-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
garsh
Re Member
Yeah. Don't forget cost of development.
You could just have two connectors on the same bus, but then somebody would try to plug them both in at the same time, using swapped phases, and the best outcome you could hope for in that scenario would be tripping the breakers in your electric panel.
So, you could have dual-chargers on-board your Tesla to handle that. Which they offered for the Model S for a while. Looks like it was a $1500 option. So, not cheap.
Maybe you could just add some smarts to the single charger to only "turn on" one connection at a time instead. It still takes time to develop such a thing. And someone will complain that the car isn't charging twice as fast when they plug both in.
garsh
Re Member
If that ever comes to be, I'll probably stop by my local supercharging station on my way home from work just to watch them for a while.But who will see this sci-fi snake when the car drives alone all by it self into the charging station?
PluglessSteve
Member
Disclosures (I am with Plugless and we did not work with Tesla on our system) - on efficiency. We think all inductive chargers should be judged by the following three criteria - 1. What is the TOTAL wireless system efficiency as compared to the corded equivalent (not the efficiency just across the gap, as an example) 2. As provided by 3rd-party testing and 3. on a production system. To that end our Gen1 Plugless system (the 3.3kW charger available for Volt, LEAF and ELR) is 7% efficient compared to level 1 charger and roughly ~12 less efficient than level 2 corded charging. 2. per the testing of Idaho Nat'l Labs (USDOE) who requires publishing -https://avt.inl.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/evse/PLUGLESSEvatranStandaloneTestResultsFactSheet.pdf and 3. we've been selling that system for two years (with installations across North America)
Our Gen2 System (which the Tesla S system is) will have data from INL and we expect the numbers to be the same. (it takes some time for results, as INL does thousands of test cycles - more than 8700 for our Gen1 system, for example).
Our Gen2 System (which the Tesla S system is) will have data from INL and we expect the numbers to be the same. (it takes some time for results, as INL does thousands of test cycles - more than 8700 for our Gen1 system, for example).
Garlan Garner
Banned
hacer
Active Member
Tesla's current on-board charger has about 96.1% efficiency at 8.4 kW. So if you succeed at 12% less, that would be 84.1% efficient. Do the thousands of test cycles include variation on alignment and air gap? If so that is fairly impressive but still represents massive inefficiency if ever adopted on a large scale. (Think pouring 1.5 gallon of gasoline on the ground for each typical ICE car fill-up or 2.25 gallons for an SUV).
For the Tesla, does your system interface to the existing on-board charger or the battery directly? I assume that it voids Tesla's battery warranty if it is the latter and at least the on-board charger warranty if it is the former. Do you provide a replacement warranty since your customers will loose their factory warranty?
Do you have a curve for that?
I think what Plugless is doing is great. Misalignment testing is available.
But I would like to beat the 96.1 percent with an inductive connection, at least on part of the curve. That is going to be really hard to do... The curve on the existing charger would be a motivator. Everything else has a "pretty sure" confidence level. I am not that confident on beating the Tesla 96.1%. But am "pretty sure" on beating the BMW onboard numbers...
BMW is easier to beat than Tesla. Must work harder.
JeffK
Well-Known Member
Keep in mind the modern Tesla models are available with dual onboard chargers allowing charging up to 20 kW. The future plugless system is only advertised as capable of 7.2 kW making it considerably slower and at a penalty or nearly $2000. I can't see myself spending that kind of money on a wireless system unless the power improved to allow faster charging. I'd also hope more than anything that the inductive charging is not a sensitive as wireless cell phone charging, the exact placement is a PITA, finely placing where I park would take just as long as plugging the car in.
Then there's the matter of selling the extra "plugless concrete shield" for installing on concrete... it should totally be included in the base price. How many people really don't have concrete garages? It it was made a permanent part of the design of the physical unit then no one would have an issue and if anything it causes the unit to be physically closer to the car thus increasing efficiency. Why make things unnecessarily complicated?
Don't get me wrong, I think wireless charging is as cool now as when (Nikola) Tesla performed his first experiments in wireless power. Maybe they'll have a better, more powerful, less expensive version by the time the Model 3 comes out. The US DOE has a 20 kW version...
ORNL surges forward with 20-kilowatt wireless charging for vehicles | ORNL
Then there's the matter of selling the extra "plugless concrete shield" for installing on concrete... it should totally be included in the base price. How many people really don't have concrete garages? It it was made a permanent part of the design of the physical unit then no one would have an issue and if anything it causes the unit to be physically closer to the car thus increasing efficiency. Why make things unnecessarily complicated?
Don't get me wrong, I think wireless charging is as cool now as when (Nikola) Tesla performed his first experiments in wireless power. Maybe they'll have a better, more powerful, less expensive version by the time the Model 3 comes out. The US DOE has a 20 kW version...
hacer
Active Member
Thank you. I think we can beat it at the high end, maybe, enough to say, about the same...
Tesla sets the bar higher. That data has a little bit of "back to the drawing board" in it. Or maybe spend more time and money in a few places.
Thanks again.
