Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Chaserr]

Yep older MSs (pre face lift) had 11kW onboard chargers. Those that paid for dual chargers could draw 22 kWs, but that required 3 Phase supply for the post to deliver more than 7kW, so most owners opted for a Chademo Adapter, which allowed for 50kW DC, and was a significantly cheaper Option. The onboard charger was increased to 16 kW on facelift models.

In the US 20kW is easier and cheaper since it is just an 80A breaker on the normal 240v. Not very many people will see 22kW AC in the US, but I remember a thread on the official tesla forums talking about people using commercial 277V connections to do it.

 

[omarsultan]

I thought that the single onboard charger was rated at 11KW while a Model S/X with dual chargers could accept 22KW

The max AC power my S is able to accept is 11KW with its single onboard charger (AC-DC converter)

I think the official numbers back then were 10kW and 20kW with dual chargers (basically the same chargers in a Supercharger cabinet). My S constantly pulls 19 kW. The original X did not have a 80A option as they had switched over to 3rd gen chargers by then, so to high power option was 72A (theoretically 17 kW). IIRC, the max possible these days is 11.5 kW for S/X/3.

 

[Droschke]

I think the official numbers back then were 10kW and 20kW with dual chargers (basically the same chargers in a Supercharger cabinet). My S constantly pulls 19 kW. The original X did not have a 80A option as they had switched over to 3rd gen chargers by then, so to high power option was 72A (theoretically 17 kW). IIRC, the max possible these days is 11.5 kW for S/X/3.

Did you hear anything new about your car?

Sending from Home Depot

 

[jaitch]

Any battery expert know what to expect with respect to cell voltage when under load (say heater in Max, and foot to the floor?)

Mine under heater load, some packs drop from 3.655V to 3.611V, and under heavy load, due to TMSPY scanning cell voltages, I can see a 600mV voltage drop!

I am not a battery expert but I can give you some numbers I have seen on CAN bus data using ScanMyTesla on my P90DL:-

At "full throttle", drawing 1525 amps, SOC 67%, battery at 34 C, pack voltage drops from 374 volts to 273 volts and cell/bricks drop from 3.90 volts average (0.015 volts delta on the cell values) to 3.72 volts average (0.2 volts delta on the cell values). The cell drop to overall pack voltage doesn't match the maths (374/96=3.9 volts but 273/96 not=3.72 volts) and I think this is from increases in resistance under load?

 

[tga]

I am not a battery expert but I can give you some numbers I have seen on CAN bus data using ScanMyTesla on my P90DL:-

At "full throttle", drawing 1525 amps, SOC 67%, battery at 34 C, pack voltage drops from 374 volts to 273 volts and cell/bricks drop from 3.90 volts average (0.015 volts delta on the cell values) to 3.72 volts average (0.2 volts delta on the cell values). The cell drop to overall pack voltage doesn't match the maths (374/96=3.9 volts but 273/96 not=3.72 volts) and I think this is from increases in resistance under load?

You can't really rely on relative cell-to-cell voltages under acceleration or regen, because the 96 cell voltages are sampled sequentially, not in parallel, and it's virtually impossible to guarantee that you have the exact same conditions throughout a sample run.

 

[omarsultan]

Did you hear anything new about your car?

Sending from Home Depot

LOL - just got back myself. Still waiting on the battery - latest ETA is Mon/Tue so I should have details to share on Tue/Wed.

 

[David99]

Elon keeps restating that slow charging is preferable for longevity, and he's right. Same as Bjorn points out. Battery care is something that every EV owner should take into account because it benefits them if they keep the car longterm, and whenever they sell it will benefit the next owner and the planet.

If you have tweets or interviews where he says that, I'd love to see that, because I don't remember him ever saying that.

Tesla does the opposite. They advertise the fastest charging speed and highest charge rates and seem to be very proud of putting that out there. Pushing the Model 3 battery to 250 kW is not 'preferring slow charging'. Tesla never even put out a disclaimer that supercharging would degrade the battery faster. Not even a recommendation. In an FAQ on Tesla's website a question was: 'does supercharging harm the battery' and their answer was, 'owners are free to use superchargers as much as they want. It does not affect the 8 year unlimited miles warranty'. They pretty much encouraged owner to supercharge.

 

[Guy V]

Guy V said
While they might have some problems with the EPA about how long Rated Range should actually have to be delivered, they are telling you in the new warranty only to count on 70%, which is 185 if Rated was 265.




The cars we are discussing are not new cars and are not under any new car warranty, so I don't know what your point is. Our older cars warranty requires them to use a replacement battery with equal to or greater than the milage before the failure, that can't include an artificial imposed cap, put in place by Tesla.

Consider, you finally get a battery fault that convinces them to replace your 208-mile capped 85 battery. Whatever do your think prevents them from capping it at 208 miles from the start and continuing to lower it to 185? After all, "out of an abundance of caution" that would almost certainly extend its life past the warranty. They have publicly revealed that they now think that 70% is an adequate range retention after 8 years, have provided no timescale for reaching that level and promised nothing at all about how fast you will be able to charge your battery over the long term.

Neither an existing owner nor a new buyer now has any reason other than cockeyed optimism to expect more.

 

[mvotb]

While they might have some problems with the EPA about how long Rated Range should actually have to be delivered, they are telling you in the new warranty only to count on 70%, which is 185 if Rated was 265.

Consider, you finally get a battery fault that convinces them to replace your 208-mile capped 85 battery. Whatever do your think prevents them from capping it at 208 miles from the start and continuing to lower it to 185? After all, "out of an abundance of caution" that would almost certainly extend its life past the warranty. They have publicly revealed that they now think that 70% is an adequate range retention after 8 years, have provided no timescale for reaching that level and promised nothing at all about how fast you will be able to charge your battery over the long term.

Neither an existing owner nor a new buyer now has any reason other than cockeyed optimism to expect more.

Ok, I see your point now, and I totally agree that Teslas new warranty would be unacceptable to me, and probably unacceptable to most new purchasers if they understood how bad it could work out for them. Unfortunately most people don't look into those things well enough. All anyone is really guarantied now is a relatively local car.

I certainly don't think anything prevents Tesla from doing anything they what to our cars. They force downgraded me off of V8 without my permission, so they certainly do anything they want. As far as the capped 208 goes, they had no right to cap it in the first place, so they have no right to use 208 as a mileage standard for replacement. Of course that's what the lawsuit is about.

 

[jensk2]

I seriously doubt it will work. The chargegate is imposed.

Agree, the paper(s) documents some capacity recovery mechanisms, that one can utilize to recover capacity by staying at low SoC for long periods of time. But Tesla is likely not able to discover the anode capacity increase, because they can only measure dv/dAh during charge of 70+ parallel coupled cells, which totally washes out the peaks.

But if Tesla re-calculates total capacity over time, they should discover the capacity increase from resting at low SoC. Charge Gate however could be just calculated from the history of each car (lots of DC charging and charging to hig SoC would cause the hardest gate) For capacity, if they - based on history or other metrics - just limits max voltage to 4,09V then the true available capacity will of course increase with capacity, but that could 'just' mean that reality gets closer to predictions

 

[jensk2]

The weight difference between the 85kWh pack and 100kWh pack is about 250 pounds. 99% of the time my back seats are empty that can easily seats 350 - 400 pounds of adults. My frunk is empty.
The distribution of weight is pretty even to all 4 wheels because of the pack design.
So the car can easily accommodate 60 pounds per corner without disturbing the handling.

According to EPA documents:
https://iaspub.epa.gov/otaqpub/display_file.jsp?docid=39835&flag=1
the battery weights are: S75D: 530 kg, S90D: 580 kg and S100D 625 kg.So the 100 battery is only 45 kg heavier. Taking just one module out will match the S90D battery weight and provide 93,75 kWh

If Tesla were to offer 100D battery packs to S85/90 owners, they would only need to provide 14 battery modules, to reach better capacity than the replaced battery (100 kWh * 14/16 =87,5 kWh) which would result in a slightly lighter battery with slightly more capacity. Using the 70/75D layout (two front modules removed) will decrease front-end weight, which could be 'corrected' with a 15 modules battery with 93,75 kWh with only slightly increased weight, but increased capacity and power.

(A 15 modules layout would as well allow reducing the mounting height of the front motor giving lower center of mass and improved lifetime of front driveshafts) But that is another story!

 

[jensk2]

It's certainly true that fire tends to cause a sudden and significant loss of range. Can't argue with that!

I forget if I have seen any owners of capped vehicles who primarily charged on home charger and rarely beyong 80 per cent and also with low mileage. That combination would surely demonstrate a total failure of Tesla to produce a viable car capable of performing to specification and such cases take away any argument that aggressive use is in any way to blame.

I have a S 70D October [email protected] km and have unchanged range, but a small decrease in SUC speed (*). My daily commute has below Charge habits: (Charge late, charge as low as possible, always keep resting SoC under 50%, only use SUC when really needed, better do 10%-60% on SUC than 20%-70% etc)


*) My SUC charge speed profile matches the 'new' ABRP charge graph, which I take is the new (sound) limits, that will be in play for even a factory new Model S 85/90 battery pack, because the previous charge rates (especially at low battery pack temperature or high SoC) were far to aggressive) given my knowledge of 18650 cells.

 

[Battpower]

I have a S 70D October [email protected] km and have unchanged range, but a small decrease in SUC speed (*). My daily commute has below Charge habits: (Charge late, charge as low as possible, always keep resting SoC under 50%, only use SUC when really needed, better do 10%-60% on SUC than 20%-70% etc)


*) My SUC charge speed profile matches the 'new' ABRP charge graph, which I take is the new (sound) limits, that will be in play for even a factory new Model S 85/90 battery pack, because the previous charge rates (especially at low battery pack temperature or high SoC) were far to aggressive) given my knowledge of 18650 cells.

That's interesting to see. Not a big surprise that it makes a difference if you look after your car.

So may owners post data when they have a concern or problems, but we need to see best case cars too.

Thanks for posting.

 

[jensk2]

Modern BMS will shuttle charge from higher cells to lower instead of just bleeding off through resistors. Apparently they can do this throughout the SOC range instead of waiting for a higher SOC to be reached.

I have never dismantled my battery, but all googling I have done, suggest that my Model S from 2015 only bleeds excess SoC through resistors and at a very low rate. In the Model S design with more than 70 cells in parallel in each string, imbalances should NEVER grow big. If they do, then a battery repair is in order because one low capacity string will affect the overall capacity directly.

(With ræsonnable fast active real-time balancing, a lower capacity string is better handled).

 

[jensk2]

Great video and important info. The 100 packs are no different than the previous ones and get limited as well. Two things: Tesla might say now that's the only limit they will apply but we know that's very unlikely. Give it enough time and they will slow it down more.
The other thing is that the 100 pack was supposed to be able to charge at 200 kW. Looks like that is yet another one of Tesla's overpromises.

I believe the Model 3 and 100 pack are using the same cell chemistry.

Nope, 100 Pack is still 18650, but denser packed.

 

[mjmiron]

I have never dismantled my battery, but all googling I have done, suggest that my Model S from 2015 only bleeds excess SoC through resistors and at a very low rate. In the Model S design with more than 70 cells in parallel in each string, imbalances should NEVER grow big. If they do, then a battery repair is in order because one low capacity string will affect the overall capacity directly.

(With ræsonnable fast active real-time balancing, a lower capacity string is better handled).

I also have a 2015 85D that I got replaced due to battery and charge suck and upgraded to a 90D. I am hopeful like you with good charging habits it lasts. I charge to 90% or less and leave within a half hour of charging and use SC when necessary.

depending on how this lawsuit goes will determine if I want to keep my car. I have concerns Tesla will do the right thing in the end. Also hopeful we get more folks on the next two year able to replace these batteries or they go down in price from Tesla. Man I love auto pilot and speed things I love and do not want to give up and heated steering wheels and seats help too. Love Tesla but me keeping this car will depend on how this all ends.

 

[Battpower]

I have never dismantled my battery, but all googling I have done, suggest that my Model S from 2015 only bleeds excess SoC through resistors and at a very low rate. In the Model S design with more than 70 cells in parallel in each string, imbalances should NEVER grow big. If they do, then a battery repair is in order because one low capacity string will affect the overall capacity directly.

(With ræsonnable fast active real-time balancing, a lower capacity string is better handled).

somewhere I heard / read that the stator windings of the traction motors were used to dissipate energy in some cases - but I can't find the posts any more.

 

[jensk2]

I also have a 2015 85D that I got replaced due to battery and charge suck and upgraded to a 90D. I am hopeful like you with good charging habits it lasts. I charge to 90% or less and leave within a half hour of charging and use SC when necessary.

depending on how this lawsuit goes will determine if I want to keep my car. I have concerns Tesla will do the right thing in the end. Also hopeful we get more folks on the next two year able to replace these batteries or they go down in price from Tesla. Man I love auto pilot and speed things I love and do not want to give up and heated steering wheels and seats help too. Love Tesla but me keeping this car will depend on how this all ends.

I know very well that Elon says 90% is fine . . . . but if you don't need that range, a lower StateOfCharge is better!

 

[omarsultan]

I have never dismantled my battery, but all googling I have done, suggest that my Model S from 2015 only bleeds excess SoC through resistors and at a very low rate. In the Model S design with more than 70 cells in parallel in each string, imbalances should NEVER grow big. If they do, then a battery repair is in order because one low capacity string will affect the overall capacity directly.

(With ræsonnable fast active real-time balancing, a lower capacity string is better handled).

That kind seems like what happened in my pack (pics posted upthread)

 

[omarsultan]

I know very well that Elon says 90% is fine . . . . but if you don't need that range, a lower StateOfCharge is better!

That's great in theory, but not practical if all you have is an EV at your disposal. I need to be able to go on unexpected trips so charging is determined by worst case, not average case.