bonnie
I play a nice person on twitter.
I think they would be foolish to pursue supercharging for the Roadster. I'd rather see the engineering time spent on other endeavors.
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
wiztecy
Active Member
How about just Chademo? Since the ESS will be pulled out and an the new ESS installed, the contactor needed to make chademo work as well being safe could be installed inside the ESS where it needs to reside. Also the proper firmware update could be applied so that the software talks with the hardware to make it work as a system. I'm happy just the way it is, but utilizing the chademo network would be nice. Definitely less expensive than supercharging. However I'm also happy just the way it is as long as the CAN SR. is riding along with me!
DC Charging for the Roadster [Archive] - Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum
DC Charging for the Roadster [Archive] - Tesla Motors Club - Enthusiasts & Owners Forum
I'm not a Roadster owner, nor do I expect to be, but recently I read a bit about the topic - thanks to bonnie's tip - and one reason I might see Tesla doing something about the charging is to keep a charging network alive for the Roadster. Some DC charging adapter might make some sense there, if those current Roadster charging stations get replaced by something of higher volume.
It probably hurts Tesla a little that the Roadster has a different charging port and infrastructure, bringing that somehow in line with the Model S/X could probably help them reduce parts and infrastructure complexity. Then again, maybe stuff like the J1772 adapter already do enough in this area.
But the point is, if the Roadster was somehow in danger of becoming hard to charge on the road (say, if DC charging started replacing AC charging widely), then it might in Tesla's interest not to abandon those owners but seek some solution? Maybe they could come up with an active Model S charging adapter that could be used to hook Model S cables into and that way reduce infra complexity or something like that.
Just thinking out loud. Perhaps the current charging selection will be enough for the life of the Roadster fleet.
It probably hurts Tesla a little that the Roadster has a different charging port and infrastructure, bringing that somehow in line with the Model S/X could probably help them reduce parts and infrastructure complexity. Then again, maybe stuff like the J1772 adapter already do enough in this area.
But the point is, if the Roadster was somehow in danger of becoming hard to charge on the road (say, if DC charging started replacing AC charging widely), then it might in Tesla's interest not to abandon those owners but seek some solution? Maybe they could come up with an active Model S charging adapter that could be used to hook Model S cables into and that way reduce infra complexity or something like that.
Just thinking out loud. Perhaps the current charging selection will be enough for the life of the Roadster fleet.
I'm not seeing why the engineering would be that substantial.
You'd need some sort of a contactor module to bypass the existing on board charger and connect the DC leads, whether as part of a replacement charger module or as a standalone assembly. The new pack is going to mean lots of firmware changes anyway, even if the old charger hardware is sufficient (no idea if it is or not, but I haven't seen mention of changing the charger.)
Other than that, I'd think all you'd need is to sort out the safe charging profile - which should be fairly simple for the new packs, since I think people were saying it's the same cells as the Model S. I'm not sure if TMS programming/pack heating is enough of a factor to affect the profile.
Then you just teach the car to talk to the Supercharger (should be simple, since the SpCs speak CANBus anyway) and regulate them to the profile. There's no reason I can see why it shouldn't be able to handle at least as much as the S60 with the new packs.
Walter
Why would you expect the wiring inside the pack to be robust enough for Supercharging? Little known fact: the Sport has a slightly different pack, with larger wires to handle the extra current.
That looks like a great solution.
DC vs. AC is interesting, I think in European standards wars DC - overall - seems to be where things are headed, but then Roadster isn't an issue here really. Sounds like charging infrastructure for Roadster's in the U.S. is secure then, as is.
I wonder how long those Roadster-specific charging point will remain.
DC vs. AC is interesting, I think in European standards wars DC - overall - seems to be where things are headed, but then Roadster isn't an issue here really. Sounds like charging infrastructure for Roadster's in the U.S. is secure then, as is.
I wonder how long those Roadster-specific charging point will remain.
Am I missing something? It's a brand new pack, with brand new wiring, no? So they should be able to make it robust enough if they choose.
On a more practical note, I thought the wiring was sized to handle ~200 kW surges of discharge, which should be ample to handle ~100 kW charging, though that doesn't necessarily address long term heating questions (though I'd expect that wires which can handle 10 seconds of 200 kW can handle half an hour of <100 kW.)
Walter
Since this subject has been beat to death, I think the reason you're bringing it up again is because you're looking for another Roadster project now that the Parser is largely stable. :biggrin: I think you need to talk to @wk057 and bring him on board to help you. See this post:
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/40042-Roadster-3-0/page5?p=853334#post853334
and my response and then his. Somewhere in that thread he mentions that somebody decoded most of the serial communication used by the Superchargers. Between the two of you, both brilliant engineers, one Roadster expert, one Model S battery pack expert, I bet you could do it!
I'll support your effort by building you a Model S inlet capable of 90kW to mount somewhere on the Roadster.
smorgasbord
Active Member
Count me as a vote for SuperCharging - and I'd expect to have to pay quite a bit for it.
With the new 70kWh/260 mile pack (aka 400 mile pack), all sorts of things open up when you add SuperCharging into the mix. I don't need to do more than 500 miles a day, but with SC we could do 400 miles a day at full-on highway speeds.
Of course, I'd still rather have more performance than range, but that's a whole 'nother thread.
With the new 70kWh/260 mile pack (aka 400 mile pack), all sorts of things open up when you add SuperCharging into the mix. I don't need to do more than 500 miles a day, but with SC we could do 400 miles a day at full-on highway speeds.
Of course, I'd still rather have more performance than range, but that's a whole 'nother thread.
samcarney
Sam C
It's totally doable and I think they should just do it. Offering a supercharging upgrade package makes a lot more sense than an aero bodykit (it's bad form to change the look a discontinued and rare car), and as the supercharging network expands, it makes more sense than even offering 400 miles range in a sports car.
Adding supercharging would make it a more capable track car at REFUEL.
Adding supercharging would make it a more capable track car at REFUEL.
TurboFroggy
Member
Why wouldn't Tesla just install a HPWC at each Supercharger setup? It looks like there is already a 25KVA 480 to 208V/120V transformer at each site (maybe to run the control equipment). Then that cool adapter that NigelM showed could be used to charge at 70A*208V at least.
I really doubt that they are making any design changes to the pack, aside from putting in different cells. In fact, I would not be the slightest bit surprised to hear that these will all be refurbished packs. You trade in your existing pack, they put in a pack that has already been refurbished with the new cells. Then they refurbish your pack for someone else's upgrade. That would allow them to offer the replacement pack at a much better price. I suspect if you were offered a refurbished pack for $20k or a brand-new pack for $40k that you'd be really happy with the refurb.
My point really was that the Roadster pack design probably isn't compatible with high power DC input, and that I really doubt they will make significant design changes.
- - - Updated - - -
I'd bet that they could put 16kW DC from a Supercharger into a Roadster via DC directly into the existing PEM. After all the inverter chops at a higher frequency; they don't need AC input. But I doubt they'll offer that because it will tie up Supercharger stalls with Roadsters that take hours to charge.
That's certainly possible, and I don't have any way to know for certain. Very few of the parts in the pack are likely to know or care whether the power is flowing in or out of the pack, though.
My guess would be that the pack design can handle it with no changes, or at most there'd be a few small components that need to be changed - which could easily done during your suggested pack refurbishment. As noted before, they would of course have to provide new Model S type receptacles, and either replacement chargers or a new bypass module.
I think you're likely right that they'll be reusing the existing top level ESS housings with new innards; I think the sheets will be all new rather than recycled, and they may or may not make some other replacements/modifications while they're at it.
Walter
The main issue is keeping the pack cool. The current cooling system is designed to extract a few kW of heat produced when charging at ~17kW. It wouldn't cope with the higher power dissipation required during supercharging without an upgrade to the cooling system too -- which would be a significant re-engineering exercise.
shrink
Member
By contrast, the LEAF allows quick charging through a CHAdeMO and provides no cooling at all (although LEAF batteries admittedly have done horribly in hot climate). I think CHAdeMO charges at 25kW to 50 kW depending on the charging unit, but is capable of up to 100 kW? I really don't know specifics on that, so someone please correct me. Now Nissan is saying their new LEAF battery chemistry is heat resistant and again there is no cooling/TMS for the battery.
Best case scenario is the new Roadster pack is also heat resistant, but we really have no way of knowing that. But my question is (having no engineering background) is what if theoretical Roadster supercharging is limited to something like 50 kW? We don't need 90 or 100 kW. We still get a quicker charge and hopefully produce less heat. Would something like that have a chance of working?
I would have thought it was sized to handle the ~225 kW surge during acceleration and 60 kW+ steady state loads from high speed driving. (120 mph for 40 minutes or so, right?)
It would seem like the high speed driving case should be harder on the battery cooling system than Supercharging would be - though of course in that case it have high speed air over the radiators - possibly it can't pull enough cooling air over those with the fans, I don't know. All the reports I can find for hard driving say the PEM cooling is more of an issue than the battery cooling for the existing roadster.
Walter
wiztecy
Active Member
"CHAdeMO is the trade name of a quick charging method for battery electric vehicles delivering up to 62.5 kW of high-voltage direct current via a special electrical connector."
Via: CHAdeMO - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I've read that CHAdeMO was originally designed for 100-kW service, but only delivers 50-kW at stations.
I'd still prefer CHAdeMO over SC's for the Roadster. There's more of those around in practical areas plus its a standard. Even though I'm fairly close to Fremont, there are no SCs on common routes I travel, however CHAdeMO chargers are. Looking at plugshare they're in locations that are very very useful and practical.
PlugShare - EV Charging Station Map - Find a place to charge your car!
You can filter down to just CHAdeMO or SuperChargers using the advanced options.
One concern would be how long would CHAdeMO be supported until the next big technology is released. But the same can be said about the J1772 standard and its still around. However it appears that the major car manufactures are still battling over they want to move over to CHAdeMO, so with that it does have a chance to fade out.
Last edited:
Similar threads
