Supercharger - Quartzsite, AZ

[Uncle Paul]

Your idea for a reporting system for Superchargers condition would be super helpful. Imagine they will roll out something like that when they come up for air.
Even a red/yellow/green light on each charger would help people know in advance which stall to back into.

Maybe this will roll out with the V3 chargers. People will want to know which stalls will offer them the quickest fill.

Cars are now flooding out of the factory. Tesla will need to run fast to have the Supercharger network keep up.

As with most things Tesla, they will use advanced technology, combined with great hardware to solve these issues.

 

[wraithnot]

Cough, cough, you mean to say that the DQ in Baker is now considered a Supercharger lounge?

Thanks for the tip. I love the supercharger lounge at Kettleman City and have stopped there a total of four times. From the initial news coverage I thought the station at Baker was just as slick: Tesla is about to bring online its biggest Supercharger stations in the US – first look at new lounge

But it sounds like Baker won’t be attracting any lounge lizards just yet.

 

[David99]

This site really needs some love. Since Thanksgiving, various stalls have issues. Just this morning, 2A was slow (no one else there). Changed stalls and got normal speed.

 

[Bet TSLA]

I have studied queueing theory.

Lovely. Here are a couple of old threads that might keep you busy:
Capacity of Superchargers Using an Erlang-B Model
Supercharger capacity

Here is an article that discusses things without a bias.

Tesla Demand

Riiiight. Demand discussions are inherently idiotic. Take it to the "Demand" thread.

 

[SSonnentag]

I pass by, and occasionally charge a bit at, the Quartzsite superchargers every Sunday evening. Yesterday at around 5pm, January 6, 2019, there were several cars queued up to charge. While Sunday evening is one of the busiest times at this particular location, I was a bit surprised to see the lineup on a non-holiday weekend. I suppose there could have been that many people returning home from an extended Christmas/New Year's holiday, but this site has been pretty full for the past few months on all Sunday evenings. More charging stations are definitely needed here now that the Model 3's are flooding the streets.

Doubling or tripling the number of Teslas on the roads in a year or less is hard to keep up with in charging infrastructure.

 

[PLUS EV]

I talked to some people that were driving Tahoe to San Antonio at the Fort Stockton supercharger and they said they had a lineup somewhere along the way and I figured it was here. I do think there were a lot of people going home after a long holiday week as the West Texas superchargers were all more busy than normal. There were 3 of us in Junction, 4 in Fort Stockton and 2 in Van Horn. That may not sound like much but I've driven from Phoenix to (insert large Texas city) before without seeing a single other Tesla. And when I do have company it's only ever been one other charging with me. Obviously there are more Teslas on the road now, but I was still surprised.

It will be interesting to see how Quartzsite holds up on Sundays from now until the summer driving season. I'm guessing it will get close to full at times but not be much of an issue. After Memorial Day is a different story.

 

[outdoors]

Was there a year ago yesterday. Driving home in the 3. Was completely empty. Did get to go to the mini car cruise and talk to some people about Tesla. Times are a changing. Tesla is working hard and selling cars. Infrastructure is coming along.

 

[juliusa]

Do you really not understand that the thousand charges you did in the past have nothing to do with the waits that will occur in the future as they deliver more and more cars all using the same charging network?

Athletes are recruited by colleges based on past performance.
Athletes are recruited to the pros, and offered contracts, based on past performance.
We look at a person's resume and past performance when hiring them.
We look at GM and their past commitment to EVs when evaluating their future with EVs.
We look at politicians and their history when determining how we think they will govern if elected.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results...but is often the best indicator we have.

 

[gnuarm]

Athletes are recruited by colleges based on past performance.
Athletes are recruited to the pros, and offered contracts, based on past performance.
We look at a person's resume and past performance when hiring them.
We look at GM and their past commitment to EVs when evaluating their future with EVs.
We look at politicians and their history when determining how we think they will govern if elected.

Past performance is no guarantee of future results...but is often the best indicator we have.

I've supercharged over a thousand times and was 2nd in line once at Mountain View a couple years ago.

I believe gnuarm is a troll and I'm fairly sure he doesn't own a Tesla.

Your past observations of Superchargers has nothing to do with the results seen by others in the future. I believe you acknowledged that but seem to think the fact that you can't figure out any other indicators means you should use a bad one. Instead, try looking at good indicators... like other people's experiences and the general trend. That can say a lot. Not sure why you want to compare Supercharger congestion to politicians' performance.

I hope the Quartzsite site gets some new charging units or one of the other nearby towns get a bank of chargers. Even if the congestion only happens a few times a year, a line of Teslas 15 cars long (and likely to get significantly longer) is very bad press and may well make national news at some point when Tesla is put under a spotlight.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

I pass by, and occasionally charge a bit at, the Quartzsite superchargers every Sunday evening. Yesterday at around 5pm, January 6, 2019, there were several cars queued up to charge. While Sunday evening is one of the busiest times at this particular location, I was a bit surprised to see the lineup on a non-holiday weekend. I suppose there could have been that many people returning home from an extended Christmas/New Year's holiday, but this site has been pretty full for the past few months on all Sunday evenings. More charging stations are definitely needed here now that the Model 3's are flooding the streets.

Doubling or tripling the number of Teslas on the roads in a year or less is hard to keep up with in charging infrastructure.

Yes and no. Tesla has to keep spending in line with volume. Some spending ahead of volume because of the discrete nature of installations and the issue of coverage. But they've already got behind with the 2018Q3 slowdown before they ramped Model 3.

Quartzsite's problem is a combination of reduced stalls available and being an essential stop.

They really need to add more charging around it, maybe in Blythe, CA and a stop between Quartzsite, AZ and Buckeye, AZ where there's the necessary power available. The more sites there are, the more optimal the stops, the faster people charge, the greater the effective capacity, the less chance of congestion.

We see the potential future along some other Interstates, where there are stretches with Superchargers at more frequent intervals:
- I-5 from the border to Harris Ranch, CA maximum gap 53.6 miles
- I-15 Start in San Diego, CA to Las Vegas, NV maximum gap 64.8 miles
- I-80 from start in San Francisco, CA to Reno, NV maximum gap 77.3 miles
- I-90 from Buffalo, NY to end in US-1 Boston, MA maximum gap 87.7 miles, 69.8 miles, 52.1 miles
- I-95 from Chester, VA to Milford, CT maximum gap 66.6 miles (76.5 miles maximum to Woodstock, NB once all known sites are built).
There are also bunches on other Interstates, and Tesla's maps show intention to fill in.

 

[Bet TSLA]

at some point when Tesla is put under a spotlight

Tesla is always under a spotlight. Everybody agrees that more superchargers will be necessary over time, and that some places where they ought to go are pretty obvious. I think that mostly people also agree that the job should be left to the professionals, who have a much better idea of the trade-offs, immediate and long-term goals, and available means, as well as massive amounts of detailed data.

The world is already way too full of people insisting that Tesla must do something right now to address whatever is most important to them at the moment. Give it a rest. If next holiday season this site is still having severe overcrowding problems you can say "I told you so" and I'll acknowledge your brilliance.

 

[gnuarm]

Yes and no. Tesla has to keep spending in line with volume. Some spending ahead of volume because of the discrete nature of installations and the issue of coverage. But they've already got behind with the 2018Q3 slowdown before they ramped Model 3.

Quartzsite's problem is a combination of reduced stalls available and being an essential stop.

They really need to add more charging around it, maybe in Blythe, CA and a stop between Quartzsite, AZ and Buckeye, AZ where there's the necessary power available. The more sites there are, the more optimal the stops, the faster people charge, the greater the effective capacity, the less chance of congestion.

If you look at this through queueing theory, you will realize that if Quartzsite is simply a way point between the two major cities and there is no real reason to stop here or any other place between the current charging stations, the best solution for Quartzsite is a single station with more stalls. Multi server, single queue.

But if there is a reason to have other charging stations, then that is the way to go. I don't know the area, but it seems pretty desolate.

We see the potential future along some other Interstates, where there are stretches with Superchargers at more frequent intervals:
- I-5 from the border to Harris Ranch, CA maximum gap 53.6 miles
- I-15 Start in San Diego, CA to Las Vegas, NV maximum gap 64.8 miles
- I-80 from start in San Francisco, CA to Reno, NV maximum gap 77.3 miles
- I-90 from Buffalo, NY to end in US-1 Boston, MA maximum gap 87.7 miles, 69.8 miles, 52.1 miles
- I-95 from Chester, VA to Milford, CT maximum gap 66.6 miles (76.5 miles maximum to Woodstock, NB once all known sites are built).
There are also bunches on other Interstates, and Tesla's maps show intention to fill in.

Yeah, some places are better than others. I don't mind so much when driving alone, but I had a friend in the car the other day and she is recouping from an ankle replacement, so I was trying to make it as easy as possible on her with a couple long stops while we ate which in theory would make the trip shorter. But the best laid plans... Next time no plans for proper meals. We'll drink the rain we catch in our mouths while sticking our heads out the window and eat the bugs that get stuck in our teeth while we smile.

 

[juliusa]

Your past observations of Superchargers has nothing to do with the results seen by others in the future.

Maybe those future-seers can tell us where the Tesla price is going so we can make some money.

Instead, try looking at good indicators... like other people's experiences and the general trend.

There is no general trend - just a few anectdotes. Same postes as 3 years ago when the supercharger network was about to collapse with the ramp-up in production and the introduction of the Model X.

Didn't collapse then, and has not collapsed now. The Quartzsite location was opened over 5 years ago, and has some congestion. Yes needs some added capacity there or along the route. Does not mean it is indicative or part of a general trend.

My estimate is less than 5% of supercharger locations had capacity issues 3 years ago; and less than 5% of supercharger locations have capacity issues now.

Take a breath man. Life is good - supercharger network is fine.

 

[juliusa]

If you look at this through queueing theory, you will realize that if Quartzsite is simply a way point between the two major cities and there is no real reason to stop here or any other place between the current charging stations, the best solution for Quartzsite is a single station with more stalls. Multi server, single queue.

The is a very simplistic way to look at it, and fortunately I believe the supercharger team is much more sophistocated in their analysis.

Cars charge faster with lower SOC, so two locations of half the size splitting a distance in thirds is often a better solution for people to reduce charging time than a single location in the middle with twice the capacity. With in-car occupancy information, the queue optimization of a single large location is mitigated by showing occupancy and effectively making alternate sites a single queue that will self-balance.

Choice of stopping places, with different amenities, is also appealing. Sometimes the stop is not just about fastest charging, but timing and convenience.

An over 5-year-old site with 8 charging stalls that has had ample capacity for 4 years is hardly a poster child for under-investment. Indio and Buckeye were added after Quartzsite, and the LR3 and S100D and X100D can easily travel without stopping at Quartzsite. Another location on either size of Quartzsite, or an expansion of Quartzsite, would handle the capacity.

It is just not that big a deal.

 

[gnuarm]

Maybe those future-seers can tell us where the Tesla price is going so we can make some money.


There is no general trend - just a few anectdotes. Same postes as 3 years ago when the supercharger network was about to collapse with the ramp-up in production and the introduction of the Model X.

Didn't collapse then, and has not collapsed now. The Quartzsite location was opened over 5 years ago, and has some congestion. Yes needs some added capacity there or along the route. Does not mean it is indicative or part of a general trend.

My estimate is less than 5% of supercharger locations had capacity issues 3 years ago; and less than 5% of supercharger locations have capacity issues now.

Take a breath man. Life is good - supercharger network is fine.

I don't know why you continue to exaggerate and distort the discussion. No one is saying anything is going to collapse. But anyone who is open minded and not limited to seeing the past as the only possible future can see the large uptick in Teslas on the road will result in more frequent charging congestion. The congestion we see now is unusual in the history of Tesla. Numerous locations in CA where Tesla sales have been the highest are seeing frequent congestion, again not seen before. No, the network is not collapsing. No one is saying that other than you. But clearly now that production is up some 300% over pre-2018 sales we can expect this trend to continue until Tesla does something.

Your choice of ignoring facts is fine. No one cares if you think there isn't a problem. We care if Tesla recognizes there is a problem and does something about it. Tesla obviously thinks there will be a problem if they do nothing. That's why they keep talking about rapid expansion of the network. The only question that is important is whether they will follow through.

 

[gnuarm]

The is a very simplistic way to look at it, and fortunately I believe the supercharger team is much more sophistocated in their analysis.

Yes, very simple approach to a very simple problem. Again, the facts say that if there is no need for stations in other locations along the route, the best solution to reducing the length of wait lines is to add more chargers at the existing location. That's simple queueing theory as I already said. Are you familiar with that? It's the reason why they install a single wait line in banks and theaters instead of having a line for each teller.

Cars charge faster with lower SOC, so two locations of half the size splitting a distance in thirds is often a better solution for people to reduce charging time than a single location in the middle with twice the capacity. With in-car occupancy information, the queue optimization of a single large location is mitigated by showing occupancy and effectively making alternate sites a single queue that will self-balance.

Splitting the distance is only useful if the distance is too long. I think Quartzsite is about 100 miles from chargers at each end which is adequate for maximizing charging speeds on the newer cars. Since Quartzsite is about halfway adding a charging station won't make the distances a third each unless they move the Quartzsite chargers to another city.

Your equivalence argument is not valid. In fact, it can lead to greater congestion. A number of cars in route see utilization getting high at the first station and so every car headed that way skips that station. The cars headed for the nest station won't show up on the system until they reach that next station and start charging raising the utilization. By then there are more cars on the way which have already passed the first station and now the second station ends up with a significant wait line while the first station becomes underutilized as charging completes on the cars already there. Yep, a single station is better for wait times than two stations with the same number of total chargers.

Choice of stopping places, with different amenities, is also appealing. Sometimes the stop is not just about fastest charging, but timing and convenience.

Yes, convenience is important if it is a factor. That's why I prefaced my statement the way I did. But that's a big IF. There isn't much at Quartzsite and I don't see much at any of the other locations along the way.

An over 5-year-old site with 8 charging stalls that has had ample capacity for 4 years is hardly a poster child for under-investment. Indio and Buckeye were added after Quartzsite, and the LR3 and S100D and X100D can easily travel without stopping at Quartzsite. Another location on either size of Quartzsite, or an expansion of Quartzsite, would handle the capacity.

It is just not that big a deal.

Not sure what your point is. You seem intent in defending Tesla against even the tiniest of criticisms while actually acknowledging there is a problem. Maybe you should try chilling a bit and just read what others post without getting too excited. No one is trying to take down Tesla. There are problems and Tesla needs to address them. The question is whether Tesla will be able to do that with the now much higher rate of production of electron thirsty cars. At this point, thinking things are going to be business as usual is just hiding your head in the sand. Your head, your choice.

 

[Bet TSLA]

The congestion we see now is unusual in the history of Tesla. Numerous locations in CA where Tesla sales have been the highest are seeing frequent congestion, again not seen before.... But clearly now that production is up some 300% over pre-2018 sales we can expect this trend to continue until Tesla does something.

No, the congestion we are seeing now is typical. There have been isolated problems for years. They get dealt with. New ones appear. And so on. Of course the trend will continue. Of course Tesla is doing something every single day. Today's situation, according to supercharge.info is that there are, worldwide, 40 supercharging stations under construction with permits in process for 89 others. This is a historically high level, which indicates that Tesla is indeed doing something.

So WTF are you fulminating about? Try to be less dense.

 

[tmoz]

I must admit that my factual knowledge of the Tesla SC infrastructure is very limited. I've personally used ~40 different SC locations, and only had an issue in Indio, meaning I had to wait. I've heard stories of queues, which is a poor way to statistically sample the infrastructure and gives me nothing but partial and incomplete information. I'm sure Tesla has all of the data and analyzed in many different ways. It would be nice to see the results of their analysis.

90% of my personal 3.5 yrs of experience at SCs has been before the model 3 ramp in 2nd half 2018.

My take-away from these discussions is to be careful and prepared if I'm going to be going on a 300+ mile trip by getting SC location specific information about those I'm going to be using, especially if I'm going to be traveling on a holiday weekend.

It would be nice for Tesla to release more data about the SC network, especially upgrades to existing locations. I suppose we are seeing some of this with two locations popping up right next to each other. But some usage statistics for the US and stats for each individual state would be nice for both PR and planning purposes.

I'd really like to see a SC put in Globe and Show Low, but if other locations are having wait times, I couldn't justify it as Globe and Show Low would be a lonely place for Teslas and be used relatively rarely. Lots of growing pains, but let's be happy that there is all of this tremendous growth in the first place.

 

[juliusa]

That's simple queueing theory

Simple is the key word. This ignores the complexities of the actual situation. Here are a few:
1. Adjacent superchargers (within 50 or so miles) share the same queue to an extent, since occupancy is displayed in the nav
2. Different locations offer different amenities
3. Different locations allow faster charging rates by driving an additional 50 miles and having lower SOC before charging

But anyone who is open minded and not limited to seeing the past as the only possible future can see the large uptick in Teslas on the road will result in more frequent charging congestion.

False. Proven by the fact it has not happened. There was infrequent congestion 3 years ago; there is infrequent congestion now. There will likely always be infrequent congestion, particularly at holiday travel time. Just like there are infrequent lines at gas stations at those times, and frequent congestion on highways at those times.

Your equivalence argument is not valid. In fact, it can lead to greater congestion. A number of cars in route see utilization getting high at the first station and so every car headed that way skips that station.

Interesting theory, but wrong. If someone is looking to optimize their travel time; they would not choose to skip the station unless the first station were more than 50% utilized, and second station less than 50% utilized, in the hopes of getting a dedicated charger. If there were several cars ahead of them that made the same choice, they would arrive prior to people behind them making the choice to skip.
There will also be many people that will just stop where they want, regardless of the utlization - but there will be some that are congnizant and will balance the system - just like enough people jump lanes in slow moving traffic to ensure a reasonable match in lane speed.

Not sure what your point is. You seem intent in defending Tesla against even the tiniest of criticisms while actually acknowledging there is a problem.

Not defending anyone. There is no problem. This is business as usual. Populations, driving patterns, ownership, and many other factors constantly change - if there were never any congestion, Tesla would be wasting money building superchargers years in advance of when they are needed. You seem to know some simple queue theory - how many chargers would Tesla need in Quartzsite to guarantee nobody would ever have to wait?

No, the congestion we are seeing now is typical. There have been isolated problems for years. They get dealt with. New ones appear. And so on. Of course the trend will continue. Of course Tesla is doing something every single day.

Well said. 36 stalls under construction and 14 more permitted in San Jose, for example.

Don't forget the pricing adjustments that will impact usage and supercharger occupancy:
- No more free* for life of vehicle supercharging
- No more free* for original owner supercharging
- No more first 6 months free* supercharging
- No more free* annual supercharging allowance is there?
- Higher supercharging rates
- Idle fees
* Not really "free" - included in price of vehicle.

The question is whether Tesla will be able to do that with the now much higher rate of production

Surely as a student of queue theory you know that larger numbers of vehicles are a good thing and the network can operate at higher occupancy without increasing the risk of wait time.

There are lot of moving parts, and Tesla has a track record of managing adequate capacity.

It will be fine. Really.

 

[gnuarm]

Simple is the key word. This ignores the complexities of the actual situation. Here are a few:
1. Adjacent superchargers (within 50 or so miles) share the same queue to an extent, since occupancy is displayed in the nav

This was already addressed. I showed exactly how multiple queues can interact with the information and the travel delay to result in greater queue waits than if they were a single queue. Stating that the queues are shared "to an extent" isn't analyzing the problem.

2. Different locations offer different amenities

If that is actually true, then yes, different locations are good which I've said. But a Carl's Jr is not much in the way of amenities vs. a Burger King or whatever other fast food is available. I'll take the shorter charger line waits of the single queue thanks.

3. Different locations allow faster charging rates by driving an additional 50 miles and having lower SOC before charging

Again, already addressed. The distances from Quartzsite to adjacent chargers are enough that virtually every car would be in the max charging level. Besides, the car allows you to plan your charging and the previous charge should have charged the car to a level that allows max charging rate. Providing multiple close together locations actually works against this because the charge level needs to be high enough to reach both locations before the driver has a choice. Run the battery too low and you get the same slow charging problem.

False. Proven by the fact it has not happened.

LOL! If it hasn't happened, it ain't gonna happen? Too bad we can't apply that reasoning to everything.

There was infrequent congestion 3 years ago; there is infrequent congestion now. There will likely always be infrequent congestion, particularly at holiday travel time. Just like there are infrequent lines at gas stations at those times, and frequent congestion on highways at those times.

Ok, a case of denial. What I've read is that charging congestion is happening a lot more than infrequently in many locations in CA. I've seen it personally in Maryland where there shouldn't be any congestion looking at the general trend in the greater area.

The "infrequent" lines at gas stations are virtually non-existent other than at Costco which is driven by being the cheapest gas in town. Is Tesla the cheapest charging in town? Oh, they are the ONLY charging for most Tesla drivers on trips. So I guess it's the same thing.

Interesting theory, but wrong. If someone is looking to optimize their travel time; they would not choose to skip the station unless the first station were more than 50% utilized, and second station less than 50% utilized, in the hopes of getting a dedicated charger. If there were several cars ahead of them that made the same choice, they would arrive prior to people behind them making the choice to skip.

Your rationale is very poor. Of course anyone wanting to avoid a wait line will skip a station that is significantly more utilized at that time to avoid getting caught in a wait. The problem is what happens from the interaction with the trip delay. Once a driver has passed the first charger they are committed to the second. You need to factor in the time it takes to get from the first to the second charger. And one or two cars arriving isn't going to change matters much.

Besides, your reasoning here is directly in conflict with your "amenities" point above. Either way, splitting the queue means longer wait times.

There will also be many people that will just stop where they want, regardless of the utlization - but there will be some that are congnizant and will balance the system - just like enough people jump lanes in slow moving traffic to ensure a reasonable match in lane speed.

Ok, this is just being in denial. The point is not only does the system not balance in this situation, it oscillates because the time delay.

Not defending anyone. There is no problem. This is business as usual. Populations, driving patterns, ownership, and many other factors constantly change - if there were never any congestion, Tesla would be wasting money building superchargers years in advance of when they are needed. You seem to know some simple queue theory - how many chargers would Tesla need in Quartzsite to guarantee nobody would ever have to wait?

Who said anything about a guarantee? The simple issue is more waiting vs less waiting with a single queue or multiple queues. The answer is clear. A single queue of chargers approximately a half tank from other chargers will provide the lowest wait times and would be the best solution if there are no other population centers or frequent destinations in between.

[

Surely as a student of queue theory you know that larger numbers of vehicles are a good thing and the network can operate at higher occupancy without increasing the risk of wait time.

Uh, only if you increase the number of chargers at each location or otherwise increase the capacity of the system in proportion... which is not being done. The number of Teslas on the road doubled in 2018. It will most likely increase by more than 70% again in 2019. The number of chargers has increased linearly for a number of years now and there is no reason the growth rate will be significantly different in 2019. They are addressing the congestion issues in CA which is important. If these get fixed it will be written off as "growing pains". But there is no reason to think these issues are isolated and won't continue to occur in other regions. Moreover, the density of charging needs to be improved to provide more options on trips. The present early adopters are happy to accept frequent short charging stops on trips. The mainstream potential customer will want to get more range from their batteries and not waste hours charging every 120 miles when they could be could be charging at meal stops. But the spacing of chargers in much of the country precludes this. That is what needs to change before Teslas will become mainstream.

There are lot of moving parts, and Tesla has a track record of managing adequate capacity.

Lol! Tesla has a track record of not managing well when it involves "lots of moving parts". Just look at Tesla's history, it is littered with missed deadlines and failed intentions. The issue at hand can't be dismissed with a wave of the hand by saying, "it hasn't been a problem so far!" LOL

It will be fine. Really.

Oh, there it is... a full arm wave! LOL

I guess we'll see how things go in the next year. But if they don't have a LOT more charging available by the time the model Y is released in the US there will be much stiffer resistance to sales. The Y won't be receiving the same wide eyed stares from the world waiting to see if Elon Musk falls on his face. When the Y comes out it will be in competition with the big iron companies and will have to stand on it's own two legs... so to speak. Charging will be one of those legs.