Tesla Announces CCS1 Adapter Coming to S. Korea Early 2021

[smogne41]

Relax everybody, this will be fine. I criticize Tesla for lots of things, but they will be able to do this fine. It is absolutely fundamental to how all forms of DC fast charging works that the car asks the charger for what it wants in terms of voltage (which in tern sets the current). The car will know it is using CCS vs Supercharging (they are radically different communication protocols), and will adjust limits accordingly. You will not need to limit yourself to only chargers under 300A or anything. They will just have the car limit the charging session to safe current limits. Again, absolutely fundamental to all DC fast charging protocols.

The charger will only give what the car asks for. Hell, with CCS a lot of the time it will not even give you that <-That is a joke about CCS being such a complicated mess and so difficult to implement that all new cars require extensive validation with all the different charging equipment (and lots of software kludges) because the 'standard' is such a mess nobody is actually able to follow it in the real world.

 

[jsight]

They exist, they're just...a lot less common than even 150 kW chargers, and putting out an adapter which may be unsafe to use on the majority of stations when the fix is an OTA car firmware/software update to enable a voltage limiting-by-adapter feature they already have on other adapters and cars is...remarkably shortsighted, at best, though not necessarily out of normal for Tesla? There are 350 kW and up stations either existing, or being installed in Korea this year, so it's not like limiting the release to Korea solves this issue by just avoiding 150 kW-and-up chargers: South Korea to install 3,000 fast-charging stations in 2021 - electrive.com I'd hope Tesla wouldn't abuse their drivers like that, offering a solution which isn't even good through the end of the year after literally years of being begged for a first-party solution for the CCS1 problem, but I wouldn't be surprised by them behaving like that (which is why I never ended up driving one).

The fact that they are shipping it with this warning makes me think that it is likely to be a rare risk. Maybe one specific buggy firmware version?

Change is constant with this company, and most of it is improvement.

 

[MD-2000]

So basically, we know nothing for sure but it is obvious that Tesla *can* modify the software (if not already) to limit CCS charging amperage.

The other obvious problem is, unless there's another method to detect the adapter and type, then Teslas are forever limited to the lower rating of these first adapters. What they need is a means to identify if someone is using a newer, higher-rated adapter, should they make one in the future. Or maybe they are holding off until they see what the latest and greatest of CCS is in North America, and can design an upgraded adapter.

Which leads to the follow-up question - then are these adapters truly completely passive? Based on appearance, they would seem so. As I recall, one problem with adapters is that under the standard, neither side provides power to run an active adapter so it needs its own power source (battery?)

I assume an upgraded adapter would simply need thicker conductors, but then there's the issues of heat and corrosion. The V3 cables are IIRC liquid cooled. Not sure about CCS. So the short run from socket to plug would need some sort of cooling after a certain level of current? Plus, corrosion or other bad contact would increase the heat load. Would a proper higher-power adapter need some means of saying to the car / charger "Whoa! I'm getting too hot!"

Heresy - would it be simpler to design a CCS chargeport (future vehicles and optional retrofit?) and modify it to accept a Tesla-charger-to-CCS-car adapter for existing older superchargers, where that adapter can detect overheat and slow the charging? Modifying the car itself seems to be the simplest hardware solution. Added benefit of eventually putting Tesla on the same standard as the rest of North America, which will have to happen someday.

(We had the whole port replaced by mobile service very quickly when the chargeport door started to balk at opening. It seems pretty straightforward.)

 

[jsight]

So basically, we know nothing for sure but it is obvious that Tesla *can* modify the software (if not already) to limit CCS charging amperage.

The other obvious problem is, unless there's another method to detect the adapter and type, then Teslas are forever limited to the lower rating of these first adapters. What they need is a means to identify if someone is using a newer, higher-rated adapter, should they make one in the future. Or maybe they are holding off until they see what the latest and greatest of CCS is in North America, and can design an upgraded adapter.

Which leads to the follow-up question - then are these adapters truly completely passive? Based on appearance, they would seem so. As I recall, one problem with adapters is that under the standard, neither side provides power to run an active adapter so it needs its own power source (battery?)

I assume an upgraded adapter would simply need thicker conductors, but then there's the issues of heat and corrosion. The V3 cables are IIRC liquid cooled. Not sure about CCS. So the short run from socket to plug would need some sort of cooling after a certain level of current? Plus, corrosion or other bad contact would increase the heat load. Would a proper higher-power adapter need some means of saying to the car / charger "Whoa! I'm getting too hot!"

Heresy - would it be simpler to design a CCS chargeport (future vehicles and optional retrofit?) and modify it to accept a Tesla-charger-to-CCS-car adapter for existing older superchargers, where that adapter can detect overheat and slow the charging? Modifying the car itself seems to be the simplest hardware solution. Added benefit of eventually putting Tesla on the same standard as the rest of North America, which will have to happen someday.

(We had the whole port replaced by mobile service very quickly when the chargeport door started to balk at opening. It seems pretty straightforward.)

If the car can talk CCS over a Tesla connector, the easiest solution is to allow third party vendors to install Tesla connectors that talk CCS. Its an easy retrofit for them, and in the US it would vastly widen their market reach.

 

[MP3Mike]

Added benefit of eventually putting Tesla on the same standard as the rest of North America, which will have to happen someday.

Why does it have to happen ever? I suspect that there are more charge cables with a Tesla connector on them in NA than any other connector. Changing to something else would be a huge undertaking. (That ship sailed when they shipped the Model 3 with the Tesla connector.)

The other obvious problem is, unless there's another method to detect the adapter and type, then Teslas are forever limited to the lower rating of these first adapters. What they need is a means to identify if someone is using a newer, higher-rated adapter, should they make one in the future. Or maybe they are holding off until they see what the latest and greatest of CCS is in North America, and can design an upgraded adapter.

I wouldn't ever expect an adapter to be able to handle more than ~150kW. It would require cooling, and there just isn't the need to do that.

 

[smogne41]

Which leads to the follow-up question - then are these adapters truly completely passive? Based on appearance, they would seem so. As I recall, one problem with adapters is that under the standard, neither side provides power to run an active adapter so it needs its own power source (battery?)

We have no idea really, but it would not be hard for them to have put a temperature and/or current sensor in there. Tesla can do whatever they want on their side for powering or reading data from something.

 

[Fourdoor]

Read the rest of the Twitter thread. The user also ended up with damage to the charge electronics. I don't know if they paid for the repair or not.

I read the link Rocky posted, very informative. I don't use twitter and have no desire to add another time suck to my life

Keith

 

[lynyrdM]

If the car can talk CCS over a Tesla connector, the easiest solution is to allow third party vendors to install Tesla connectors that talk CCS. Its an easy retrofit for them, and in the US it would vastly widen their market reach.

Now that is one reason I could see Tesla not wanting to cap the adapter current. If other DC charging companies will be using native Tesla connectors which aren’t limited to 300A (maybe as high as 500A) that would be a way to allow that.

I would still say that process should be more refined where a Tesla cabled DC charger speaking CCS would clarify to the car somehow that it’s not talking to it with an adapter (allow >300A) then have code in the car to always limit charging speed to 300A otherwise (when the adapter is being used).

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Why does it have to happen ever? I suspect that there are more charge cables with a Tesla connector on them in NA than any other connector. Changing to something else would be a huge undertaking. (That ship sailed when they shipped the Model 3 with the Tesla connector.)

Right, for North America they'd not only have to change the DCFC but all the existing Tesla AC connectors would be affected. For locations using the Tesla Type 2, AC charging wasn't affected, so they only had to update the Superchargers.

A charging standard is a cable, plug and software. There are lots of multi-cable chargers. Many in Europe were CHAdeMO + CCS + 22kW/44kW AC. Many here are CCS + CHAdeMO.
Charging standards are just not as big a deal as people think.

 

[srs5694]

Why does it have to happen ever? I suspect that there are more charge cables with a Tesla connector on them in NA than any other connector. Changing to something else would be a huge undertaking. (That ship sailed when they shipped the Model 3 with the Tesla connector.)

IMHO, Tesla doesn't have to switch to CCS1 in North America, but I expect that one of two things will eventually happen:

• The vast majority of DC fast charging providers (Tesla, Electrify America, EVgo, etc.) will provide two cables on most of their charging cabinets: One for Tesla and one for CCS1; or....
• Tesla will switch from its proprietary connector to CCS1.

The reason is that having two separate standards, with separate locations for charging, is a problem for everybody -- EV drivers, DC fast charging network operators, and Tesla. Non-EV drivers find the current situation with multiple standards confusing, and they balk at the need to learn about the differences. (I see this at National Drive Electric events and in online discussions.) I've noticed highway signage about EV charging start to pop up, but at the moment, the signage I've seen doesn't specify what type of charging is available, which is likely to lead to confusion and frustration. (Signage could be improved, but that will complicate the signage in ways that people will find confusing, at least initially.) Adapters can help, but they're awkward and can fail. DC fast charging network operators want the largest possible customer base, which will drive one of those two solutions. Thus, in the long run, market forces will push for one or the other of those two solutions. That said, consumer demand on this score is likely to be a weak driver; Tesla could hold out on switching to CCS1 for several more years, DC fast charging networks could hold out on supporting both standards for several more years, and Tesla could throw up obstacles to third parties adding Tesla plugs. In the long run, though, I don't think the current segregation of Tesla vs. CCS1 is likely to be sustainable, particularly once we start getting double-digit percentages of cars on the roads being EVs. That quiet consumer demand for convergence will become a roar at that time.

As to the merits of Tesla switching to CCS1, yes, that will be a huge undertaking; however, Tesla has already announced support for CCS1 at its Superchargers. The last I heard, Tesla was talking about using adapters for this purpose, but adapters are an awkward solution at best, and if Federal funds to expand DC fast charging materialize, and if Tesla wants those funds, Tesla may be forced to change plans to providing native CCS1 support, depending on how the Federal regulations are written. All in all, I think that Tesla will have to provide native CCS1 support, sooner or later. If and when Tesla Superchargers begin providing native CCS1 support, then equipping future Teslas with CCS1 will become much easier, and there will be no drawback to older Teslas for the switch. (Tesla could provide a Tesla-to-J1772 Level 1/2 adapter with new cars, much as they provide a J1772-to-Tesla adapter today.) On a broader level, Tesla switching to CCS1 relatively soon will impose much lesser costs on Tesla, on consumers, and on third-party DC fast charging providers than would Tesla holding out and forcing a long-term solution of two-standard support at DC fast chargers generally.

 

[STS-134]

IMHO, Tesla doesn't have to switch to CCS1 in North America, but I expect that one of two things will eventually happen:

• The vast majority of DC fast charging providers (Tesla, Electrify America, EVgo, etc.) will provide two cables on most of their charging cabinets: One for Tesla and one for CCS1; or....
• Tesla will switch from its proprietary connector to CCS1.

The reason is that having two separate standards, with separate locations for charging, is a problem for everybody -- EV drivers, DC fast charging network operators, and Tesla.

This will continue to be a problem until there's ONE standard for the entire world. There isn't a different type of gasoline nozzle for North America vs. other places.

 

[Ezmendriz]

well I remember when we have leaded gasoline vs unleaded gas in the 70's. the mouth of the new cars running on unleaded fuel was narrower to prevent the use of leaded fuel on them. so... technically 2 different type of nozzles and receivers for a while. As before we are in a technology crossroad.

IMHO, CCS would become the standard, tesla will change the new cars and provide an adapter to old cars and the world will continue to turn.

 

[Rocky_H]

There isn't a different type of gasoline nozzle for North America vs. other places.

No, but we DO have two different types of fuel nozzles here in North America!!

I find it hilarious when people try to make this gas pump analogy without realizing that.

 

[Tectonic]

No, but we DO have two different types of fuel nozzles here in North America!!

I find it hilarious when people try to make this gas pump analogy without realizing that.

Absolutely true (I assume you're referring to gasoline and diesel here). However, the distinction with EVs is that EVs have multiple "nozzles" (plug types) for the same fuel (electricity), while gas and diesel have different nozzles because they are different fuels.

 

[Jeff N]

I expect that those 100kW chargers are 500V x 200A or 400V x 250A.
The KoNiro can charge at 200A.

It seems like the industry mostly skipped them and jumped to 150kW.

Those short and boxy units are made by Delta Electronics of Taiwan and are rated for 50-1000V and 200A.

Here’s the nameplate from one at an EVgo installation in Belmont, California:

I assume an upgraded adapter would simply need thicker conductors, but then there's the issues of heat and corrosion. The V3 cables are IIRC liquid cooled. Not sure about CCS. So the short run from socket to plug would need some sort of cooling after a certain level of current? Plus, corrosion or other bad contact would increase the heat load. Would a proper higher-power adapter need some means of saying to the car / charger "Whoa! I'm getting too hot!"

CCS cables rated for much over ~250A are liquid-cooled. At least some of the CCS connectors have temperature sensors in the plug in order to detect and avoid overheating.

I suspect some cars also have temperature sensors on the inlet side but I don’t know if that is true for Tesla vehicles. I suspect not since I don’t remember seeing any evidence for a sensor or wiring for one on an older Model S inlet part that I have. It seems likely that they have one on the Tesla plug.

 

[e of pi]

If the car can talk CCS over a Tesla connector, the easiest solution is to allow third party vendors to install Tesla connectors that talk CCS. Its an easy retrofit for them, and in the US it would vastly widen their market reach.

This is a really interesting possibility whose implications I hadn't thought about before--a cable option for Setec or ABB installs that ends in a Tesla-ended cable, but which speaks CCS. It'd kind of make CCS like USB/USB-C: most basic features don't depend on the end, and so the USB ecosystem is rich and deep for first-parties to use without worrying about making all their own cables for everything, and for third parties to support without concern. It might even enable a field-retrofit of existing two-cable dual-CCS chargers like those EA has installed for have one cable be a Telsa-ended CCS1-protocol cable (perhaps with an initial 300 amp limit to match the car's limit, or perhaps Tesla would be kind enough to tell them the car's actual limits if there's not an adapter in the way). Others have reverse engineered the physical dimensions of the Tesla proprietary port before, so this might just be viable...

 

[Rocky_H]

Absolutely true (I assume you're referring to gasoline and diesel here). However, the distinction with EVs is that EVs have multiple "nozzles" (plug types) for the same fuel (electricity), while gas and diesel have different nozzles because they are different fuels.

Yep. But we have also had two (or three) different kinds of charging cables for cell phones for many years, and you don't see people going crazy and flipping out about that either. It's a minor bother, but people deal with it just fine.

 

[SageBrush]

However, the distinction with EVs is that EVs have multiple "nozzles" (plug types) for the same fuel (electricity), while gas and diesel have different nozzles because they are different fuels.

I don't see why that difference matters. Some ICE drivers use the stinky nozzle and others use the stinky and greasy nozzle. Each driver knows what nozzle to pick up. Same with EV drivers, except the connectors are less disgusting.

I'm more interested in a different question: how much more does it cost to support two standards ?

 

[STS-134]

No, but we DO have two different types of fuel nozzles here in North America!!

I find it hilarious when people try to make this gas pump analogy without realizing that.

Okay, fair point. But the vehicles that use the other type of nozzle use a different type of fuel and putting the wrong type of fuel in a vehicle will damage the engine. But if we're just talking about electrons and voltages, that's all the same.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Okay, fair point. But the vehicles that use the other type of nozzle use a different type of fuel and putting the wrong type of fuel in a vehicle will damage the engine. But if we're just talking about electrons and voltages, that's all the same.

Well not exactly, AC and DC is still different (and the socket and connectors have variations), although for DC generally the voltages that each connector supports is around the same (although the current may be very different).