Wiki Sudden Loss Of Range With 2019.16.x Software

[Droschke]

Has anyone gone through the process of writing a formal letter to Teslas warranty division? And or dispute solution?

If the Service Centers are telling owners their batteries are just fine what writing a formal letter to the Tesla's warranty department would do?

Even those owners who took the warranty arbitration route were denied of their requests. The class action lawsuit, and any positive outcome for the affected owners, seems to be the only remedy here.

 

[IngTH]

One problem with the dendrite theory is that a way to reverse dendrite growth is to increase charging current to allow internal heating of the cells between the range or 40-60 C. This heating has been shown to cause the tree like dendrite formation to collapse into flatter more stable plating. Tesla reducing charge current and running the cooling system more would seem to be the opposite of what would be done to reduce dendrite growth.

Sorry guys for not further following the thread. Droschke asked me to give an answer on the above theory:

No, the way Tesla handles the matter is correct. They (pre)heat now by the external battery heating to ~45°C and reduce charging current esp, at higher SOC. This is the best way to prevent (and revert the reversible) Li-plating. Cooling starts when temperature rises notably above this level (from waste heat at internal resistence or from parasitic side-effects at the cathode and/or the anode).

 

[Droschke]

Sorry guys for not further following the thread. Droschke asked me to give an answer on the above theory:

No, the way Tesla handles the matter is correct. They (pre)heat now by the external battery heating to ~45°C and reduce charging current esp, at higher SOC. This is the best way to prevent (and revert the reversible) Li-plating. Cooling starts when temperature rises notably above this level (from waste heat at internal resistence or from parasitic side-effects at the cathode and/or the anode).

Thank you @IngTH for getting back to us. Li-Plating has always been suspect.

 

[raphy3]

As a 2013 S85 owner with diminished range (242 mi), power, and slower average Supercharging rates, I would love a replacement pack through warranty or paid upgrade. It would be interesting to see the mean average price an owner would be willing to pay for such an upgrade. At this point, I was hoping battery upgrades would be in the $12K-$15K range and that an existing battery pack would be valued at $8K-$10K as core swap. Wishful thinking, but I'm still hanging on to our beloved "Classic" for sake of sustainability; I'd love to it outlast our 300K mile (and going) VW TDI.

242 sounds like an OK range for a 2013 85. There are plenty with higher range, 242 may be on the lower end, but that tracks pretty well places like TeslaFi for example. For sustainability, keep the battery as long as you can. After all, the waste in the rest of the car pales in comparison to the ewaste in the battery if not recycled.

 

[bigsmooth125]

Pshh. My 2013 S85 hasn’t seen 242 miles in years. It now gets 217 miles at 100%, a year ago it got 230, the year before 235.

242 sounds like an OK range for a 2013 85. There are plenty with higher range, 242 may be on the lower end, but that tracks pretty well places like TeslaFi for example. For sustainability, keep the battery as long as you can. After all, the waste in the rest of the car pales in comparison to the ewaste in the battery if not recycled.

 

[IngTH]

Thank you @IngTH for getting back to us. Li-Plating has always been suspect.

I wish you all good luck with the legal action. Maybe this chart from a manufacturer of cathode raw material can be a help too?
Its about nail penetration and hot box test with different cathodes/potentials, so is not directly related to the Li-plating problem but shows very well the risk of thermal runaway rising with higher cathode potential.

For a (new) S85 battery just subtract ~0,08V from the potential given in the NCA columm to obtain the cell voltage you measure by SMT.

 

[Droschke]

Error message from an affected battery pack. This should clear up some of the speculation. The key word 'hidden' means these error messages only show up when the car is in service mode.

In my opinion...
#2 it clearly states the voltage limitation.
#1 'weak short' appears to be dendrites (dendrites are needle-like and can poke through the insulation layer).View attachment 570684

I would highly recommend updating the software on your car so they can better diagnose your battery and apply the appropriate amount of protection or possibly even remove the limitations.

So far they have not offered me a replacement pack.

David - Any update about your battery situation?

 

[David99]

David - Any update about your battery situation?

Other than the 'weakShort' message mysteriously disappeared just after I posted it here, nothing. The pack keeps losing range and balance seems to get worse. Supercharging also appears to get slower. On my current tour I supercharge almost all the time and recently I see it charging even slower than the already bad slowdown. Situations were the battery should have idea conditions.

I've also been trying to make sense of the new temperature limits. At first it appears they are linked to state of charge. The higher the SoC the lower the temperature needs to be. But it seems it's not that simple. The cooling target goes up at lower SoC (meaning the BMS allows it to be warmer) but for some odd reason it seems go down slightly again when the battery is reach close to empty. It also seems to depend on how recently you have supercharged. At the same SoC the BMS demands the battery to be cooler than after driving it for a while.

Honestly I'm getting awfully tired to analyzing what changes Tesla has been doing yet again. This car shouldn't be a science research project. All that Tesla is doing is saving the battery to make it passed the warranty period without a catastrophic failure so they don't have to replace it. They are acting in their interest and don't give a rat's a** about the customer.

 

[SmartElectric]

As a 2013 S85 owner with diminished range (242 mi), power, and slower average Supercharging rates, I would love a replacement pack through warranty or paid upgrade

Your pack has very good capacity retention after 7 years, and yet you'd love Tesla to just give you another pack under warranty ...

 

[Battpower]

Honestly I'm getting awfully tired to analyzing what changes Tesla has been doing yet again. This car shouldn't be a science research project. All that Tesla is doing is saving the battery to make it passed the warranty period without a catastrophic failure so they don't have to replace it. They are acting in their interest and don't give a rat's a** about the customer.

I see no evidence for anything other than this. Very disappointing / frustrating.


Especially this:

"This car shouldn't be a science research project."

 

[Droschke]

Honestly I'm getting awfully tired to analyzing what changes Tesla has been doing yet again. This car shouldn't be a science research project. All that Tesla is doing is saving the battery to make it passed the warranty period without a catastrophic failure so they don't have to replace it. They are acting in their interest and don't give a rat's a** about the customer.

Yes, that's it. And, is what exactly we believed they were doing from the early days of this thread. The only difference is more and more evidence of the cover-up is showing up as time goes by. Hope your pack would get replaced very soon.

 

[JRP3]

No, the way Tesla handles the matter is correct. They (pre)heat now by the external battery heating to ~45°C and reduce charging current esp, at higher SOC. This is the best way to prevent (and revert the reversible) Li-plating.

But dendrite growth and Li plating are not the same thing, as I understand it.

 

[Battpower]

But dendrite growth and Li plating are not the same thing, as I understand it.

Is plating not a precursor to dendrites?

 

[Chaserr]

Is plating not a precursor to dendrites?

Thermodynamic Understanding of Li-Dendrite Formation - ScienceDirect
Critical stripping current leads to dendrite formation on plating in lithium anode solid electrolyte cells | Nature Materials

Everything I'm reading on the subject points to yes.

It's all coming together. Dendrites caused a small number of fires and the publicly announced response was to lower voltage to slow them immediately. We called that update "Batterygate." After that they realized the conditions to form new dendrites were still allowed and they started limiting charge speeds, temperatures, reducing volts in other creative ways, and we called those updates "chargegate" and "draingate."

Or, not. It's hard to imagine anyone intentionally covering up something so dangerous.

Unfortunately, there hasn't been a different hypothesis put forward that explains everything as perfectly as Tesla's belief the fires were caused by lithium plating, stripping, and dendrite growths causing shorts - shorts of teh "weak" variety intentionally left on the road (Has Tesla informed you of their change in policy regarding your short circuiting battery yet, David?) and "strong" shorts either being removed in large numbers when the "advanced diagnostics" became better able to detect imminent catastrophe, or resulting in a parked fire incident.

I'm still hoping anyone can come up with a better hypothesis.

 

[JRP3]

I assume you need plating to create dendrites but that plating does not automatically create dendrites.

 

[Battpower]

I assume you need plating to create dendrites but that plating does not automatically create dendrites.

I believe so. And various techniques like heat and certain current through cells may smooth out the plating, kind of repairing damage. Seems potentially like a do-or-die option if it goes wrong and temperatures get out of control or li-plating is not healed.

 

[mymagiccarpet]

I see no evidence for anything other than this. Very disappointing / frustrating.


Especially this:

"This car shouldn't be a science research project."

yeah exactly....going back to who owns the car and data it generates? I certainly don't remember my car being subsidized by Tesla, so why should they get to play with my car and collect data?

 

[Battpower]

yeah exactly....going back to who owns the car and data it generates? I certainly don't remember my car being subsidized by Tesla, so why should they get to play with my car and collect data?

This imo is one of the most important things that must get fixed otherwise newer cars will get dragged through a similar mess.

No more updates without clear and open disclosure of purpose before installation.

Simple disclosure of battery condition, may be 'on request', along with lifetime Supercharging and Ludicrous Launch counters if those uses have finite limits regarding warranty coverage.

Clearer warranty terms / process so that it is possible to differentiate between normal wear and tear and 'component failure'.

Essential to have a viable battery replacement program with core charge and ideally capacity upgrade options otherwise these are disposable cars.

One reason this stuff appeared to matter less was that EM clearly sold cars with his promise that they would be underwritten by the best warranty that would cover everything. (more or less). Now that chickens have come home to roost, there is all this debate very much about what is actually covered under warranty, what constitutes a failure and how can owners demonstrate that something has failed if Tesla keep changing settings in software.

This isn't something new of course. There are always differences between management and engineering:

 

[mymagiccarpet]

This imo is one of the most important things that must get fixed otherwise newer cars will get dragged through a similar mess.

No more updates without clear and open disclosure of purpose before installation.

Simple disclosure of battery condition, may be 'on request', along with lifetime Supercharging and Ludicrous Launch counters if those uses have finite limits regarding warranty coverage.

Clearer warranty terms / process so that it is possible to differentiate between normal wear and tear and 'component failure'.

Essential to have a viable battery replacement program with core charge and ideally capacity upgrade options otherwise these are disposable cars.

One reason this stuff appeared to matter less was that EM clearly sold cars with his promise that they would be underwritten by the best warranty that would cover everything. (more or less). Now that chickens have come home to roost, there is all this debate very much about what is actually covered under warranty, what constitutes a failure and how can owners demonstrate that something has failed if Tesla keep changing settings in software.

This isn't something new of course. There are always differences between management and engineering:

View attachment 577302


View attachment 577303

very very true. To add to that, just think of release notes that you get with each SW update.
added x language
updated fart game
etc.

Why release new SW if you are updating a fart game?
But I've seen nothing ever that says anything about battery management, range, heating and cooling, nothing, ever! The only thing they said over the past year about battery is the warming when on the way to charger.
I can't think of any other company which updates it's SW and does not list all the changes made.
It is downright insulting.

 

[Battpower]

just think of release notes that you get with each SW update.
added x language
updated fart game
etc.

Actually, that's exactly what I had in mind! Especially when you add in new bugs and old ones not resolved.

Not only is it insulting, but it SHOULD be really embarrassing for Tesla.

I've wondered for some time if they keep these stupid updates as a way of slipping in another round of hidden battery mods.

https://www.researchgate.net/public..._short_failure_in_a_Li-ion_spacecraft_battery

More on plating, dendrites and possible mitigation methods. Also notice internal vs external shorts.