Plugless Charging

[cronosx]

He means:
1) make it optional (make space for induction coil in designing the vehicle but make it optional to install the coil and the attached cabling and cooling)
2) wait for the technology to mature more (get better, with less losses)
3) Wait until the hardware can be built at a cost of 112 dollars to Tesla, and sell it to the customer for 250 (100% margin)

I kind of agree.

Ok, why can't he be readable as you?

Ok, i agree, of course it need to be optional, and then i agree that the tecnology isn't mature for now.

The part i don't agree is the 112$ options.
First of all, they charge about 25% so if the pay it 112$ they will sell it at 140$, since it's an optional maybe 180? but not more i think. ( and of course actually cost at least 10 time more.. so it's unlikely that in a couple of years will be available at this price )
The point is.. who care how much it cost? it's an option, if you don't think the value is enought for the cost you just don't buy it, but if you really want it for some reason, here it is.

 

[EaglesPDX]

Since for the making of the plugless adapter they need a model 3, i would say that che chicken come first.

For Evatran/Plugless, yes they have to have the car to build the adaptor. My situation is the reverse, I'll need the plug less charger before I can use the car.

Tesla is out to build an EV ecology. It's why so much of Tesla tech is made public domain. I would guess Tesla will help companies like Evatran/Plugless to succeed by giving them access and engineering help just as Microsoft, Apple and Google do with developers in building their ecologies.

With assured population of 500,000 Tesla 3's, it gives Plugless the assured market to commit resources to building the adaptor for the Tesla 3 as soon as possible.

Building the "on the street" charging station has some cost to it ($4K) so I don't want to do it twice, once for a wired connection and once for wireless. And since the wireless is the only practical way to do an "on the street" charger, I'll wait.

Being around the 200,000th order, I don't expect a car until 2018. I think the Plugless charger will likely to be ready to go by the time my Tesla 3 is ready to build.

 

[melindav]

Building the "on the street" charging station has some cost to it ($4K) so I don't want to do it twice, once for a wired connection and once for wireless. And since the wireless is the only practical way to do an "on the street" charger, I'll wait.

When you say "on street" do you mean a public street or a parking space within an apartment/condo site? If you are thinking a public street, it would be worth you going down to the city (1900 SW 4th) and meet with someone from PBOT before you get your heart set on it. Having had dealt with PBOT for work, I honestly don't think it'll fly. And IF it is allowed, it's going to be much more than the $4000 before you are up and running and depending on which development zone you are in could involve Land Use application plus building, electrical and sitework permits.

 

[JeffK]

I am curious:
If plugless charging is about 90 % efficient, where do the 10 % go?

Just trying to understand how this works.

Johan was partially correct. You do have a loss from the AC to DC conversion within the car but it's on the order of 1-5% but with Plugless you ALSO have a loss of 10% from wireless transfer.

So, if you had a 90kWh car and you had the national average of $0.12 per kWh it'd cost you a around $1.20 extra every time you charge if you use wireless compared to corded.

You have further losses later when the car converts the DC back to AC for the AC induction motor.

 

[EaglesPDX]

When you say "on street" do you mean a public street or a parking space within an apartment/condo site?

Our parking is a paved section next to the road. Think of it as a large paved shoulder contiguous with the road. Private land, no imperial entaglements other than normal permits for code etc. and utility company which has already agreed to a transformer and drop. Six EV car chargers is a nice money maker for them. Our total install came out to $1500 per power feed plus charger and mount. My charger is going to be the Plugless.

 

[melindav]

Then that falls under PBOT and will go by their rules. Go in and talk to them, I could be wrong, but my experience is they are exceptionally unreasonable and work at a turtles pace

 

[EaglesPDX]

I explained further above plus I live in Portlandia. If the city were to get obstreperous, all I'd have to do is show up at city council wearing a giant paper mache Elon Musk head and they'd cave.

 

[melindav]

seriously, I am attempting to give you advice based on things I do and work with every day. If you want to assume the city officials work off the cartoon of what people think Portland is, you are delusional. good luck.

 

[EaglesPDX]

Did get an email from Plugless that several Evatron/Plugless employees ordered T3's so there's some internal motivation to get the Plugless adaptor for the T3 out the door.

 

[Tiberius]

Also, this one is pretty interesting wireless charging technology. Just drive through the "charging lane", and your car will be charged!

England will test electric car charging lanes

Anyone else ever play F-Zero as a kid? I was going to make a similar picture but someone else on reddit beat me to it.

 

[EaglesPDX]

With charging lanes and cars on autopilot, no chance of car going out of the lane as it would have in the built in lane sensors that will allow autonomous cars to travel at high speed and high density. The issue would be more keeping the speed down in the autonomous charging lanes to match the speed differential of the slower, non-autonomous lanes.

 

[JeffK]

With charging lanes and cars on autopilot, no chance of car going out of the lane as it would have in the built in lane sensors that will allow autonomous cars to travel at high speed and high density. The issue would be more keeping the speed down in the autonomous charging lanes to match the speed differential of the slower, non-autonomous lanes.

I've always had a problem with the autonomous high speed, high density notion. It's been around for nearly 30 years. The reality is, if the front car hits an animal the other cars cannot brake in time even if communication is nearly instantaneous. The same applies to hard braking, if the front car brakes as the theory goes the other cars would be alerted and brake too. This always assumes they have equal traction and treadwear. Yet at distances like 6 ft I find this hard to imagine working properly.

Sure a human reaction time is one thing but the the distance travelled while braking varies directly with the velocity of the vehicle. I guess I have yet to see a working high speed, high density caravan in an accident scenario. I'd imagine it's going to be slightly lower density than what was imagined 30 years ago.

 

[RDoc]

I've always had a problem with the autonomous high speed, high density notion. It's been around for nearly 30 years. The reality is, if the front car hits an animal the other cars cannot brake in time even if communication is nearly instantaneous. The same applies to hard braking, if the front car brakes as the theory goes the other cars would be alerted and brake too. This always assumes they have equal traction and treadwear. Yet at distances like 6 ft I find this hard to imagine working properly.

Sure a human reaction time is one thing but the the distance travelled while braking varies directly with the velocity of the vehicle. I guess I have yet to see a working high speed, high density caravan in an accident scenario. I'd imagine it's going to be slightly lower density than what was imagined 30 years ago.

What kind of animal are you thinking about? Unless it's something like an elephant or rhino, the car that hit it won't slow very much at all.

A vehicle, particularly a truck or bus crossing the divider and hitting the lead car head on would be a serious problem, but that's a pretty rare occurrence on a modern highway.

 

[JeffK]

What kind of animal are you thinking about? Unless it's something like an elephant or rhino, the car that hit it won't slow very much at all.

A vehicle, particularly a truck or bus crossing the divider and hitting the lead car head on would be a serious problem, but that's a pretty rare occurrence on a modern highway.

Seriously? Happens all the time where I live.

 

[techmaven]

Also, this one is pretty interesting wireless charging technology. Just drive through the "charging lane", and your car will be charged!

England will test electric car charging lanes

This makes pretty much no sense at all. Just calculate out the resource consumption requirements to make such a lane and where they would have to go, and sort out the energy losses.

Remember, most cars are parked, doing nothing, for 22 to 23.5 hours a day. It makes sense to deliver energy to them then as opposed to the fraction of time they are in motion.

 

[BluestarE3]

Seriously? Happens all the time where I live.

Deer on roadways are not that uncommon around here either.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Also, this one is pretty interesting wireless charging technology. Just drive through the "charging lane", and your car will be charged!

England will test electric car charging lanes

Now there is a great idea.

 

[Garlan Garner]

Johan was partially correct. You do have a loss from the AC to DC conversion within the car but it's on the order of 1-5% but with Plugless you ALSO have a loss of 10% from wireless transfer.

So, if you had a 90kWh car and you had the national average of $0.12 per kWh it'd cost you a around $1.20 extra every time you charge if you use wireless compared to corded.

You have further losses later when the car converts the DC back to AC for the AC induction motor.

For some reason I don't have those losses with my wireless charger. $.12 to $.24 is a 50% loss. So getting to $1.20 is actually a 1000% loss. To cut to the chase for my situation. Wired charging = $1.80 per day. Wireless comes in at $1.96. That's what's happening to me in real time.

 

[jkk_]

I've always had a problem with the autonomous high speed, high density notion. It's been around for nearly 30 years. The reality is, if the front car hits an animal the other cars cannot brake in time even if communication is nearly instantaneous. The same applies to hard braking, if the front car brakes as the theory goes the other cars would be alerted and brake too. This always assumes they have equal traction and treadwear. Yet at distances like 6 ft I find this hard to imagine working properly.

Sure a human reaction time is one thing but the the distance travelled while braking varies directly with the velocity of the vehicle. I guess I have yet to see a working high speed, high density caravan in an accident scenario. I'd imagine it's going to be slightly lower density than what was imagined 30 years ago.

Not mention that there will always be delays in transmissions. Sure they may seem immediate for humans but they really aren't. And then we can have packet loss from the lead car when it's initiating braking. For me, high speed high density notion just has too many problems to be solved. The KISS principle is usually quite good route to follow.

 

[JeffK]

For some reason I don't have those losses with my wireless charger. $.12 to $.24 is a 50% loss. So getting to $1.20 is actually a 1000% loss. To cut to the chase for my situation. Wired charging = $1.80 per day. Wireless comes in at $1.96. That's what's happening to me in real time.

uhh...
1 - 1.80/1.96 = ~ 8.2% loss compared to wired. So you're seeing around the same predicted losses.

If you can measure by exact kWh used vs kWh charged we can get a more accurate number.

the $1.20 number is a full 90 kWh charge requiring 100 kWh due to losses at $0.12 per kWh (10 kWh at 0.12)