Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[gaswalla]

David, do you normally charge to 80 percent?

 

[Ferrycraigs]

A Tesla owner in Germany received a written explanation concerning the firmware based capacity loss and uploaded it on facebook.
It was made available to the service center by Tesla-HQ and unfortunately it has been poorly translated into german before it was handed out to him.
(IMO the last paragraph reveals that this wasn't meant to be a handout for the customer. ;-))

I tried to make a rough translation back to english (I don't have a ESL certificate)

I suspect there may be native German speakers that will correct me here, but I think the English translation can be tidied up as follows (my adjustments in bold but there is no copyright on my translation, so feel free to adjust further):

“The cells have accumulated sufficient wear, mainly through DC charging, but also through regular cycles, therefore charging cells to the same level as when new would result in accelerated cell deterioration (both in terms of capacity retention and performance).

The system has adapted to the state of the cell and gradually adjusted the maximum state of charge of the cells over several weeks to maximise the long-term retention of capacity and performance.

The system can reduce the maximum state of charge of the cells by about 10% compared to the original state of charge.

From there, the cell is operated in an optimal range to maximize long-term retention and performance and to stabilize the range at full charge.

Reassure the customer that adjusting the maximum charge limit is, in most cases, a one-time event and means that the range [does not] continue to slip.

The system implements this proactive precaution to ensure that the cells of the HV battery have years and thousands of kilometers left to counteract accelerated cell wear, which would lead to a loss of capacity and a loss of performance.”

 

[Ferrycraigs]

The document from the German service center is interesting. It seems they notice that the battery is degrading, and very high charge levels would cause accelerated degradation and ultimately make the battery fail. The interesting part to me is that they limit the top charge level. It tells me that high SoC is worse than we thought. And as the battery gets older high levels of charge become even more damaging.

That’s an interesting take on it. I read that the cause was DC Charging and lots of cycles. I didn’t see a link to high SoC.
Other than perhaps where they said if we continue to charge them to the same levels as new (is there an assumption that means 90-100%?) that would accelerate degradation.

Reassuring the customer that’s it is, IN MOST CASES, a one-off adjustment is a bit worrying, and it sounds like all my good work in using a CHAdeMO rather than a Supercharger, has been completely in vain.

And I’m not sure where this leaves me with the 'I paid for a 70 and you have now made it a 58' argument. I don’t think it leads inescapably to the conclusion there was a batch of dud cells, but it probably suggests that BMS hasn’t protected the cells as much as it might have been expected to have done.

 

[sixela]

The problem is with this class action's victims Tesla went the other way and decreased battery capacity below what was sold and rated by the EPA. A battery limited like this will never have had the ability to reach EPA certifications and is a bait and switch. They will also never have had the ability to reach advertised power or acceleration numbers.

Except Tesla never guaranteed that older batteries would still be able to reach the EPA certified ranges within the entire warranty period of the battery. The EPA certification is based on tests, and basically says "this is a what a new car of this type will achieve (within the test environment, which also does not model things like winter conditions, use of air conditioning etc.)."

The EPA certification would be rendered invalid if the BMS would suddenly refuse to charge the cells to the same voltage on a car with a new battery. It does not prevent the BMS from measuring things and adjusting to older batteries in a way that reduces range.

Heck, even ICE cars of a certain age consume more fuel and have reduced range compared to their new as-certified siblings.

 

[MP3Mike]

it sounds like all my good work in using a CHAdeMO rather than a Supercharger, has been completely in vain.

If anything using CHAdeMO is likely worse for your battery than using a Supercharger. I think the research shows that the time spent charging is worse than faster charging. So CHAdeMO puts you right in the bad spot, fast enough to create heat/degradation but slow enough that it adds up more than using a quicker Supercharger.

From prior information Tesla treats CHAdeMO kWhs added the same as Supercharger kWhs added. (For example in the number of kWhs of DC charging before they start throttling.)

 

[bhzmark]

I read that the cause was DC Charging and lots of cycles. I didn’t see a link to high SoC.

It seems a link can be inferred by the remedy and the expectations for what that remedy does -- slow or even stop the accelerated degradation.

You can have a modest (software imposed) range limit now, or a worse (hardware imposed) range limit later.

 

[Guy V]

If they took that approach it would be much harder for Tesla to make a credible claim that there was any reason for doing this at all. Because if there was, then, "why did you react so slowly"?

And for all you know, that might be going on, as well.

Hmmmmm, yes, with those who haven't yet been affected...

 

[Leeboy22001]

A Tesla owner in Germany received a written explanation concerning the firmware based capacity loss and uploaded it on facebook.
It was made available to the service center by Tesla-HQ and unfortunately it has been poorly translated into german before it was handed out to him.
(IMO the last paragraph reveals that this wasn't meant to be a handout for the customer. ;-))

I tried to make a rough translation back to english (I don't have a ESL certificate)

Shame it wasn't written on Tesla headed paper, and signed .

 

[jkennebeck]

Tesla has jumped the shark and is now spewing FUD on their loyal (for now) customer base. Sad. I called the service line today and was told they didn't know about any lawsuit. She told me to "Condition" the batter by running it down below 20% then charge to 80 or 90 and see if that helps. We'll see. Charging now.

 

[jkennebeck]

Shame it wasn't written on Tesla headed paper, and signed .

Subpoenas and testimony and a good lawyer and that document is gold.

 

[David99]

Where is the German original? I'm. Native German and would love to see the original.

 

[jkennebeck]

Where is the German original? I'm. Native German and would love to see the original.

There's a scan of it a few posts back in the thread

 

[lightningltd]

Where is the German original? I'm. Native German and would love to see the original.

Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

 

[Ferrycraigs]

If anything using CHAdeMO is likely worse for your battery than using a Supercharger. I think the research shows that the time spent charging is worse than faster charging. So CHAdeMO puts you right in the bad spot, fast enough to create heat/degradation but slow enough that it adds up more than using a quicker Supercharger.

From prior information Tesla treats CHAdeMO kWhs added the same as Supercharger kWhs added. (For example in the number of kWhs of DC charging before they start throttling.)

Well I wish I had known that.

 

[DJRas]

The document from the German service center is interesting. It seems they notice that the battery is degrading, and very high charge levels would cause accelerated degradation and ultimately make the battery fail. The interesting part to me is that they limit the top charge level. It tells me that high SoC is worse than we thought. And as the battery gets older high levels of charge become even more damaging.

I have supercharged a lot. 160k miles of my total of 223k miles were on superchargers. That's more DC charging than probably anyone else in this discussion. I probably also have the highest mileage car here. And I live in a very warm climate. All factors that are bad for the battery. Yet I'm unaffected. I believe the reason is that from day one I have been vigorous about only charging as much as I need for the next day. I almost never charge to 90% just because. Also, I have been using the timer and an app to delay charging so it would finish just minutes before I leave in the morning. Both these things have kept the average state of charge over time much lower than the standard method of plugging in at the end of the day and letting it charge to 90 right away.

Given that I have some of the highest supercharge amount, live in a hot climate and drove many more miles than all affected cars makes me think that 'state of charge' is the biggest factor for battery degradation. That's the one thing I was able to keep relatively low over the entire 5 years of ownership. All other factors/conditions are highly unfavorable for my battery.

Interesting information.
As you know I am probably number 2 in the supercharging about 100,000 miles out of my 140,000 miles.
I rarely charged to more than 90% (10 times in the year prior to May 2019).
I did charge most of that to 90% but immediately drove after that to about 60%-65% SOC where it would sit at work or at home.
Typically went between 30% and 90% SOC (now 15% to 90% because of the range reduction).
Also, warm climate southern California.

But, mine has been severely impacted ( with a bit restored now).

 

[sorka]

Except Tesla never guaranteed that older batteries would still be able to reach the EPA certified ranges within the entire warranty period of the battery. The EPA certification is based on tests, and basically says "this is a what a new car of this type will achieve (within the test environment, which also does not model things like winter conditions, use of air conditioning etc.)."

The EPA certification would be rendered invalid if the BMS would suddenly refuse to charge the cells to the same voltage on a car with a new battery. It does not prevent the BMS from measuring things and adjusting to older batteries in a way that reduces range.

Heck, even ICE cars of a certain age consume more fuel and have reduced range compared to their new as-certified siblings.

That's like saying it's ok for the car manufacturer to decrease the size of your gas tank when you've got some miles on it because the EPA never said you were guaranteed to keep getting the EPA rated range.

Secondly, my Prius at 312K miles gets better fuel economy than when it was new. In fact, every car I've ever bought new got slightly better fuel economy when it had many miles on it. I've driven over 2 million miles traveling to my current job since 2001 and every one of my cars that I've sold with over 300K miles has not had any decrease in fuel economy.

Now of course things breaks. Injectors get clogged and the spray pattern is not optimal but that's not a normal condition. If you use a good quality fuel and an occasional treatment of Techron, that won't happen to a modern pintless style injector. Cars don't need tuned or timing adjusted any more. You change the oil when you should (including the most neglected part of the care which is the transmission), spark plugs, filter, coolant, etc and it will run until it breaks. Modern cars don't usually run worse, lose power, or lose fuel economy unless something is actually wrong with them.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

Where is the German original? I'm. Native German and would love to see the original.

Enjoy! I suspect it started in English, and was then google translated into German before they sent it there.

 

[DJRas]

If anything using CHAdeMO is likely worse for your battery than using a Supercharger. I think the research shows that the time spent charging is worse than faster charging. So CHAdeMO puts you right in the bad spot, fast enough to create heat/degradation but slow enough that it adds up more than using a quicker Supercharger.

From prior information Tesla treats CHAdeMO kWhs added the same as Supercharger kWhs added. (For example in the number of kWhs of DC charging before they start throttling.)

Then Tesla's recent slowing of Supercharging is ALSO bad for their batteries.
Interesting point!

 

[DJRas]

That's like saying it's ok for the car manufacturer to decrease the size of your gas tank when you've got some miles on it because the EPA never said you were guaranteed to keep getting the EPA rated range.

Secondly, my Prius at 312K miles gets better fuel economy than when it was new. In fact, every car I've ever bought new got slightly better fuel economy when it had many miles on it. I've driven over 2 million miles traveling to my current job since 2001 and every one of my cars that I've sold with over 300K miles has not had any decrease in fuel economy.

Now of course things breaks. Injectors get clogged and the spray pattern is not optimal but that's not a normal condition. If you use a good quality fuel and an occasional treatment of Techron, that won't happen to a modern pintless style injector. Cars don't need tuned or timing adjusted any more. You change the oil when you should (including the most neglected part of the care which is the transmission), spark plugs, filter, coolant, etc and it will run until it breaks. Modern cars don't usually run worse, lose power, or lose fuel economy unless something is actually wrong with them.

I too had a 2011 Prius that had 310,000 miles when I replaced it with this Tesla- nearly 48 MPG the entire time I drove it
Prior to that I had a 1999 Mazda Miata with 298,500 miles - 26 MPG for those miles

 

[sixela]

That's like saying it's ok for the car manufacturer to decrease the size of your gas tank when you've got some miles on it because the EPA never said you were guaranteed to keep getting the EPA rated range.

ICE cars also degrade -- through other mechanisms, usually through reduced mechanical efficiency in the engine. I've yet to see the first class action suit about that.

I'm happy that it didn't happen to your Prius, but I have had other experiences.

Modern cars don't usually run worse, lose power, or lose fuel economy unless something is actually wrong with them.

I'll grant you that battery capacity in a BEV does degrade a lot more than fuel consumption in an ICE does, but that's hardly a secret. Hey, I'm only guaranteed 70% of the range after 192000 km on the Model 3 I'm driving under warranty, which is not a very high bar.