Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Guy V]

Must admit I still struggle with this. I mean, there is - I guess - no doubt that Elon is an intelligent guy himself. And there should still be enough smart people left in their organisation. Let's assume so at least.

I can somehow understand how the very first reaction of a large corporation to a threat could indeed be to deflect, avoid, deny. But by now it is indeed evident this isnt going away, and I can't imagine it hasn't been escalated all the way up the organisation.

For me the 2 points above feel incompatible. This does indeed seem like a lose-lose situation, where deciding to fight in the hope of winning seems anything BUT smart. And yet they insist on that strategy.

So... what do they know that we don't (yet)?

Thinking... OH! They really are planning to sell to VW.

 

[Guy V]

At a supercharger now. I love how it still sends me "your supercharging is almost complete message and you may start incurring idle charges" in the next 5 minutes. That's laughable as it takes nearly 55 minutes to go from 90 to 100%,if it ever even gets there!!!!!

I never ever have to worry about it getting past 98%

 

[Guy V]

I'm totally with you on that. In the beginning Tesla was very open to admit any issues and being proactive in fixing things. The battery shield, the drive unit replacements, battery replacements (rare but they did replace packs), Elon retroactively including the drive unit into the warranty, resale value guarantee, and many other examples where Tesla acted without being forced by any authority. This built trust in a new company.

Looking at this issue from a company's point of view I do understand their stance. They don't know exactly what is going on inside the battery. There is no history/experience to look at and learn from. This is pioneer work. There is a serious issue and it's affecting a lot of cars. Probably more than just those that see the range reduction. The damage is already done. Admitting the issue openly to the owners and community does not change the outcome. If anything it is a confession that can and will be used against them. Tesla implemented a few measures that put safety first. That's a very good thing. Unfortunately it compromises the performance of the car in several ways (both charging and range). Tesla will try everything to fix this, make it better, find a solution. But the solution can't be to give everyone a new battery only to run into the same issue again a few years down the line. What if Tesla learned that after so many years & miles the battery chemistry just changes and has to be treated with the implemented measures to still be safe. Then what? Give everyone new battery packs with new cells that last longer? So then they will last twice as long but still develop these issue, just after a longer time?

I think this is a situation where something new has been learned about batteries and we have to accept it as a fact. I would hate to see Tesla getting forced to replace a huge amount of batteries and getting financially destroyed, thus getting punished for the being the pioneer that we all needed, the world needed. I don't think there is an easy way out of this situation. It especially feels frustrating as an early adopter to be 'shafted' and left alone with a crippled battery. But I don't want Tesla to be financially ruined over this. What Elon and Tesla did is of epic importance and has changed the world to go in a better direction. I hope the solution will be a compromise that everyone can live with.

I could go along with what you say, but Tesla is now out there touting million mile batteries...

 

[Guy V]

Who will ever buy a car if they know the engine will eventually wear out? As I mentioned in my other comment, Tesla proactively worked on the issue long before they knew about it. They started working on making batteries last much longer from the start. All future EVs benefit from this research Tesla did. But they could only do it by starting somewhere. As I said, I fully expect Tesla to come up with a solution that doesn't leave the early adopter hanging. But maybe there can be a compromise that isn't going to ruin the company.

Unless they are flat-out lying and and doing a monstrous suicidal cover-up, the cost to replace the number of affected batteries that they claim would in no way endanger the company financially. Elon could pay it out of his own pocket as he did the "financing secured" fine which would be the same order of magnitude.

Perspective, they are spending billions per year in capital investment for future production, which this incident could actually jeopardize.

 

[doctorwho]

I could go along with what you say, but Tesla is now out there touting million mile batteries...

This is actually a great opportunity for Tesla. Many of the concerns that people have about EVs concern battery longevity. If Tesla says ‘ we underestimated the risk on our batteries and will unconditionally guarantee the safety and life under normal use by replacing affected batteries, it would be great publicity and terribly reassuring for both current owners and future buyers. It also sets the standard for other manufacturers

 

[Ferrycraigs]

It is all speculative but here is my theory that would explain all the things Tesla has done recently to our old batteries. I believe it is a wider spread issue affecting all old batteries. Tesla has implemented a few measures that all aim at one thing: high cell voltage. With the recent software update, the car now starts aggressively cooling the battery when the cell voltage reaches a certain level close to the top voltage. The software update has significantly reduced charge rate when the battery is nearing 100%. Basically being more careful when charging to high voltage. And some cars have even been voltage capped. This seems to be the last resort when the other two methods are not enough. All these measures deal with issue of cells being at very high voltage. Some cars might have condition X/Y more severe than others. But I think all old batteries are affected. If all cars (with the old type cells) are affected, just at various degrees, then it's degradation. The way to keep them safe depends how severe the condition has developed in each individual car.
Not trying to make any excuses for Tesla, it's just a theory that would explain all the things Tesla has been implementing in our cars.

David thanks for taking the time to explain. Alas I may be one of the, I think, many exceptions that break the rule. I was voltage capped but not charge rate capped. But all that does is query the order of events. Whilst your comment suggests Capping was a final resort, I think capping came first in download terms (2019,16,1,1) and charge rate strangling came second (2019.20.4.2). Is the order important? Don't think so.

As for more aggressive cooling, I am onside. I have certainly experienced much more fan cooling than before, including when not even plugged in, and this is reflected in much higher, but variable (1-5%), Vampire drain. The Loss appears to be higher on warmer nights. I also know a number of pre facelift owners that have not been Capacity capped, (although that could mean they just haven’t noticed it) so I am less persuaded that it it is all pre facelift cars (that have been voltage capped. I am sure the % of charge rate cars is much much higher)

Whilst I find the theory of high voltage persuasive, I only charged to 100% very rarely, ie once per year. I normally operated between 20-80%, sometimes 85%, ironically exactly the position Tesla now puts me in after battery capping. So their fix is to put me in the same position that my car is normally in. The logic, or lack of logic of that position indicates, to me, that high voltage may not be the original trigger.

My theory? As you say, pure speculation. I am attracted to a batch of pre silicon cells that only just made the quality control line. Only the 60, 70 and 85 packs had these cells. The 90s only ever had Silicon Cells; perhaps why they have never been Capacity capped. Tesla, whilst hunting for Dendrite conditions found out that a bunch of these, not sub standard but perhaps poor standard, cells were wearing out faster than expected, and their deterioration rate indicated they might not last until the 8 year warranty had expired. But could last that long if their working conditions were less stressful via max voltage capping. I am conscious that could easily be described as degradation. I prefer 'defect' as it sits more properly in hardware problems. As these cells were still, technically, within specification, Tesla can say with some confidence that our batteries are healthy, by which they mean within spec.

I have often wondered if the battery capping and charge rate capping are actually two separate, but linked, conditions. Particularly as Rate Capping does seem to suggest voltage or temperature issues.

 

[Lukez]

Filed complaint as well based on my situation (not accepting Ota updates, am I safe?)

I used the suggestion to link the investigation number in my complaint:
RE: NHTSA Action Number: DP19005 - INVESTIGATION Subject : Battery Management Software Updates

 

[Droschke]

But I think all old batteries are affected. If all cars (with the old type cells) are affected, just at various degrees, then it's degradation.

David - I respectfully disagree. The issue is not about degradation. It's about an unauthorized capping of voltage which resulted in 30 miles loss for my car. My car has only 44k miles on it, what degradation?

 

[BigNick]

Lukez, are you still on V8? I ask because you aren't accepting updates. Are you just cancelling every time the pop-up appears or have you taken more extreme measures (null hotspot, fuses, etc)?
Also - since you're in Ontario, will NHTSA accept your complaint? I thought they were US-only, or do they cover Canada as well?

 

[Droschke]

Opening a Model S/X battery is quite a task and sealing up again as well. Takes a lot of labor so it's expensive. It is also not a good idea to replace modules. It is important that all cells in the entire battery have the same capacity and characteristics. All cells are charged and discharged as one unit. If some modules behave differently, there is a big problem. If Tesla opens a battery with a bad module, it would be very difficult to find a donor module that has degraded/aged in the exact same way as the rest of the modules.

A disposable sealed cell phone design basically.

 

[swegman]

Its

While the voltage cap itself is not degradation, degradation might be the reason they implemented the cap and updated the charging curves.

It’s not degradation, please stop confusing the situation.

If the range indicator said 250 miles range and you could only consistently drive 220 miles you may be able to say the range indicator is incorrect (over-reporting available range) and the battery exhibits degradation.

However, before the capping of my battery I was able to drive 250 actual miles and still have a few miles left in the range indicator. So the range indicator was not presenting a false (incorrect) reading of the range available from the battery. The range displayed was an accurate representation of the range available from that my battery (ie, no degradation). Now, after the cap was applied to the battery, the full charge (98% SOC because the battery will no longer charge to 100% SOC) is 226/227 miles.

One can not say the range indicator is now under-reporting the true range of the battery because ScanMyTesla shows that at the “full” charge the cell voltage is now around 4.09 volts, whereas before the capping it would be around 4.2 volts.

 

[MP3Mike]

It’s not degradation, please stop confusing the situation.

If the range indicator said 250 miles range and you could only consistently drive 220 miles you may be able to say the range indicator is incorrect (over-reporting available range) and the battery exhibits degradation.

Isn't there is more than one kind of degradation? (Two examples would be increased internal resistance and reduced capacity.)

 

[MP3Mike]

Dieselgate convictions hinged on the government proving VW used software changes to give the EPA test cars more range than customers could achieve,

No, Dieselgate was about the cars polluting 40-80x the legal limit when being driven, but not when tested on a dyno by the EPA or other regulator agencies. It wasn't about range.

 

[MP3Mike]

Forget the voltage and saying anything related to range or degradation. Say you lost the ludicrous power. Re read my post.

I'm not sure that would make any difference. As the reduction in power is specifically excluded from warranty coverage just like the reduction in energy capacity.

Loss of Battery energy or power over time or due to or resulting from Battery usage is NOT covered under this Battery and Drive Unit Limited Warranty, except to the extent specified in this Battery and Drive Unit Limited Warranty.

 

[Lukez]

Lukez, are you still on V8? I ask because you aren't accepting updates. Are you just cancelling every time the pop-up appears or have you taken more extreme measures (null hotspot, fuses, etc)?
Also - since you're in Ontario, will NHTSA accept your complaint? I thought they were US-only, or do they cover Canada as well?

No I'm on v9 pre chargegate. Just not accepting updates.
Recently moved to the US, filed the complaint as being in the US.

 

[BigNick]

No I'm on v9 pre chargegate. Just not accepting updates.
Recently moved to the US, filed the complaint as being in the US.

You got the UI downgrade, but not the battery downgrade.

 

[Chaserr]

Wouldn't that cost Tesla more than simply swapping a capped pack with an uncapped, refurbished pack?

Refurbs still have the problem. At this point it's safe to say Tesla wouldn't have let this go so far if it wasn't true that most or all batteries will have the issue eventually.

Most of this is fine, except for the redefinition of the word degredation. If an issue is present in all cars, that doesn't mean it is now interpretable as degredation. Especially if it's some condition "X/Y" that has some label other than degredation (hence the label X/Y...). If a defect is ubiquitous, that doesn't confer the right to reclassify it as no longer a defect that is now not covered by warranty.

Takata airbags affected 100% of all Teslas made for years even though not even one ever had the actual failure mode. Recalls don't become OK just because they are massive in scope.

While the voltage cap itself is not degradation, degradation might be the reason they implemented the cap and updated the charging curves.

Explosive batteries might be the reason they implented the cap and updated the charging curve. There actual proof of explosions being the cause and not even Tesla is going to make the mistake of suggesting degradation reduces voltage or can be fixed with a software update. We know for a fact it isn't degradation - stop letting the people that keep bringing up this off-topic excuse fool you with this distraction. When you repeat them it just makes it seem like you haven't been paying attention and are shooting from the hip without reading anything.

I am pretty sure that my May 2013 P85 must have an A pack and what is is happening now is in no way anything like my experience pre-cap.

Your experience mirrors mine, I remember testing A packs when I had loaners and they were only slightly slower because of the 90 kW limit but they still held it until roughly 50%. I don't think he ever charged pre-cap, or if he did his battery has always been faulty. Nothing he describes was normal for Teslas before the 2019.20 update.

 

[faughtz]

you missed the point of my post.

Forget the voltage and saying anything related to range or degradation. Say you lost the ludicrous power. Re read my post.




Basically replaced everything. pack (another 85, not the 90), rear DU and the special Ludi contactors. Then my Dragy result was exactly as it was before the change.

I did not miss the point of your post. I understand your assertion to tesla, and the success of that argument, but I’m inquiring as to whether your battery was affected by software like many of us or suffered a failure.

 

[jensk2]

No, because my post is correct. My supercharging rates have been slowed. My range is unaffected. I have been at 255 miles at 100%/4.2V for over a year. I have been monitoring cell voltages via CAN bus to confirm.

Your assertion that everyone who has slower supercharging also has reduced range is wrong. I have slower supercharging. My battery continues to charge to [email protected]%, just as it did when new. My range is not reduced. Q.E.D.

I totally agree. My Oct 2015 S 70D charges now SoC + kW = 95, where it used to be SoC + kW > 122 for charging from 10% and first 50% up.

My range as expressed by Rated Range / SoC * 100% is as shown. That could of course be the BMS incorrect estimates, but our last long trip in september, planned with ABetterRoutePlanner, planned that I should reach the home bound SUC with 13% and we arrived with 17%.

So no obvious reporting a fake range, which would also be counte rproductive for Tesla, after all they regularly replace batteris if the car dies before 0 km range is reported.

 

[jensk2]

What he is pointing out is that the % display hides degradation and capping, while the miles display doesn't. So in that sense the miles display does give you more information. i.e. if you are looking at a Tesla charged to 100% you have no idea if the car is a 40, 60, 70, 75, 85, 90, or 100; or the state of health of the battery.

Side tracking a bit, but I like the good old Visible Tesla dashboard, which presents 'it all' in one picture:
It presents Rated km, Ideal km and Estimated km + SoC Percentage.From that one can 'estimate' 100% SoC range by dividing ones favorite range measure with the SoC

That said, I personally use Percentage, because I want to park overnight or at office below 55%.