Tesla Cockpit non-app BETA 2

[Newport Ryan]

I have a bunch of open questions in the posts above. And your most recent response, which I'm sure was supposed to address just one of them, doesn't actually address any of them.

Until recently you had been quite responsive to issues raised in this thread. If you have decided not to support your site as it initially appeared you were going to, that's fine. But if you are planning on supporting it, please read through my posts above and then please address the several issues I raised.

Thanks!

My apologies for not being clear. The system is not calculating every single quarter mile during a drive. It is only considering portions of the drive in which the car goes from being stopped to 60mph and/or quarter mile. When the drive is complete the fastest of each is recorded after reprocessing the vehicle positions gathered during. Make sense?

And sorry for not getting back to you sooner, let me know if there is anything else outstanding besides the formatting issues which are being looked into and only seem to affect a certain subset of users.

 

[Andyw2100]

My apologies for not being clear. The system is not calculating every single quarter mile during a drive. It is only considering portions of the drive in which the car goes from being stopped to 60mph and/or quarter mile. When the drive is complete the fastest of each is recorded after reprocessing the vehicle positions gathered during. Make sense?

And sorry for not getting back to you sooner, let me know if there is anything else outstanding besides the formatting issues which are being looked into and only seem to affect a certain subset of users.

Thanks very much. I understand the speed stats now.

As for the remaining questions / items, you already noted the formatting issues, so that's one. Another is the issue concerning geofence notifications. I have some geofences set, but I don't get any special notifications when they are entered or when the car leaves them.

I think the formatting of the charge messages and the geofence notifications are the only two remaining issues I have.

Thanks again!

 

[Newport Ryan]

Thanks very much. I understand the speed stats now.

As for the remaining questions / items, you already noted the formatting issues, so that's one. Another is the issue concerning geofence notifications. I have some geofences set, but I don't get any special notifications when they are entered or when the car leaves them.

I think the formatting of the charge messages and the geofence notifications are the only two remaining issues I have.

Thanks again!

Hi Andy,

The formatting issue should be good now in the charge done notification. Let me know if you see otherwise.

Just pushed a geo-fencing update that addresses the issues we found with common destinations, locations and geo-fencing.

There are also a few new notifications. Battery heater off / on, door lock/unlock, api version change and charge port status changes.

Thanks again for the feedback and let me know if those two items look good for you.

have a great night.

 

[Andyw2100]

The formatting issue should be good now in the charge done notification. Let me know if you see otherwise.

Well, it is better, but I think the efficiency calculation is still in an odd format. This was my notification from early this morning:

--
Charging completed at Jan 25 2017 5:50AM. Rated Range: 225.85mi, Estimated Range: 220.42mi. Battery Level: 90%. Actual Charge Time: 2 :49:56. kWh added: 42. Overhead -4.61 miles, -1.43 kWh. Efficiency 103.33%. Odometer: 38,399.61mi. All times are in Eastern Standard Time.
--

I would think the overhead should not be represented as a negative value, and then that the efficiency should be less than, not more than, 100%. TeslaFi reported an efficiency of 91.2% for the same charge. It reported kWh used as 47.0 and added as 42.89. (I think this would be one number that would be particularly good not to round to just "42."

Just pushed a geo-fencing update that addresses the issues we found with common destinations, locations and geo-fencing.

The geofencing notifications seem to work now, but they are still using the address you are estimating instead of the named location.

Thanks for continuing to work on these issues!

 

[Newport Ryan]

Well, it is better, but I think the efficiency calculation is still in an odd format. This was my notification from early this morning:

--
Charging completed at Jan 25 2017 5:50AM. Rated Range: 225.85mi, Estimated Range: 220.42mi. Battery Level: 90%. Actual Charge Time: 2 :49:56. kWh added: 42. Overhead -4.61 miles, -1.43 kWh. Efficiency 103.33%. Odometer: 38,399.61mi. All times are in Eastern Standard Time.
--

I would think the overhead should not be represented as a negative value, and then that the efficiency should be less than, not more than, 100%. TeslaFi reported an efficiency of 91.2% for the same charge. It reported kWh used as 47.0 and added as 42.89. (I think this would be one number that would be particularly good not to round to just "42."




The geofencing notifications seem to work now, but they are still using the address you are estimating instead of the named location.

Thanks for continuing to work on these issues!

Hey Andy,

Thanks so much for the follow up.

You are right they shouldn't be negative numbers and at best efficiency should never go above 100%, also hear you on the rounding on kWh added. Getting those fixed ASAP.

Glad to hear the Geo-fences are firing for you. When you say "still using the address you are estimating instead of the named location" do you mean in the notification that gets sent out?

Just pushed an update out to the Drive page...

 

[Andyw2100]

Glad to hear the Geo-fences are firing for you. When you say "still using the address you are estimating instead of the named location" do you mean in the notification that gets sent out?

Thanks for continuing to implement the fixes, suggested improvements, etc., Ryan.

As for the geofencing, I was mistaken. The geofence notifications actually --DO-- use the names I have provided.

However...

It is the drive notifications--drive underway and drive ended--that are still guessing at an address and saying things like, "Drive ended at or near...", and then an address. I think if the location is a geofenced location, it should say, "Drive ended at..." and include the named geofence. (I was confusing the geofence notifications and the drive notifications in my last post.)

On another note, the new drive graphs look great! Thanks for adding them. It will probably come as no surprise to you, though, that I have a couple of suggestions on those as well.

The first has to do with readability. Some of the colors you chose are awfully close to each other, so perhaps colors that are more different from each other could be used. Also the key--time, power, and what each color represents--are all very hard to read. It looks like you are using gray on a black background. Perhaps just switching to white, like you did with the main headings, would work better.

Also, if there was some way to select the graph to pop it out and make it larger, that would also be helpful.

Again, don't get me wrong--I live the addition! I'm just trying to help you improve it!

Thanks again!

 

[JP68]

@Newport Ryan,

This sounds interesting, still have some questions though:
You use the standard Tesla API (Tesla Model S JSON API · Apiary), right?

Does your app keep polling every x seconds, so the car stays 'awake' during parking?

Thanks, JP

 

[Andyw2100]

Hey, I just noticed that you've fixed the charge notification efficiency stuff! Awesome!

Quick question on that, though.

This was the notification I received when the charge completed this morning:

--
Charging completed at Jan 26 2017 5:46AM. Rated Range: 225.85mi, Estimated Range: 218.20mi. Battery Level: 90%. Actual Charge Time: 2 :46:0 . kWh added: 42. Overhead 3.9 miles, 1.21 kWh. Efficiency 97.22%. Odometer: 38,506.87mi. All times are in Eastern Standard Time.
--

So the efficiency stuff is in the correct format. My only question concerns how your data relates to TeslaFi data. Here is the Teslafi data for the same charge: 42.26 kWh added, 46.4 kWh used, 91.1% efficiency.

So both of you are doing the calculations correctly now. The difference is that TeslaFi thinks that what you are referring to as overhead was 4.14 kWh (46.4-42.26) and you think that number was 1.21 kWh. No offense, but since hundreds of people have been looking at TeslaFi numbers for months, some of whom are almost certainly comparing their figures to figures on power meters, and since efficiencies in the range of 90% seem much more common, from what I've read, than efficiency figures in the 97% range would be, I'm going to go out on a limb, and suggest that the TeslFi number is correct.

Again--not a criticism. Just trying to help you make your software / service as good and useful as it can be!

Thanks!

 

[Andyw2100]

I have yet another question...

How do we save the changes to the notification settings? I would like to receive an email message when the battery heater is turned on, but when I check that box, there does not seem to be a way to save that setting. If I refresh the page, the check mark in that box is gone.

Thanks!

Edit: I think I figured out that if you make some other changes, the previous ones will "stick." Some sort of "save changes" button would probably be a good idea.

Also, I don't think the battery heater notifications are actually working. I am preheating my car, with range mode off, and on shore power, which should have resulted in the battery heater turning on, but I have received no email notification.

 

[Newport Ryan]

Thanks for continuing to implement the fixes, suggested improvements, etc., Ryan.

As for the geofencing, I was mistaken. The geofence notifications actually --DO-- use the names I have provided.

However...

It is the drive notifications--drive underway and drive ended--that are still guessing at an address and saying things like, "Drive ended at or near...", and then an address. I think if the location is a geofenced location, it should say, "Drive ended at..." and include the named geofence. (I was confusing the geofence notifications and the drive notifications in my last post.)

On another note, the new drive graphs look great! Thanks for adding them. It will probably come as no surprise to you, though, that I have a couple of suggestions on those as well.

The first has to do with readability. Some of the colors you chose are awfully close to each other, so perhaps colors that are more different from each other could be used. Also the key--time, power, and what each color represents--are all very hard to read. It looks like you are using gray on a black background. Perhaps just switching to white, like you did with the main headings, would work better.

Also, if there was some way to select the graph to pop it out and make it larger, that would also be helpful.

Again, don't get me wrong--I live the addition! I'm just trying to help you improve it!

Thanks again!

Hello Andy,

The reason we don't use Geo-Fence labels as location labels is because we've found a lot of GeoFences are not named based on geographic location. This is one of the reasons we separated out "Locations" to enable custom labels for common destinations. This gives pilots the best of both worlds being able to name locations and geo-fences separately as well as the functionality to create geo-fences from locations. Perhaps there is a better way to make this clearer for a user interface perspective?

The entire color pallet and overall design for the thing is being re-developed by people who know much better than I about artsy fartsy but most likely will be driven by the exterior color of the car and a pallet to match. In the short term I will at least make it readable. As a note and again I'm not a designer in respect to the colors of the data points, when I was developing the chart I did start with very different colors but as I looked at it more and more having slight differences in colors of things that were semi related made it somehow less effort to actually read the chart over time if that makes any sense.
Having said that I will make the changes to the current form of the chart as you are not the only one to give this feedback.

I also want to point out that you can remove/add data points by clicking/tapping on the metric in the legend on the right.

Last thing, when you say pop the graph our, do you mean go to full screen?

Thanks again for all the feedback and your time.

 

[Newport Ryan]

@Newport Ryan,

This sounds interesting, still have some questions though:
You use the standard Tesla API (Tesla Model S JSON API · Apiary), right?

Does your app keep polling every x seconds, so the car stays 'awake' during parking?

Thanks, JP

Hello JP,

Thanks for considering using the system and great question.

The amount, frequency, etc. of how the system collects data is totally up to you. The following is the section of the configuration page that allows for these settings;

Basically data collection is broken down into two areas. When the car is in park and when the car is not in park which can be controlled separately. In addition, we have also created a "performance window" at the beginning of the drive in which the system collects additional data from the vehicle to calculate things like quarter mile or 0 to 60 speeds.

Hopefully that answers your questions and please let me know if you have any further questions, comments or suggestions.

Thanks again for reaching out.

 

[Newport Ryan]

Hey, I just noticed that you've fixed the charge notification efficiency stuff! Awesome!

Quick question on that, though.

This was the notification I received when the charge completed this morning:

--
Charging completed at Jan 26 2017 5:46AM. Rated Range: 225.85mi, Estimated Range: 218.20mi. Battery Level: 90%. Actual Charge Time: 2 :46:0 . kWh added: 42. Overhead 3.9 miles, 1.21 kWh. Efficiency 97.22%. Odometer: 38,506.87mi. All times are in Eastern Standard Time.
--

So the efficiency stuff is in the correct format. My only question concerns how your data relates to TeslaFi data. Here is the Teslafi data for the same charge: 42.26 kWh added, 46.4 kWh used, 91.1% efficiency.

So both of you are doing the calculations correctly now. The difference is that TeslaFi thinks that what you are referring to as overhead was 4.14 kWh (46.4-42.26) and you think that number was 1.21 kWh. No offense, but since hundreds of people have been looking at TeslaFi numbers for months, some of whom are almost certainly comparing their figures to figures on power meters, and since efficiencies in the range of 90% seem much more common, from what I've read, than efficiency figures in the 97% range would be, I'm going to go out on a limb, and suggest that the TeslFi number is correct.

Again--not a criticism. Just trying to help you make your software / service as good and useful as it can be!

Thanks!

Sorry to sound redundant but I really can't thank you enough for your time on this.

The way TC is calculating efficiency is pretty straightforward and may be completely wrong. When the charge is completed the number of miles added by the charge is divided the "actual" miles added which is the difference in range between the start of the charge and the end of the charge. If the charge adds 10 miles and there are 10 miles more in range at the end of the charge from the beginning, that 100% efficiency..right?

 

[Newport Ryan]

I have yet another question...

How do we save the changes to the notification settings? I would like to receive an email message when the battery heater is turned on, but when I check that box, there does not seem to be a way to save that setting. If I refresh the page, the check mark in that box is gone.

Thanks!

Edit: I think I figured out that if you make some other changes, the previous ones will "stick." Some sort of "save changes" button would probably be a good idea.

Also, I don't think the battery heater notifications are actually working. I am preheating my car, with range mode off, and on shore power, which should have resulted in the battery heater turning on, but I have received no email notification.

This is high on the fix list. Stand By

 

[Newport Ryan]

I have yet another question...

How do we save the changes to the notification settings? I would like to receive an email message when the battery heater is turned on, but when I check that box, there does not seem to be a way to save that setting. If I refresh the page, the check mark in that box is gone.

Thanks!

Edit: I think I figured out that if you make some other changes, the previous ones will "stick." Some sort of "save changes" button would probably be a good idea.

Also, I don't think the battery heater notifications are actually working. I am preheating my car, with range mode off, and on shore power, which should have resulted in the battery heater turning on, but I have received no email notification.

Also checked on the battery heater notifications, at no point did the API "see" the battery heat on (only looked in last 24 hours).

 

[Newport Ryan]

Readability changes to the Drive chart(s) has been updated. Some notes;

• The data points are clickable/touchable
• Data metrics can be added/removed from the chart by clicking/touching on the metric in legend

 

[Andyw2100]

The reason we don't use Geo-Fence labels as location labels is because we've found a lot of GeoFences are not named based on geographic location. This is one of the reasons we separated out "Locations" to enable custom labels for common destinations. This gives pilots the best of both worlds being able to name locations and geo-fences separately as well as the functionality to create geo-fences from locations. Perhaps there is a better way to make this clearer for a user interface perspective?

Would there be a way for your system to "look up" the starting and ending drive locations to see if they are geofenced locations, and if they are, then use the location name instead of the address?

As an example, my drive today, which started at home, resulted in a "drive underway" message that provided a location near, but not at, my home. If it just reported "Drive begin at <location name>, that would be an improvement. Also I have not yet given you feedback on the drive notifications, and I will soon, but right off the bat, your @ sign should just be "at." That symbol was historically only correctly used for "five apples @ 50 cents each." Now, of course, it is also used in email addresses, and many people use it incorrectly exactly as you have, but it is actually incorrect.

The entire color pallet and overall design for the thing is being re-developed by people who know much better than I about artsy fartsy but most likely will be driven by the exterior color of the car and a pallet to match. In the short term I will at least make it readable.

Awesome!

Last thing, when you say pop the graph our, do you mean go to full screen?

Full screen, or just quite a bit larger, but with your stuff still showing in the background.

There's a lot of information there, and the bigger the better, if people want to examine the data more closely.

Thanks again for all the feedback and your time.

Happy to keep helping! Thanks for being so responsive!

Sorry to sound redundant but I really can't thank you enough for your time on this.

The way TC is calculating efficiency is pretty straightforward and may be completely wrong. When the charge is completed the number of miles added by the charge is divided the "actual" miles added which is the difference in range between the start of the charge and the end of the charge. If the charge adds 10 miles and there are 10 miles more in range at the end of the charge from the beginning, that 100% efficiency..right?

I'm not certain, but I think you may just be calculating and deducting the vampire drain during the charge. I'm not sure how TeslaFi gets both numbers. I'm just almost certain that their calculation is correct.

Also checked on the battery heater notifications, at no point did the API "see" the battery heat on (only looked in last 24 hours).

That's interesting, because everyone claims the battery will heat when the cabin is heating on shore power if range mode is off. We'll have a better idea tomorrow, as when my car starts charging tonight, the battery heater is sure to come on. Let's see if your software "sees" it or not.

And thinking more about it, you said your software didn't see my battery heater on any time in the last 24 hours. I only turned the notification on this afternoon, but the charge overnight would have also turned on the battery heater. Is it possible that somehow you may only be seeing the battery heater on if the car is also on? I drive with range mode on, so the heater would not be coming on during my drives. If we need to test this though, I can start my drive tomorrow with range mode off, which would definitely start the battery heater. Then we would know for certain if somehow your software is just not getting the information from the car correctly.

One more quick thing...

The geofence messages end with the note about the time zone, but they are not time-stamped. You may want to include the time in the message.

Again--many thanks!

 

[Newport Ryan]

Would there be a way for your system to "look up" the starting and ending drive locations to see if they are geofenced locations, and if they are, then use the location name instead of the address?

As an example, my drive today, which started at home, resulted in a "drive underway" message that provided a location near, but not at, my home. If it just reported "Drive begin at <location name>, that would be an improvement. Also I have not yet given you feedback on the drive notifications, and I will soon, but right off the bat, your @ sign should just be "at." That symbol was historically only correctly used for "five apples @ 50 cents each." Now, of course, it is also used in email addresses, and many people use it incorrectly exactly as you have, but it is actually incorrect.



Awesome!




Full screen, or just quite a bit larger, but with your stuff still showing in the background.

There's a lot of information there, and the bigger the better, if people want to examine the data more closely.




Happy to keep helping! Thanks for being so responsive!





I'm not certain, but I think you may just be calculating and deducting the vampire drain during the charge. I'm not sure how TeslaFi gets both numbers. I'm just almost certain that their calculation is correct.




That's interesting, because everyone claims the battery will heat when the cabin is heating on shore power if range mode is off. We'll have a better idea tomorrow, as when my car starts charging tonight, the battery heater is sure to come on. Let's see if your software "sees" it or not.

And thinking more about it, you said your software didn't see my battery heater on any time in the last 24 hours. I only turned the notification on this afternoon, but the charge overnight would have also turned on the battery heater. Is it possible that somehow you may only be seeing the battery heater on if the car is also on? I drive with range mode on, so the heater would not be coming on during my drives. If we need to test this though, I can start my drive tomorrow with range mode off, which would definitely start the battery heater. Then we would know for certain if somehow your software is just not getting the information from the car correctly.

One more quick thing...

The geofence messages end with the note about the time zone, but they are not time-stamped. You may want to include the time in the message.

Again--many thanks!

Geo-fences will now be considered for location naming unless there is a named location in the same spot.

Definitely going to figure out how to get a full screen/close to full screen on the graph lots of feedback that bigger is better here.

As far as the charge efficiency calculation given the actual values the car reveals to my knowledge this is the most accurate method of determining how much "usefulness" of the vehicle was lost because of energy drain outside of the charging process, during the charge process.

As far as notifications go, even if you don't have a notification selected for either/or sms or email, you will still see the notification in the notification section of the Dashboard.

You should see Timestamps on all notifications shortly.

Thanks again for your feedback.

 

[Newport Ryan]

And there are lots of battery heater on/off notifications going out so the functionality seems to be working...

 

[Andyw2100]

As far as the charge efficiency calculation given the actual values the car reveals to my knowledge this is the most accurate method of determining how much "usefulness" of the vehicle was lost because of energy drain outside of the charging process, during the charge process.

I'm wondering, then, what data Teslafi is pulling to come up with the numbers they come up with. For your convenience, I will copy below the information I included up thread, showing your charge info for my car early this morning, as well as TeslaFi's. They are comparing, as I understand it, the power leaving the wall vs the power added to the car. In threads about that efficiency, people talk about 85-90% being normal. And that's about what my historical data on TeslaFi shows. The one computation I have from you on this metric is 97%, so you must be using different numbers.

Here are my numbers from this morning:

--
Charging completed at Jan 26 2017 5:46AM. Rated Range: 225.85mi, Estimated Range: 218.20mi. Battery Level: 90%. Actual Charge Time: 2 :46:0 . kWh added: 42. Overhead 3.9 miles, 1.21 kWh. Efficiency 97.22%. Odometer: 38,506.87mi. All times are in Eastern Standard Time.
--

Here is the Teslafi data for the same charge: 42.26 kWh added, 46.4 kWh used, 91.1% efficiency.

So both of you are doing the calculations correctly now. The difference is that TeslaFi thinks that what you are referring to as overhead was 4.14 kWh (46.4-42.26) and you think that number was 1.21 kWh.

Thanks again!

 

[Andyw2100]

As far as the charge efficiency calculation given the actual values the car reveals to my knowledge this is the most accurate method of determining how much "usefulness" of the vehicle was lost because of energy drain outside of the charging process, during the charge process.

I'm wondering, then, what data Teslafi is pulling to come up with the numbers they come up with. For your convenience, I will copy below the information I included up thread, showing your charge info for my car early this morning, as well as TeslaFi's. They are comparing, as I understand it, the power leaving the wall vs the power added to the car. In threads about that efficiency, people talk about 85-90% being normal. And that's about what my historical data on TeslaFi shows. The one computation I have from you on this metric is 97%, so you must be using different numbers.

Here are my numbers from this morning:

--
Charging completed at Jan 26 2017 5:46AM. Rated Range: 225.85mi, Estimated Range: 218.20mi. Battery Level: 90%. Actual Charge Time: 2 :46:0 . kWh added: 42. Overhead 3.9 miles, 1.21 kWh. Efficiency 97.22%. Odometer: 38,506.87mi. All times are in Eastern Standard Time.
--

Here is the Teslafi data for the same charge: 42.26 kWh added, 46.4 kWh used, 91.1% efficiency.

So both of you are doing the calculations correctly now. The difference is that TeslaFi thinks that what you are referring to as overhead was 4.14 kWh (46.4-42.26) and you think that number was 1.21 kWh.

Thanks again!

 

[Newport Ryan]

Many updates to the Drive page, biggest one being the ability to filter drives by any column.