Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Would you like priority option for supercharging?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.
This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
Supercharging locations are getting crowded in some places.

I believe it is time to add a very small, simple, though handy tool to manage supercharging. New button!
REDUCED_supercharging_rate.png

By default, this is set to STANDARD for every location.
User has the option to click REDUCED on the screen (or app) before charging and during the session.

There must be a simple logic behind this so my vision would be like that:
  • If Stall A and Stall B vehicles both have STANDARD then current logic applies, the first one arrived has priority.
  • If Stall A car has default STANDARD and Stall B chose REDUCED then let A charge at full available power regardless who arrived first. If B changes setting apply current logic. If new vehicle arrives to stall A give priority if requested.
  • If both stalls chose REDUCED charge both at half the maximum SC speed (should be between 60-70kW).
  • If second bay is unoccupied choosing REDUCED will result in whatever is appropriate for vehicle and charger*. So something like 50-60kW. Tesla might consider allowing users to get Tier1 prices if REDUCED rate is chosen and billing is per minute, not per kWh.
  • Lastly, in some scenarios, REDUCED option might be ignored. For example, when Supercharging location is heavily crowded. If one bay is tapering (due to high state of charge) or even at idle (with idling fee of course) other vehicle shall receive all available power (aka current logic applies).


It is possible and reasonable that in future, one charger will serve more than 2 stalls. This makes priority choices even more meaningful for those who are in a hurry and location is heavily crowded. For example, 540kW charger for 8 bays. This configuration will reduce available charger power waste in congested supercharging location.

*Usually, full speed is most efficient, but as Superchargers are made out of many stand-alone charging modules, there are many "full speed" options to choose from.
 
  • Disagree
Reactions: ABC2D and TexasEV
Violates the first principle- KISS
Nobody is forcing anybody to do anything. There is just a button available for those who
don't want to pay idling fee while eating a meal closeby.

Just saying that KISS protocol works for a while. For example, years ago, we were promised for
a simple car with no ECO mode selection, no launch control procedure click this-turn that.
But look, we have an ECO mode. We have launch control. We also have CREEP selector. Additional
button, but everybody likes the fact that it's there.
 
I did mention that scenario. Just in case it actually slows down overcall supercharging location throughput.

In case location is mostly empty (0-50%) it doesn't slow anybody down. There is no line.

In case location is half-filled (50-75%) this will allow second vehicle to charge faster if it wishes.
If you arrive with 10% and want to charge to 90%, choose REDUCED, stall B is unoccupied, you occupy
stall A, you start charging at 60kW rate. Somebody arrives to stall B and requests default speed STANDARD.
You slow down to around 10-30kW so that Stall B receives maximum charging current. This continues for short
period, maybe 10 minutes until vehicle that arrived to stall B starts to taper. You speed up to 60kW. It is likely
the one who is in hurry won't charge to 80+%.

In case location is heavily crowded (75-100%) or overcrowded (>100%) choosing REDUCED will allow reduction
down to maximum supercharger capability (of around 135kW total per 2 stalls). So that even if both choose
REDUCED they will still load the charger to the edge. Both start charging at around 68kW. If one chooses
STANDARD then that one will be charged at max battery capability and the other one gets all that is left.


This logic doesn't waste valuable time.
And actually, if there is a waiting line, I would consider idling fee to start 5 minutes after charge rate drops below 10kW.
This would eliminate those who strategically went to a restaurant and set charging limit to 100%. We all know how
much time does it take to get from 95% to 100%. And that is not awesome when there are 5 people waiting in line.
 
Well, if somebody chose REDUCED it would be easy to recommend appropriate paired stall.
If somebody chose STANDARD and just arrived, it would be easy not to recommend same charger secondary stall.
Your idea is definitely good one. But it would work better if there were vehicles not charging rapidly.
Remember that today, first vehicle arriving has priority by default. And it cannot be changed.
For example, why not mark them in orange?
supercharging_stalls.png

(error, 2 stalls available)

Tesla might also win in some situations. Imagine they have grid fee for excessive power use.
Imagine 50% of stalls are occupied (for example all A stalls). Vehicles will be there for 15-30 minutes
charging at 100kW. So 8 vehicles total 800kW. If half of them chose REDUCED (as they want to
have a longer break, shopping or something), they get 60kW constant, other half gets 100kW.
Total 640kW. What if anything above 600kW and Tesla has to pay for extra power. No Powerpack available.
They could throttle down those vehicles that chose REDUCED so total doesn't exceed 600kW. And maybe
pass some of those savings to those who chose REDUCED rate. While those who want maximum charging
speed get what they want. I would definitely want to save money if that is possible. Especially when I don't need
to charge very fast. Or, what if grid asks for temporary reduction for a minute due to excessive peak happening.

This doesn't alleviate Supercharger crowding - number of vehicles will still be the same.
It alleviates delays for those who are in a hurry.
 
With 2000 posts I expect you know how vehicle charging works.
If you actually meant what you said, you would rather vote for
"no SC above 90%". Today, whoever arrives to SC at any
state below 80% can stay there to charge for at least an hour without idling fee.
It takes 40-60 minutes to charge from 90% to 100%.

REDUCED rate will likely reduce average session time. Not prolong it.
If A and B arrives at almost the same time, A has like 90 minutes
of stuff to do, charges from 5% to 98%. B is in a hurry and want
to stay at SC just to charge 25kWh (so 15 min at 100kW).
But B has to be there for way longer as all stallpairs have at least one vehicle
and A car is charging at 100kW for half an hour. Leaving B, the one who actually
wants to leave ASAP, stranded for longer.
So, today, A stays for 90 minutes, B stays for at least 30 minutes, average 60 minutes
With REDUCED selected, A stays for 90 minutes, B stays for 15 minutes. Average 52.5.
A will charge about 60(1 hour)+5 (15min while B charges at max)+15(15 minutes)=80kWh
if no more vehicles visit stall B.Whoever is in a hurry, will not choose REDUCED.

Any reasonable SC visiter who actually doesn't care about 100% charge but needs
to be there for 60 minutes would likely choose REDUCED and allow secondary
bay user to enjoy so called "max speed". This is not possible right now.
Right now, anybody who wants to be there for 60 minutes will just remove charging
limit. This will almost guarantee no idling fee.
 
Last edited:
  • Disagree
Reactions: ABC2D and bxr140
I am not convinced that this is a good idea for a lot of owners.

My personal feeling is that we succumb to clutter on electronic displays. I find this on web pages too. What starts out as a tidy display of information eventually turns into a mess.

I would more than likely forget to utilize yet another button on the touchscreen when I stop to Supercharge. And if it "pops up," that would be aggravating. Those spontaneous pop-ups notices are a nuisance.
 
WAY too complex for the average driver.

Heck, way too complex for some smarter-than-average drivers.

Supercharging locations are getting crowded in some places.

I believe it is time to add a very small, simple, though handy tool to manage supercharging. New button!
REDUCED_supercharging_rate.png

By default, this is set to STANDARD for every location.
User has the option to click REDUCED on the screen (or app) before charging and during the session.

There must be a simple logic behind this so my vision would be like that:
  • If Stall A and Stall B vehicles both have STANDARD then current logic applies, the first one arrived has priority.
  • If Stall A car has default STANDARD and Stall B chose REDUCED then let A charge at full available power regardless who arrived first. If B changes setting apply current logic. If new vehicle arrives to stall A give priority if requested.
  • If both stalls chose REDUCED charge both at half the maximum SC speed (should be between 60-70kW).
  • If second bay is unoccupied choosing REDUCED will result in whatever is appropriate for vehicle and charger*. So something like 50-60kW. Tesla might consider allowing users to get Tier1 prices if REDUCED rate is chosen and billing is per minute, not per kWh.
  • Lastly, in some scenarios, REDUCED option might be ignored. For example, when Supercharging location is heavily crowded. If one bay is tapering (due to high state of charge) or even at idle (with idling fee of course) other vehicle shall receive all available power (aka current logic applies).


It is possible and reasonable that in future, one charger will serve more than 2 stalls. This makes priority choices even more meaningful for those who are in a hurry and location is heavily crowded. For example, 540kW charger for 8 bays. This configuration will reduce available charger power waste in congested supercharging location.

*Usually, full speed is most efficient, but as Superchargers are made out of many stand-alone charging modules, there are many "full speed" options to choose from.
 
As stated before, KISS.

There are no idling fees when a supercharger has low occupancy.

High occupancy throughput works best with FIFO, and that’s before you over complicate sequencing with a bunch of people trying to save a buck or three.

Supercharging is super easy. When your car is done charging, move it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rocky_H and KJD
WAY too complex for the average driver.

Average driver only has the opportunity to take it easy while supercharging if one has any reason to do so. Like extra time.
Average user doesn't need to know the whole algorithm. Just a button, not a long story behind it.

All stalls need to be fed from one hub.
2-stall sharing is not perfect, but one-hub system is too hard to do. There are smaller locations and bigger ones.
I would vote for 8 stalls per charger, while charger is 400kW. This gives us more stalls. And makes my proposal with new
charging rate selection extremely useful.

When your car is done charging, move it.
This will not happen. I'm not going to walk 2 minutes from restaurant in the middle of a meal to move my car, which finished 80%
charge after 18 minutes of charging. I want to eat for 20 more minutes. The end. I'm not going to move my car.
This is reality and Tesla wishing people acting otherwise... is not going to happen. Convenience - it was promised. So we get it.

smarter power distribution.
This is exactly what my proposal allows - user has only one button. Tesla can't predict for how long any vehicle wants to stay there,
therefore it can't optimise available power distribution without any feedback from the driver.

OT: Four 400kW Supercharger V3 is one 1,2MW Megacharger.(2 stalls)
 
This will not happen. I'm not going to walk 2 minutes from restaurant in the middle of a meal to move my car, which finished 80%
charge after 18 minutes of charging. I want to eat for 20 more minutes. The end. I'm not going to move my car.
This is reality and Tesla wishing people acting otherwise... is not going to happen. Convenience - it was promised. So we get it.
What you’re saying is the idle fees aren’t high enough.
Or you could set your charge limit to 100% and have more time until it’s done.
 
  • Like
Reactions: rxlawdude
The time and rate at every charging station is different. I have a log of 20 states , with one car or full stalls. Another example, most stations have 2 stalls on one inverter. Here in st augustine, we have 3 on one inverter, makes it very very slow if you are sharing inverters. If 3 on one inverter, it takes forever. I move over a lot.
 
Fantastic idea. I'll contribute an embellishment. For someone who is in a hurry, who arrives at an 8 charger station with two open slots and six filled slots, a dilemma develops (once @arnis 's invention is in operation): Which of these guys is 'slow charging' and which one is 'hogging' the pair? Obviously choosing well helps a) the new guy to get out quickly, and b) the overall throughput (and aggregate kW of the entire site) of outgoing charged cars. To assist the later 'dilemma drivers', anyone who is on a deliberately REDUCED charge should flash their amber lights on a low duty cycle of about one flash every 3 seconds. So once a driver pushes the REDUCED button, in addition to adjusted charging power, the car starts to signal it is sacrificing its priority charging.

@arnis , I've worked with lots of inventors through the years, and you certainly make the grade with this idea.

This is the epitome of a 'win-win'. The driver who elects REDUCED charge gets a sufficient charge, and can enjoy a nice meal, un-rushed. The future drivers can visibly see where the fastest paired slot is, and they get the fast(er) charge they wanted. Nice work!
 
  • Funny
Reactions: bxr140