Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[DJRas]

Perhaps Tesla purposely restricts the battery from completely discharging because it may be to recover. Have you thought of this?

There has always been a buffer at the bottom to protect against bricking the battery. This is a restriction at the top. Only done to "few" cars.

 

[N..8]

DJRas, The way your pack is charging it almost looks like it has very high resistance. Although not a death sentence it does change how high a C level you can charge a 18650.

A tempting plan, but if your battery is capped, charging it to 100% won’t achieve the effect you hope for. As I (now) understand it, the battery is still the same size (or spec). It’s just that 10 kWh has been made unavailable. It’s still there in the background. After capping all that happens is the BMS records 100% at the new, lower Vmax, normally around 80-85% of the old battery. But on the plus side, you can charge up to 100% almost with impunity as it’s really only charging to 85% of the spec. And it may get there quicker, and won’t have any negative effects on your battery.

Ferrycraigs, I would 100% agree but he is also being caped on CC Max during charging. Instead of being at a high rate of CC for the first 80% of charge he isn't ever hitting above 200amp where most other cars are above 280amps. So his charge curve is nerfed, he is almost charging in a CV mode most of it. Lots of things are happening in his pack and almost looks like it's at a very high resistance and Tesla is trying to keep the heat down by charging it at a lower CC/CV.

 

[Droschke]

are you saying cars in colder places will have this issue more?

They shouldn't because the Tesla BMS is there to protect you

 

[MikeyC]

It hasn’t been stolen, so arguing theft is, I think, very likely to fail. It hasn’t been stolen; it’s still there, it just isn’t available. The house still has the same number of rooms, it’s just that a big bloke with a Tesla T Shirt is standing in the doorway of one room denying you access. Even though you paid for the whole house.

Pretty good analogy. That may be how it goes in court... if it goes to court. However, one could also make the argument that "theft" doesn't necessarily require "use" by the thief. A lawyer for a class action suit could argue that theft is the action of something being taken. Someone could steal a TV from your house and throw it off a bridge (or even bury it in your back yard and conceal it) and it's still theft: they don't have to have access to the TV. In the same way, you can argue that the guy with the Tesla t-shirt who is blocking the door to that room in your house has "stolen" that room because only he has access to it (if he wants to access it). The t-shirt guy doesn't actually have to be using the room. The fact that he is blocking the room means it is no longer yours because you don't have access to it.

Mike

 

[MikeyC]

I have a feeling that the current firmware was a quick-and-dirty update where they simply changed vMax to 4.1 and lowered the overall charging rate. They didn't alter the step-downs in charging rate by percentage so you still get a much lower charging rate say from 90 to 100% even though 100% is really ~85% of the actual capacity. A compromise might be for Tesla to shift the drop-downs so that it charges to 100% (the old 85%) faster. That might result in being able to charge to 100% even faster than before this fiasco because that 100% indicated would only be 85% of the real capacity. I can see Tesla doing that eventually, and I wonder if that would satisfy some people because many may not have charged to 100% anyway due to the diminishing returns on charge rate at the top end.

I think it all depends on what they found that prompted them to make this change. Worst case is that they may have found that 4.1v is the new true vMax. In other words, you may not be able to count that capped 4.1 to 4.2v range as "reserved capacity" if they found that the batteries now have an upper limit of 4.1v and charging to 4.2v is actually overcharging. If that's the case, they may have to treat 4.1v as the actual capacity since trying to charge to 4.2v would be like overcharging a new battery to 4.3v to get a little extra over-capacity.

Mike

 

[Droschke]

delaying the point at which it will ultimately fail, or fall out of spec.

In other words, a cleaver way to avoid warranty replacement of the unhealthy packs.

 

[DJRas]

DJRas, The way your pack is charging it almost looks like it has very high resistance. Although not a death sentence it does change how high a C level you can charge a 18650.

Ferrycraigs, I would 100% agree but he is also being caped on CC Max during charging. Instead of being at a high rate of CC for the first 80% of charge he isn't ever hitting above 200amp where most other cars are above 280amps. So his charge curve is nerfed, he is almost charging in a CV mode most of it. Lots of things are happening in his pack and almost looks like it's at a very high resistance and Tesla is trying to keep the heat down by charging it at a lower CC/CV.

And yet, Tesla says my pack is just fine.

 

[VT_EE]

What if you just charge to 100% daily..will this cause battery issues before 8 yrs so you can be under warrenty or will degradation be considered normal by tesla so it makes no difference?

I wouldn't do this. Tesla would probably pull your logs and then accuse you of not charging properly, which caused accelerated degradation. They would then deny your warranty claim. Still hoping something positive comes out of this for you guys/gals.

 

[DJRas]

I have a feeling that the current firmware was a quick-and-dirty update where they simply changed vMax to 4.1 and lowered the overall charging rate. They didn't alter the step-downs in charging rate by percentage so you still get a much lower charging rate say from 90 to 100% even though 100% is really ~85% of the actual capacity. A compromise might be for Tesla to shift the drop-downs so that it charges to 100% (the old 85%) faster. That might result in being able to charge to 100% even faster than before this fiasco because that 100% indicated would only be 85% of the real capacity. I can see Tesla doing that eventually, and I wonder if that would satisfy some people because many may not have charged to 100% anyway due to the diminishing returns on charge rate at the top end.

I think it all depends on what they found that prompted them to make this change. Worst case is that they may have found that 4.1v is the new true vMax. In other words, you may not be able to count that capped 4.1 to 4.2v range as "reserved capacity" if they found that the batteries now have an upper limit of 4.1v and charging to 4.2v is actually overcharging. If that's the case, they may have to treat 4.1v as the actual capacity since trying to charge to 4.2v would be like overcharging a new battery to 4.3v to get a little extra over-capacity.

Mike

So, you are saying there is a defect in MY battery that makes it UNSAFE to use to top 10-15% that I used to use until May 15.

 

[DJRas]

I wouldn't do this. Tesla would probably pull your logs and then accuse you of not charging properly, which caused accelerated degradation. They would then deny your warranty claim. Still hoping something positive comes out of this for you guys/gals.

Tesla Warranty does not say you cannot charge to 100%

 

[Droschke]

It hasn’t been stolen, so arguing theft is, I think, very likely to fail. It hasn’t been stolen; it’s still there, it just isn’t available. The house still has the same number of rooms, it’s just that a big bloke with a Tesla T Shirt is standing in the doorway of one room denying you access. Even though you paid for the whole house.

How about confiscation (seizure of property by an authority)?

If that big dud with a Tesla t-shirt is standing in the doorway of one room denying us access with the intention of not returning the room to us, that's technically seizure.

 

[Droschke]

I have a feeling that the current firmware was a quick-and-dirty update where they simply changed vMax to 4.1 and lowered the overall charging rate. They didn't alter the step-downs in charging rate by percentage so you still get a much lower charging rate say from 90 to 100% even though 100% is really ~85% of the actual capacity. A compromise might be for Tesla to shift the drop-downs so that it charges to 100% (the old 85%) faster. That might result in being able to charge to 100% even faster than before this fiasco because that 100% indicated would only be 85% of the real capacity. I can see Tesla doing that eventually, and I wonder if that would satisfy some people because many may not have charged to 100% anyway due to the diminishing returns on charge rate at the top end.

I think it all depends on what they found that prompted them to make this change. Worst case is that they may have found that 4.1v is the new true vMax. In other words, you may not be able to count that capped 4.1 to 4.2v range as "reserved capacity" if they found that the batteries now have an upper limit of 4.1v and charging to 4.2v is actually overcharging. If that's the case, they may have to treat 4.1v as the actual capacity since trying to charge to 4.2v would be like overcharging a new battery to 4.3v to get a little extra over-capacity.

Mike

Mike - My biggest concern is the safety. If the capped packs have been suffering from the high degree of Li-Plating and some cells have developed Li dendrites that's a huge safety concern.

I posed this question before, what if one of the capped cars with the dendrited cells catches fire?

Leaving aside the obvious and severe harm on the owner's side for a second, what would it bring to Tesla as a company?

 

[boywonder]

Although the new 100% has the cells capped to 4.07V or thereabouts, the effective cap is actually greater for owners who supercharge because to get the last (new) 90-100% takes so long that no one bothers.

The new 90% is in fact the old 80% so the reality is that the upper 20% of the battery is not easily reachable while the top 10% of the original battery voltage or power is impossible to access.

 

[Keshk]

I wouldn't do this. Tesla would probably pull your logs and then accuse you of not charging properly, which caused accelerated degradation. They would then deny your warranty claim. Still hoping something positive comes out of this for you guys/gals.

There is NOTHING in the Warranty, Sales contract, or other signed official papers says that you cant charge 100%.

This is either a bogus argument, or complete lack of knowledge how engineering works. If there is a problem with charging 100%, Tesla developers (or any average-skilled engineer) will put a margin in charging to prevent that from happening.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

DJRas, The way your pack is charging it almost looks like it has very high resistance. Although not a death sentence it does change how high a C level you can charge a 18650.

Ferrycraigs, I would 100% agree but he is also being caped on CC Max during charging. Instead of being at a high rate of CC for the first 80% of charge he isn't ever hitting above 200amp where most other cars are above 280amps. So his charge curve is nerfed, he is almost charging in a CV mode most of it. Lots of things are happening in his pack and almost looks like it's at a very high resistance and Tesla is trying to keep the heat down by charging it at a lower CC/CV.

Yep, classic symptoms of Chargegate (capping of charge speed) which is a separate issue to this thread which is batterygate, (capping of the battery). Some poor souls are affected by both. Fortunately, because I have stopped downloading updates, I only suffer from batterygate.

 

[Ferrycraigs]

In other words, a cleaver way to avoid warranty replacement of the unhealthy packs.

“Some people might say that, I couldn’t possibly comment”

 

[Ferrycraigs]

How about confiscation (seizure of property by an authority)?

If that big dud with a Tesla t-shirt is standing in the doorway of one room denying us access with the intention of not returning the room to us, that's technically seizure.

I’m still dealing with the seizure I nearly had when I realised what they had done to my battery.

 

[MP3Mike]

Fortunately, because I have stopped downloading updates, I only suffer from batterygate.

Be aware that depending on when you bought your Tesla you may void your warranty by not keeping the software up to date:

Voided Warranty
You are responsible for the proper operation of the vehicle and for receiving and maintaining detailed and accurate records of your vehicle’s maintenance, including the 17-digit Vehicle Identification Number (“VIN”), servicing center name and address, mileage, date of service or maintenance and description of service or maintenance items, which should be transferred to each subsequent purchaser. You may void this New Vehicle Limited Warranty if you do not follow the specific instructions and recommendations regarding the use and operation of the vehicle provided in your owner documentation, including, but not limited to:
• Installing the vehicle's software updates after notification that there is an update available;

And yes, it is in the used car warranty as well.

I know it wasn't originally in the warranty, but I don't know when they added it.

 

[MikeyC]

So, you are saying there is a defect in MY battery that makes it UNSAFE to use to top 10-15% that I used to use until May 15.

I really don't know. Was kinda just pondering the possibilities.

Mike

 

[Droschke]

“Some people might say that, I couldn’t possibly comment”

Where is the quotation coming from? You are quoting yourself or it's from another source?