminal of the entire pack to the positive terminal, there are sixteen modules, and let's say 400V for a nice round number. From the per-module BMB's perspective, there are negative (0v) and positive (~25v) ends. If you count from the pack negative, through module A, then module B, and so on until you reach the positive terminal, module A's negative is the pack negative, and mod A's positive is mod B's negative, and so on, in series. Clear?

Sorry, I know this is basic and well-understood, but bear with me. It's critical that everyone is up to speed on this much to make sense of what's next.

So, each BMB (per module) can bleed a group (a group of parallel cells) to equalize it with its (series) neighbors. It does this by shorting out that group's positive and negative ends (a difference of ~4v) through the bleeder resistor for that group. When you do this, you have at most 158R / 4 (paralleled resistance) = 39.5R draining the group's voltage down to where the BMB wants it to be. Still clear?

OK, now think about what happens when the pack is charging. If the bleeder resistors are turned on by the FET, instead of bleeding power out of the group, you are effectively limiting the ability for that group to charge. Not completely, the cells will still receive some of the charge current, but not as much as if the cells in the group were the only electrical path through. Remember, the charge is current-limited, so by shunting around a group, you take the available current and divide it through two paths -- one through the group, one around it. This limits the voltage available to that specific group while the others still receive their full "dose". This isn't "shuttling" of charge from one group or module to another, but it is a way to control how much each group/module charges.

Furthermore, the FET can either be turned on hard, or activated in its linear region, depending on whether the BMB's signal to the FET's gate is digital logic or analog. What this means is that the FET itself can be anything between a dead short (or close to it -- the Rds(on) spec), and open circuit. With a DAC feeding the gate, you could variably control the impedance through that bleeder circuit (fixed resistors in series with the variable FET resistance), for any one cell group, and ultimately for the entire module. This enables active control over the amount of charge of any cell group in the entire pack. Ergo, that "active impedance" thing someone spoke of earlier. Pretty clever.

Is this anything other than simply enabling the bleed resistors during he charge cycle for the higher SOC cells?

As you say, there's no "shuttling" of charge from one cell to another... it's simply dissipating a portion of the charge current being delivered to a given cell group...
 
Is this anything other than simply enabling the bleed resistors during he charge cycle for the higher SOC cells?

As you say, there's no "shuttling" of charge from one cell to another... it's simply dissipating a portion of the charge current being delivered to a given cell group...

that is simply what you think. it is not that simple. it in effect increases the voltage to bricks not only reduces. and it balances module voltage as the bmb uses power. more balancing uses more power. there is no such thing as lossless
balancing of course but that is what this schemes are since
is use so little. current like water takes the path of least resistance. bleed balancing is totally lossy
 
I don't think this IC can vary the shunt current. It's either all or nothing.
At the end of the charge cycle for balancing, to bring the cells up, current can be set to approx 100mA, and the shunts can be turned on.
However in my mind it would make more sense to set current to zero and instead bleed off all high cells.
 
If you have room, keep it. You're one of the very first to go DIY on a MS pack but in the future many will follow. You'll able to sell this thing for $500-1000 I figure.

You might be correct.
Now that I'm able to get an roaster working with my custom brick, maybe if I took it up a notch an got a whole Model S pack working with custom batteries. Anyone got a spare Model S I can experiment on? :biggrin:
 
You might be correct.
Now that I'm able to get an roaster working with my custom brick, maybe if I took it up a notch an got a whole Model S pack working with custom batteries. Anyone got a spare Model S I can experiment on? :biggrin:

Do you think you could get more energy density into a Model S pack than Tesla already does safely? If so... Careers | Tesla Motors :)

But seriously, that seems like a pretty cool project. With the Model S, it looks pretty straight forward honestly, aside from the liquid cooling aspect. Just make bricks of a similar configuration, hook the BMS sense leads to the right spots, and it should work fine I would think, technically speaking.

- - - Updated - - -

Actually, I was looking at the modules and, they're pretty tightly packed. However, I think there is a little room for improvement, but not much. Given substantial effort I bet 2-3% more cells in there... but the cost would certainly outweigh the ~9 mile range improvement.
 
Do you think you could get more energy density into a Model S pack than Tesla already does safely? If so... Careers | Tesla Motors :)
LOL I don't think Tesla would offer me enough to move me and family to CA.

Actually I could if that was an requirement spec, I would maximized energy density wise with raw cells submerged in fluid (high dielectric value). This would remove the large amount of metal coolant lines interwoven between the cells, I would keep the the cells rupture C metal can imprint, and wire fuse though.

But seriously, that seems like a pretty cool project. With the Model S, it looks pretty straight forward honestly, aside from the liquid cooling aspect. Just make bricks of a similar configuration, hook the BMS sense leads to the right spots, and it should work fine I would think, technically speaking.
Agreed looks straight forward. I wonder how many people would want only an 75 mile pack, but loose over 50% of the battery weight? Wonder how fast 0-60 it would go then :biggrin:
 
This is just a lighter form of charge shunting, here are that different types of cell equalization for your reference Cell Balancing and Battery Equalisation

This is no way like you said earlier that it's "lossless balancing" or "lossless equalization". No matter how you crunch the numbers energy is converted to heat when the power darlington transistor is active, either during the charge or after the charge.

Look I said it was not truly lossless but if you want to know more about this type of balance schemes those are the keywords. Even true shuttling is not truly losses. What Tesla has done is approach lossless balancing without resorting to real shuttling. If it was simply lighter use of the bleed resistors Tesla would not be granted a patent. There is one more trick to using "excess energy" to make it even more efficient

None if this really matters for off grid use though. If you keep the batteries in an air conditioned room they will not even need liquid cooling or the BMS/BMB. One other benefit to using many small cells in parallel is it allows Tesla to sort and then pair all the cells into a brick such that all bricks are extremely well balanced to begin with. The only reason they would ever go out of balance is if some cells were running at a different temperature than others. This can happen with a coolant loop even with good distribution so Tesla does need a BMS. If you use air cooling in an air conditioned room and lay the pack flat you wont need a BMS at all. Bulk charging should be fine. Put the battery in a separate room lined with concrete/brick/whatever just in case. I mean off the grid pack is probably going to last a few days so the discharge rate with be really low compared to the Model S
 
Pack housing is gone already :( Sold it to a buddy who scraps, for pretty cheap (he came and loaded it and hauled it off) just to get it out of the way

I did actually measure the aluminum bottom prior and it was slightly more than 1/4" thick.

Edit: Just found out that the pack housing weighed in at right around 250 lbs. (Including the bulk of the aluminum module mounting bars that I couldn't reuse, and the couple pieces of aluminum tubing from the coolant loop in the front)
 
Last edited: