Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Moorebid]

Has anyone charged at 100% and noticed now that they get half of Regen working (vs none before)?

Not at first — when the update was first loaded and the range hadn't dropped as significantly, I was seeing alarmingly less regen (which nearly caused me to rear-end a minivan that decided to come to a full and complete stop at a speed bump, for whatever reason) all the way down to the low-to-mid-80% range (vs. ~95% before the update); but now that the soft cap seems to have settled, I'm seeing full regen again at least as high as 92% (I haven't yet charged past that point since confirming 66.75 ± .25 kWh).

Also with 3-4 miles or range left I still don't see the power being limited as it used to (sometimes starting around 12miles of range)

I am still seeing that being enforced in the mid-20% range (~80°F ambient temperature, FWIW); I haven't let it get below 20%, so I don't know if it still gets worse as it goes.

Seems to me that we have kwh buffers both at the top and at bottom now.

That would be nice for the health of the battery, but… yeah, so long, "Long Range."

 

[Big Earl]

Li Plating is not the reason folks here are suffering from "restriction". It's software that is limiting the maximum charge. Those here had no issues before the software update. The battery charged full when needed and they got the range then that they can no longer get now.

His point is that if lithium plating is occurring and measures aren’t taken to halt or mitigate it, it will ultimately result in battery failure, perhaps more eventfully than would be considered safe.

Yes the cars were functioning fine before the update. Many things function fine until they fail, sometimes suddenly or spectacularly. The restriction is a response to a recently discovered battery health concern.

So what do affected owners do now? I don’t know. I’m sure some will sue or file complaints. Others will go about their business. Tesla said they might partially restore range in the future, presumably dependent on further monitoring of battery condition. I’ll be watching with great interest.

 

[Chaserr]

Right but Li plating isn't the reason for the downgrades. Li plating is a reason for warranty service to avoid those problems. Downgrades are Tesla's way to try and avoid their own warranty.

Where do owners go? To a service center, for battery repair. If not, then an attorney's office eventually followed by a service center for that same battery repair. There really isn't any other outcome possible; anything less than full 100% restoration is theft.

You have a Model 3; imagine

 

[fbitz777]

If I buy a new S or X it still has the same battery "chemistry" and number of cells and capacity as my 2017, right? They did increase the rated range due to more efficient motors.

SO are they now bullet proofing via software (BMS) these new cars so they will never enter the sad state we are in our older models?

 

[Chaserr]

Maybe. Maybe a software update in a few years will downgrade those too. Nobody knows, and Tesla made a bad decision when they made this a real discussion abouthow many years it will be before a new Long Range vehicle is downgraded to Standard.

 

[PetriKarj]

If its li plating then thermal management (battery T>15C/59F) and prevent charging to 4.2V should be adequate countermeasure. The revised firmare does just that to improve longevity.

In time Tesla will find optimum thermal and voltage management algorithms to minimize the need to drastically reduce the range.

Anyway dropping to 3.9V is exaggeration unless li plating has already occured and then its a warranty case...

 

[tess19]

Sorry if i sound a newbie but isnt the range based on how you recently drive? I thought if you foot it all on your last drive, the GOM range will be less.

 

[Matias]

But, the article posted today shows the fire was from a single module (out of 96 in a, 85kWh pack).

I think the point that the fire started from
single module is rather moot. Isn’t it obvious that fire started from single module? Who would think that it would start from several modules simultaneously?

 

[liamharry]

Sorry if i sound a newbie but isnt the range based on how you recently drive? I thought if you foot it all on your last drive, the GOM range will be less.

I'm no expert and will stand corrected by the vastly more experienced however;

• Consumption range from the energy consumption varies considerably on your driving style as it's base on either instant range (what you would get in miles/km now based on your watt consumption) or likewise over the last 5,15 or 30 miles from memory on the consumption window.

• Your rated range is a simple algorithm processed by the car/computer diving the amount of 'available' kWh's by 300 watts - the average expected consumption by Tesla.

So for example when we first purchased our 2016 85D (85kWh) pack the arted range was 270 miles. To get our initial rated range of 270 I would have to divide 81kWh's by 0.3 (which suggests that 4kWh were hidden in the buffer.

In fact our initial 100% charge in 2016 gave us 264 miles suggesting we only saw 79kWh's of our 85 kWh pack.

The easiest way to keep tabs on your rated miles is to swap between % and miles/km whenever you finish your charge and before you unplug the charger. If you keep the an odd eye on this over time you will see what range in miles/km each charge gives you and note you're degradation.

So as an example before the software update in May/June a 100% charge would give me still 256 miles ( a reduction of 8 miles over 3 years), which I thought wasn't bad. So that means that I was still able to access around 77kWh's of the pack or a loss of give/take 3kWh's over 3 years. Not bad I thought.

However since the update we now achieve a 100% range of 226 miles ( a loss of 30 miles or around 12%). Tha means I only now have a useable pack of just over 67kWh's or a total loss in a software update of 10kWh's - that's huge and not normal degradation, but a battery pack that isn't performing as it was designed/described to do ..

By the way - Bjorn Nyland showed me the simple trick of whatever you prefer your car to show (I prefer %, but miles works just do this in the opposite way) save your setting showing your preferred choice of showing every - then just create another driver profile (let's call it miles not %) in my case and save the setting with whatever is your 'opposite' preferred method of showing range or %.

Then at the charger, rather than going through the settings you can just swap between the two driver profiles and it will show how many rated miles you have at any % point.

 

[Gixx1300R]

Maybe. Maybe a software update in a few years will downgrade those too. Nobody knows, and Tesla made a bad decision when they made this a real discussion abouthow many years it will be before a new Long Range vehicle is downgraded to Standard.

And that is bait and switch.

 

[BigNick]

Would be interesting to know if affected batteries are often charged in temps <15C (<59F)....

Interesting. I suppose I should get a heater for the garage.

Winter is Coming.

But in response to the question, my car was originally delivered to the Houston, Texas area so I would assume it was never, or rarely, charged at low temperatures. But now in PA, it will be potentially exposed to temps under 40F during winter.

My garage is insulated but not heated. It doesn’t get below freezing even when 0F outdoors, but that is still cold enough to be a problem when charging.

Maybe I need to charge immediately in winter with a battery warm from driving home, instead of after midnight on my schedule. Which is a good case for not changing to a TOU plan with the electric company.

 

[BigNick]

From the way I understand it, lithium plating is a permanent chemical/structural change within the individual cells and not something that can be reversed via “reconditioning” the battery through multiple revised charge cycles.

Is this true? I would think if it were reversible that Tesla could put some kind of special charge mode into the charging software and alert the driver that it is recommended for the pack and would take X amount of time to complete.

 

[rowdy]

Maybe I need to charge immediately in winter with a battery warm from driving home, instead of after midnight on my schedule.

I'm going to do this from now on too. Charge immediately after a drive. Seems like the important thing is to avoid charging into a cold battery.

Long term I hope Tesla adds an option to warm the battery prior to charging. So if you schedule a charge at midnight the first 15 mins can be spent warming and then the charge commences.

From the way I understand it, lithium plating is a permanent chemical/structural change within the individual cells and not something that can be reversed via “reconditioning” the battery through multiple revised charge cycles.

Seems that way. For anyone already restricted it may be too late.

Interesting that Tesla now pre-warms the battery on the way to the Supercharger. Seems that fast charging is the biggest culprit and it's important to have a warm battery to minimise plating. Future cars will be much better placed with these changes Tesla has now made. Just a question of what they are going to do with these older cars & batteries....

 

[BigNick]

Seems like a no-brainer for Tesla to pre-heat the battery for 15 to 30 minutes when plugged in and a scheduled charge is imminent.

In the summer, scheduled charging at 00:30 is probably not going to be a problem. But come mid-October I think Tesla should have the battery pre-scheduled-charge heat capability added to version 2019.30.x.y.

Not everyone charging after a commute will have a 90F battery. Think Canadians with a 5-mile one-way commute.

 

[CuriousG]

Has anyone charged at 100% and noticed now that they get half of Regen working (vs none before).

Also with 3-4 miles or range left I still don't see the power being limited as it used to (sometimes starting around 12miles of range)

Seems to me that we have kwh buffers both at the top and at bottom now.

I attempted to charge to 100% today and got up to 99% before finally giving up after about 15-20 minutes of calculating then saying 5 minutes to go. My so-called 100% is now lower than my original 90% before the severe degradation. Coincidentally, that's when I noticed the 3 mile drop after the 2019.16.x firmware update matches what my 100% is now.

I think what is happening is if your battery is marked for death, the algorithm determines your 100% is now fixed at this virtual capacity then slowly (a month or so) until it creeps into their desired safety range hoping you won't notice. The problem is most people, I believe, leave their cars at rated range rather than percentage so there are plenty of people that noticed.

When I was done, I had very little regen (barely can see green). I was only able to drive half a mile or so before hopping on the freeway for another 30 miles so regen was past my new 90% at this point and fully functional when I got off the freeway.

 

[Droschke]

I think Tesla has discovered lithium plating in some battery packs. The reduction in max voltage is an attempt to prevent further lithium plating (which could ultimately result in failure or fire).

So the big questions: is the plating considered normal? After the reduction in max voltage, will these packs be stable long-term? Should Tesla be replacing packs even though they haven’t technically failed?

Excellent post.

 

[tga]

Sorry if i sound a newbie but isnt the range based on how you recently drive? I thought if you foot it all on your last drive, the GOM range will be less.

Rated or ideal range (shown on the instrument cluster) is based on a fixed Wh/mile (or km) divisor and not your driving patterns. The estimated range shown in the energy app and the nav system's battery percent on arrival do take your past driving into consideration.

 

[VT_EE]

I attempted to charge to 100% today and got up to 99% before finally giving up after about 15-20 minutes of calculating then saying 5 minutes to go. My so-called 100% is now lower than my original 90% before the severe degradation. Coincidentally, that's when I noticed the 3 mile drop after the 2019.16.x firmware update matches what my 100% is now.

I think what is happening is if your battery is marked for death, the algorithm determines your 100% is now fixed at this virtual capacity then slowly (a month or so) until it creeps into their desired safety range hoping you won't notice. The problem is most people, I believe, leave their cars at rated range rather than percentage so there are plenty of people that noticed.

When I was done, I had very little regen (barely can see green). I was only able to drive half a mile or so before hopping on the freeway for another 30 miles so regen was past my new 90% at this point and fully functional when I got off the freeway.

The regen you’re describing is exactly how it works on the Model 3. It gradually increases as you drive. At 100% battery charge, there is virtually no regen at all.

 

[CuriousG]

The regen you’re describing is exactly how it works on the Model 3. It gradually increases as you drive. At 100% battery charge, there is virtually no regen at all.

I can't say for the Model 3 since I have not charged to 100% on that. However, as several people noted on a Model S there should be NO regen at true 100% (no green at all). What I experienced was very slight regen at 100%. This software range limitation Tesla has imposed seems to have changed the behavior of regen.

 

[Droschke]

From the way I understand it, lithium plating is a permanent chemical/structural change within the individual cells and not something that can be reversed via “reconditioning” the battery through multiple revised charge cycles.

Is this true? I would think if it were reversible that Tesla could put some kind of special charge mode into the charging software and alert the driver that it is recommended for the pack and would take X amount of time to complete.

See this post :

... "plating is partially reversible at certain conditions" ...