SMT: Nominal Full Pack tracking

[jdcollins5]

Sure. Just out of curiosity - are you sure it is 78.8kWh, not 77.8kWh? That would be interesting but LR RWDs are rare so perhaps it is (I always thought it was the same as the LR AWD (77.8kWh)...but again really very few SMT captures on LR RWD).

In any case, as has been said, Full Pack When New is just a hard-coded value and is not particularly relevant for any metric - though for older vehicles it more closely aligned with the actual NFP when new. For the 2021 LR AWD in particular, it tends to be strongly mismatched (82.1kWh for models later in the year, and NFP starts around 79-80kWh...whereas for the 2021 LR AWD earlier in the model year it was 77.8kWh and started at around 78kWh...and for the Performance 2021 it was always 82.1kWh FPWN and ~80.5kWh-81kWh NFP when new for most vehicles). This FPWN value is discussed in the FAQs on the SMT website.

Definitely FPWN should be ignored when looking at and calculating capacity loss - unless it happens to align with the NFP when the vehicle was new.

In any case, your car likely started around 78kWh (this is based on other vehicles) and that 78kWh includes the buffer (as you can easily see yourself from your SMT captures, by looking at SOC %, nominal remaining, and buffer size, at a variety of SOCs).



You have to use the NFP when your vehicle was new. If you don't know that, you have to piece together evidence from other vehicles of where your vehicle may have started, which at best will be an approximation, as all vehicle packs are slightly different.

You are correct, FPWN is 77.8. Without any other reference point, and since SMT was not available when I bought my car, I will just use this as my reference point. Unless you have other reference points to use.

My current Nominal Full Pack = 69.6 kWH

So my degradation would be 69.6/77.8 = 0.8946 or 89.46%. Correct? I realize this may not be exact, but close enough for me.

Thanks again for your help.

 

[jdcollins5]

The first value you see in Nominal Full Pack (NFP) when you first take delivery.

To illustrate this in my latest example: took delivery of my Plaid on 8/27/2021. NFP was 97.0 kWh despite Full Pack When New stating 99.4 kWh.

Today, my NFP shows 96.1 kWh. So degradation is just 97.0 - 96.1 = 0.9 kWh, or 0.9/97.0 = 0.93% degradation.

Doing the same math on the hard-coded 99.4 kWh value would incorrectly show much higher degradation of 3.3%. But my pack never had 99.4 kWh, it started off at 97.0 kWh.

Thanks MarcG.

 

[MarcG]

You are correct, FPWN is 77.8. Without any other reference point, and since SMT was not available when I bought my car, I will just use this as my reference point. Unless you have other reference points to use.

My current Nominal Full Pack = 69.6 kWH

So my degradation would be 69.6/77.8 = 0.8946 or 89.46%. Correct? I realize this may not be exact, but close enough for me.

Thanks again for your help.

You’ll want to put “1 -“ in front of your equation. 89% degradation means you only have 11% of your original capacity left

 

[jdcollins5]

You’ll want to put “1 -“ in front of your equation. 89% degradation means you only have 11% of your original capacity left

True . I started to do that but did not think I needed to.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

You are correct, FPWN is 77.8. Without any other reference point, and since SMT was not available when I bought my car, I will just use this as my reference point. Unless you have other reference points to use.

My current Nominal Full Pack = 69.6 kWH

So my degradation would be 69.6/77.8 = 0.8946 or 89.46%. Correct? I realize this may not be exact, but close enough for me.

Thanks again for your help.

Yes, you have about 10.5% capacity loss and presumably you show around 298rmi at 100% on your LR RWD (for "reasons" => 69.6/76*325rmi = 298rmi) .

I have no other reference points. I think 77.8kWh is a reasonable assumption for starting capacity for that vehicle (however prior to the 310->325 range increases you may have had more like 74kWh available - the exact situation prior to that update is less clear for this vehicle). You would not have seen capacity/range loss until you got below 76kWh, in any case - that much is clear (the reason 76kWh is used in the formula above rather than 77.8kWh).

 

[jdcollins5]

Yes, you have about 10.5% capacity loss and presumably you show around 298rmi at 100% on your LR RWD (for "reasons" => 69.6/76*325rmi = 298rmi) .

I have no other reference points. I think 77.8kWh is a reasonable assumption for starting capacity for that vehicle (however prior to the 310->325 range increases you may have had more like 74kWh available - the exact situation prior to that update is less clear for this vehicle). You would not have seen capacity/range loss until you got below 76kWh, in any case - that much is clear (the reason 76kWh is used in the formula above rather than 77.8kWh).

You are correct on the 298 range miles.

 

[jim0266]

I've been tracking my LR RWD (4/19 build) with ScanMyTesla since 6,642 miles, nine months after taking delivery. At that time SMT reported 77.6 kWh nominal full pack, 325 miles of rated range and 3.50 kWH energy buffer. I have seen a video showing a new Model 3's NFP showing 77.9 kWh, but I use 77.8 as the number to track the battery over time.

My SMT spreadsheet.

My Model 3 at 18,606 miles is a weekend/roadtrip car with occasional use during the week. I've calculated 72% L2 charging and 28% Supercharging.

Between drives my car sits at no more than 50% SOC, and often in the high 30's-40's SOC. I aim for that SOC range when arriving home. When driving locally I mostly use the middle of the pack (60-40). Even for longer trips I've mostly been able to go from no more than 70% SOC and down to 30% SOC before the next SuC stop. Every so often I charge to 90% and let the car sit asleep for around 6 hours for the BMS to take a reading and try to step down to lower SOCs and let the car sleep to take additional readings.
I follow this guide to improve the battery management calibration.

The past weekend I charged to 90% and let the car sit asleep for 6 hours. It showed 89.1% SOC in SMT upon waking. I will still showing 73.0 NFP the next morning. Later in the day after our first SuC stop SMT reported 73.5 NFP. After a 359 mile trip we arrived home at 23.5% SOC and let the car sleep over night before charging back to 43%. The car was now showing 73.6 NFP and 316 miles of rated range. A few hours later it reported 72.8 NFP and 312 miles of rated range. I showed a NFP as low as 72.9 back in July 2021, but since then the car has averaged 73.1 kWh NFP. The energy buffer is now at 3.30 kWhs

Since I don't allow the BMS to see tops and bottoms consistently, with the necessary time to sleep, I do wonder if my NFP reading is accurate or a bit on the low side? Regardless, I'm still happy with the health of my battery pack.

 

[AlanSubie4Life]

At that time SMT reported 77.6 kWh nominal full pack, 325 miles of rated range and 3.50 kWH energy buffer. I have seen a video showing a new Model 3's NFP showing 77.9 kWh, but I use 77.8 as the number to track the battery over time.

Thanks for the confirmation (we have seen it before but always good to see it again) that the 325-mile LR RWD really did start at around 78kWh. (We of course knew that FPWN was 77.8kWh.)

Your ~6% loss seems great and seems to be another datapoint supporting @AAKEE ‘s “low SOC is very good” framework. I would guess the reading is accurate but only one way to find out, and no reason to, really.

And presumably you are showing ~312rmi out of 325rmi, 4% lower, confirming the 6% (76kWh/77.8kWh (degradation threshold/FPWN) discrepancy). [EDIT: Never mind I see you stated it was 312 which is as expected.]

 

[ambudriver03]

I have a 2019 P3D that was delivered on Oct 19, 2019 and a 2020 P3D delivered on Dec 27, 2019. It kinda sucks that I don't know what the cars were delivered with. I would assume 77-78 KWh.

...

Anyone else tracking this or anything else?

I have a very similarly built car as the OP @benyl, I have a 2020 Model 3 Performance "Stealth" that was built in November of 2019.

I have used TeslaFi since the day after I bought the car, and started using ScanMyTesla 'round about the 1st month or so.
I now have just over 37000 miles on the car.

Nominal Full Pack is 67.3 (Via ScanMyTesla) , so about 13% Degradation.
Full pack when new was 77.8,
Current rated range is 280 (car was delivered with 310).
Discharge cycles is 250x.
AC charge is 9730kwh via TeslaFi, 9797 via SMT (0.6% variation AC)
DC charge is 4876kwh via TeslaFi, 5123kwh via SMT (4% variation DC, though this maybe makes sense due to DCFC losses and added/delivered)

(Supersized screenshot from SMT attached)

 

[nj1266]

This is my M3P after two years of ownership. Started life @77.22 kWh nominal and declined to ~72 kWh by the first year (red dot) and stayed @72.5 kWh by the end of the second year. Degradation is around 6%. I am ok with that.

 

[Neathie]

Hi all. Newbie owner here having a week ago taken ownership of an inventory Dec '21 RWD. Advertised on the Tesla website as having a 305 mile range (I know I wouldn't get that in the real world). On a 100% charge, it's showing 251 miles and having downloaded SMT, it looks like about a 5kWh difference between the full pack when new, and the nominal full pack. Is this anything to be concerned about? There's 4,000 miles

on the odometer.

Thanks.

 

[AAKEE]

it looks like about a 5kWh difference between the full pack when new, and the nominal full pack. Is this anything to be concerned about? There's 4,000 mileson the odometer.

Nothing to worry about, that is about normal.

 

[N54TT]

edit. Looks normal to me

 

[AAKEE]

Is it me or does it look like SMT is showing a 10kwh loss from new?

No.

Full Pack When New = 60.5
Nominal Full Pack. = 55.9

Loss 4.6kWh or 7.6%

 

[N54TT]

No.

Full Pack When New = 60.5
Nominal Full Pack. = 55.9

Loss 4.6kWh or 7.6%

I realized it right after I hit reply and edited my post before you quoted it. That’s what I get when I check TMC right after I get up, before my morning coffee lol.

 

[Alset2]

Been using SMT for a few years and yesterday went to do a check on my 2022 plaid (had charged to 100% before a trip) but my readings were completely bogus. On top of that the were flip flopping between obliviously wrong numbers (79Kw to -0.xx).

Above I am referring to 'nominal full pack" reading , but many of the readings were doing this flip flopping.
I went in and tried changing cars setting back and forth a few times but did not help any. I have been using M3 settings since I got the Plaid. Switching to MS setting resulted in very little info and none of it made sense.

Anyone ever experienced anything like this? Any ideas how to fix it?

Thanks in advance

 

[AAKEE]

Been using SMT for a few years and yesterday went to do a check on my 2022 plaid (had charged to 100% before a trip) but my readings were completely bogus. On top of that the were flip flopping between obliviously wrong numbers (79Kw to -0.xx).

Above I am referring to 'nominal full pack" reading , but many of the readings were doing this flip flopping.
I went in and tried changing cars setting back and forth a few times but did not help any. I have been using M3 settings since I got the Plaid. Switching to MS setting resulted in very little info and none of it made sense.

Anyone ever experienced anything like this? Any ideas how to fix it?

Thanks in advance

There is a setting that need to be set, after update 2022.xx. something. Otherwise the NFP can be 0 or so, at least his is valid for model 3.
I guess the software follows each other when it comes to changes like this.

 

[Alset2]

There is a setting that need to be set, after update 2022.xx. something. Otherwise the NFP can be 0 or so, at least his is valid for model 3.
I guess the software follows each other when it comes to changes like this.

Thanks, do you happen to remember which setting?
But thanks anyway as Ill hook it up and play around with all the settings if you don't recall...

thanks again

 

[AAKEE]

Thanks, do you happen to remember which setting?
But thanks anyway as Ill hook it up and play around with all the settings if you don't recall...

thanks again

These must be set correct:
Before the fix came, things was wrong.
After the fix, if not using the right settings, things is wrong.

Look at the formware of the car and set it correct If it isnt.

 

[Alset2]

These must be set correct:
Before the fix came, things was wrong.
After the fix, if not using the right settings, things is wrong.

Look at the formware of the car and set it correct If it isnt.
View attachment 901191

ahh ,,thanks for clarifying that. I should have known what you were talking about.