TEPCO/CHAdeMO Level III "quick" charging station/connector

[TEG]

That is just the first fast charger in a likely roll-out of many more.
Perhaps they put one closer to SF later so you can easily make the return trip.

Based on things I have seen related to the Leaf, they plan to install them at many Nissan dealerships. Once that is done you should be able to jump from dealer to dealer on a long trip. Having one at the dealership makes sense so that they can top off cars used for test drives, or if an owner brings in a car for routine inspection they can also (80%) top it off quickly.

 

[dpeilow]

From the Wired story

The quick charger is one of seven EV chargers installed at a charging “island” behind a Sonic just off Interstate 80 — and one of 45 installed in Vacaville, a city of 100,000 people. The Eaton unit draws 150 to 200 amps at 208 volts and it costs $40,000, so it isn’t the kind of thing you’re going to install in your garage. But Eaton says it is receiving inquiries from shopping centers, retail chains and housing developers.

$40k(!), or to you could get the same power from $100 worth of connectors:

63a 3 phase plug

63a 3 phase socket


Surely it makes sense to use cheaper outlets (given that several studies have said charge points need to outnumber cars to encourage uptake), and not duplicate circuitry already present in the car?

 

[ChargeIt!]

Still don't see the need for these massive, expensive chargers for this amount of power.

$40k(!), or to you could get the same power from $100 worth of connectors: ...
Surely it makes sense to use cheaper outlets (given that several studies have said charge points need to outnumber cars to encourage uptake), and not duplicate circuitry already present in the car?

Ok ... I misunderstood your first comment ... your emphasis was on "massive, expensive" ... not on "need".

Yeah $40k is ridiculous. And Nissan agrees, and now says they can do it for $17k (Cheaper Fast Charge). But because it is DC fast-charge there really is no duplication of circuitry. The car only has single phase AC charger (inverter circuitry plus intelligence) built-in. The fast charge is "kind of" direct to the battery and all the protection and most intelligence is in the Charging Station. Plus three phase AC conversion and step-up-transformer (in this case from 208V to 500V).

(Remember in US the standard for non-commercial locations is single phase AC.)

 

[dpeilow]

This is the resulting connector:

(from EVnut's page)

 

[vfx]

Looks like a cartoon.

 

[AndrewBissell]

TEPCO Level III "quick" charging station/connector

I agree with David Peilow. In fact if you use a multi-phase induction motor (like Tesla does) you already have the 3-phase inverter in the car, so there is duplication of circuitry.

The Mennekes proposal embraces this point by NOT using DC but (as David says above) using 63A 480V 3-phase (which delivers about the same kW as the TEPCO DC chargers).

Going further: do we really need EVSEs (Electric Vehicle Supply Equipment) such as the Tesla/Clipper Creek HPC? As David points out you are at very low cost if you just supply a socket. Why not put the RCD/GFCI in the circuit breaker *where it usually already is* (and therefore doesn't cost extra)!

What else does an EVSE do? A little signalling of available current by a very simplistic protocol, plus only making the circuit live once protocol has established a car is connected.

Is it neccessary? Probably for mass adoption it is - in which case, wouldn't that be better on the circuit breaker too? I am thinking of special breakers that slot in to the breaker box that deliver "car circuits". This would save us all from the scenarios we read about where the EVSE is misconfigured and takes down the breaker. (A 32A "car breaker" would intrinsically signal 32A, etc)

 

[ChargeIt!]

Going further: ...

Both David and Andrew make good points. I am not an expert in AC motors. And this discussion merits its own thread ... it's expanding into the technology used in the car and the implications for a (simplified) EVSE.

Having said that ... the Tesla AC induction motor versus the LEAF synchronous motor technologies imply different inverter circuitries. In order to have standardized EVSE for the (not standardized) variety of vehicle powertrains ... a compromise needs to happen somewhere. The fact that USA also has both single- and three-phase AC supply adds to the complexity.

Utopia: The common denominator is 3-phase AC for not only the supply, but (tada!) storage (a mobile AC ESS !)

 

[stopcrazypp]

From the Wired story
$40k(!), or to you could get the same power from $100 worth of connectors:
63a 3 phase plug
63a 3 phase socket

I agree with David Peilow. In fact if you use a multi-phase induction motor (like Tesla does) you already have the 3-phase inverter in the car, so there is duplication of circuitry.

The Mennekes proposal embraces this point by NOT using DC but (as David says above) using 63A 480V 3-phase (which delivers about the same kW as the TEPCO DC chargers).

The 480V 63A Mennekes socket is only level 2 (~20-30kW). The level 3 DC sockets can go 49kW (the current ones being installed) up to ~500kW. It is unclear if the Mennekes socket could achieve the same power levels (eventually up to level 3 power levels you will need an external DC connection since onboard chargers can't handle level 3). I tried to look up the IEC 62196 and it seems to apply up to the power levels of level 3, but it seems the Mennekes implementation is limited to 400V 63A.

 

[AndrewBissell]

TEPCO Level III "quick" charging station/connector

The 480V 63A Mennekes socket is only level 2 (~20-30kW).

That turns out not quite to be the case.

For a 3-phase supply,
kW = V x I x sqrt(3) / 1000

So 480V x 63A x 1.732 / 1000 =
52.377 kW

52 kW is more than the current DC chargers at 49kW

Future standards from the IEC offer options for the same connector to carry either multi hundred kW DC or 3-phase AC up to 690V, 250A - also multi hundred kW.

So the IEC view is that either off-board DC or on board 3-phase chargers are technically OK for high kW charging.

Many vendors back each camp. We will see what wins in the marketplace, but it's clear from prior statements that Tesla expects the Model S to charge from 3-phase AC using on-board electronics. Most European vendors (except those re-badging iMievs) support Mennekes and 3-phase with on-board charging. It is certainly NOT technically impossible.

I happen to like the idea of cheaper (four figure AC EVSEs) than more expensive (five figure) off-board DC chargers.

I also like the small form factor Mennekes connector rather than the large TEPCO/JARI one for roughly the same kW. And the fact the Mennekes is backward compatible: you can make a direct adaptor to plug it into a J-1772, a Tesla HPC, or a plain 240 V wall socket.

 

[dpeilow]

The Mennekes is 43kW if my AC theory is correct (times sqrt 3).

But the common or garden connectors like I linked to go further - there is a 125A variant.

 

[AndrewBissell]

TEPCO Level III "quick" charging station/connector

Future standards from the IEC offer options for the same connector to carry either multi hundred kW DC or 3-phase AC up to 690V, 250A - also multi hundred kW.

Further detail from Wikipedia entry on J-1772:

Another international standard, IEC 62196, already exists from the International Electrotechnical Commission, uses the same control pilot signaling, and includes pins that can provide charging as proposed in SAE J1772-2001[1] as well as the new SAE J1772-2009 proposal. IEC 62196 adds pins that also permit much faster recharging using a far higher, 298 kW maximum power delivery via up to 690 V three phase AC, 50

 

[stopcrazypp]

That turns out not quite to be the case.

For a 3-phase supply,
kW = V x I x sqrt(3) / 1000

So 480V x 63A x 1.732 / 1000 =
52.377 kW

The Mennekes is 43kW if my AC theory is correct (times sqrt 3).

But the common or garden connectors like I linked to go further - there is a 125A variant.

Forgot about the 3 phase power factor. I looked it up and the Mennekes is rated at 43kW max (at 32A mode is 22kW). So it is comparable to TEPCO. The only difference is there is still the need for a step up transformer since three phase 400V sources are less common in the US and probably Japan (or the connector will have to handle twice the current if using 200V sources).

The TEPCO/CHAdeMO spec is:
Switching type, constant current power supply
# Input: 3-phase 200V (200~430V)
# Output power: 50 kW (10~100kW)
# Max DC output Voltage: 500V
# Output current: 125A (20~200A)
# JARI Level 3 DC Connector
# EV ECU determines optimal current; charger supplies current based on order from EV ECU
http://www.greencarcongress.com/2010/01/akerwade-20100115.html

The main difference between using AC and DC is with AC you need an onboard rectifier that can handle the power, vs offboard with DC. I don't know if there is any car demonstrated using the full power of the Mennekes connector, I can't seem to find one. There is also some difference in cable diameter given the trade-off between AC skin effect and 3 phase power.

I can't find if the Mennekes socket has support for DC charging on the same socket. It'll be ideal to have a socket that supports both DC and AC (I think J1772 was like this at some point, but they changed it, right now it is inadequate in terms of power output).

Originally Posted by AndrewBissell
Future standards from the IEC offer options for the same connector to carry either multi hundred kW DC or 3-phase AC up to 690V, 250A - also multi hundred kW.

I can't seem to find if the IEC 62196 standard is talking specifically about the Mennekes connector or if it is talking about multiple types of connectors. For example, if the Mennekes connector can handle DC charging and the high currents/voltages mentioned (or is it just currently being confined by the cable).

 

[AndrewBissell]

TEPCO Level III "quick" charging station/connector

I think it's great that we will see two strong, technically viable approaches compete in the marketplace, each supported by strong vendor groups (DC: CHAdeMO, Nissan, Toyota, Mitsubishi, TEPCO, Eaton, Ecotality; AC 3-phase: Daimler, Renault, RWE, Mennekes).

On reflection I don't know whether Tesla Model S will fall into one camp or the other. Maybe Tesla don't know yet and are waiting to see which approach will win in the market. Having said that early statements seemed to imply on-board charging from 480V AC 3-phase.

It does look like DC has a first-mover advantage at present due to the $99M DOE funding of Leaf charging (including Level 3). In Europe, on the other hand, the German e-mobility initiative has put some momentum behind Mennekes.

Maybe we'll end up with different solutions dominating on different continents. Or possibly co-existence, a bit like Diesel and Petrol (Gasoline) co-exist at the pump today.

We'll see. It's going to be fun to watch. And by the end there is every likelihood we'll have cars that carry at least a base level 200-300 mile range when they set out (from overnight Level 2 charging) and can fast recharge 100-200 miles out on the highway in just 10-60 minutes (using 50-300 kW Level 3).

I can't wait!

 

[dpeilow]

For the avoidance of doubt, I was using 400V to get to 43kW. 400V is the harmonised European three phase voltage.


From the quoted specs, the Renault Fluence must use 43kW and that will have the Mennekes connector.


62196 is not Mennekes, however Mennekes is the leading contender for 62196. The higher power variants that Andrew mentions are certainly news to me - will have to read up on it again.

 

[GSP]

"It does look like DC has a first-mover advantage at present due to the $99M DOE funding of Leaf charging (including Level 3). In Europe, on the other hand, the German e-mobility initiative has put some momentum behind Mennekes.

Maybe we'll end up with different solutions dominating on different continents. Or possibly co-existence, a bit like Diesel and Petrol (Gasoline) co-exist at the pump today.

We'll see. It's going to be fun to watch. And by the end there is every likelihood we'll have cars that carry at least a base level 200-300 mile range when they set out (from overnight Level 2 charging) and can fast recharge 100-200 miles out on the highway in just 10-60 minutes (using 50-300 kW Level 3).

I can't wait!"

Well said! ^^^^

GSP

 

[GSP]

"400V is the harmonised European three phase voltage"

400V could become a problem for the high current three phase charging approach. *Battery voltage at 80% SOC could be too high to allow enough current with 400V input. *This would require a steer up transformer at the charging station, AND an on vehicle high current charger. It might be better to put ALL of this equipment in the charging station.

Well, as Andrew said, it will be fun to watch this play out.

NB: Even though EV's have a high current three phase inverter on board, disconnecting it from the motor and connecting it to the external power source will be difficult, and likely impractical compared to adding a dedicated charger.

GSP*

 

[stopcrazypp]

*Battery voltage at 80% SOC could be too high to allow enough current with 400V input. *

Right now for battery nominal voltage
Roadster (53kWh) : 375V
Volt (16kWh): 366V
Leaf (24kWh): 346V
iMIEV (16kWh): 330V

So far 400V is probably okay, but it can become a problem for cars reaching way past the 200-300 mile range (using something akin to the 80-100kWh battery like in the 300 mile Model S).

 

[AndrewBissell]

TEPCO Level III "quick" charging station/connector

I am mighty confused by the previous two posts. If this 400V issue was really an issue, how would the Roadster (today, without the benefit of an external charging station equipped with step-up transformer) charge from 240V or 110V? Clearly these AC voltages are way below the pack DC voltage. (Same applies to all those other electric cars mentioned.)

Yet the car manages to use the little PEM to do the job - and at other times to deliver precisely controlled inverted power to the electric motor. And yes, I believe it is sharing the same hardware to do it. No problem with decoupling from the motor a far as I know.

 

[TEG]

The 2008 Roadsters licensed some "reductive charging" design from ACP which used the motor windings as part of the charging circuit. Apparently the 2010 models have some semi-redundant components in the PEM now so that they don't have to use that technology anymore. They may now avoid the need to electrically isolate parts of the motor as well. Yes, I think they have the ability to change voltage to the correct level to charge the batteries, so input voltage (e.g.: 120V, 208V or 240V) shouldn't be an issue. I suspect the charger circuitry is designed for some max power level (say 20kW) to convert AC to DC for charging. So the Roadster (as far as I know) is not currently designed to take higher current 3 phase AC as input and turn it into quick charge DC.

Another question - how amenable to quick charging is the battery technology they use in the ESS?

 

[stopcrazypp]

I am mighty confused by the previous two posts. If this 400V issue was really an issue, how would the Roadster (today, without the benefit of an external charging station equipped with step-up transformer) charge from 240V or 110V? Clearly these AC voltages are way below the pack DC voltage. (Same applies to all those other electric cars mentioned.)

Like TEG mentions, the main issue is the power levels. There is a limit to what common 110V/220V sources in the US can provide and the J1772 spec also limits the max power level. So for 110V/220V, the onboard charger will be able to handle it no problem, and car makers know how much power the onboard charger is expected to handle.

For level 3 charging via a 400V AC socket, you are talking about drastically more power (2x or more) that the onboard charger has to handle (both the rectifier to convert AC to DC and possibly the transformer to step up/step down the voltage). Come to think of it though, the 400V will have to be stepped down anyways, so it is not a really a different issue when battery voltages go up. It is actually the same issue previously discussed about onboard vs offboard chargers.