Tesla submitted a proposal for a heavy duty charging standard (3MW)

[EfficientWatts]

HPCVC called for contributions to solve the requirements as set forth. There were five submissions, from Tesla, Electrify America, ABB, paXos, and Staubli. They were reviewed and graded based on how well they solved the requirements and on their technological readiness. The Task Force reviewed the submissions first online, and again after presentations at the in-person voting event on May 16. Ranked choice voting was used to select a winning submission. That winner has not yet been announced due to some further discussions taking place.

Source: https://assets.ctfassets.net/ucu418...HPCVCS_Task_Force_update_6.10.2019_Rustam.pdf
EPRI Public Site (see 04 - Bus and Truck Working Council June 2019 - CharIN HPCVCS Task Force update 6.10.2019 Rustam)

Tesla also is a member of the committee, so even if they don't use the Tesla proposal there's a good chance the Tesla semi will use whatever standard comes out.

 

[neroden]

Only if the standard is suitable for Tesla.

Remember, Tesla tried to get a suitable charging standard through the CCS committee, failed, and used their own standard because they had to put ports on the car before the committee was willing to finalize the standard... and even when it was finalized it didn't work for Tesla and had to be amended before it could work for Tesla.

I hope it is suitable, since the situation with CCS was a fiasco.

 

[RDoc]

Yes, the question is how long are those "further discussions" going to go on? 6 months, 6 years? Since Tesla seems to be the only manufacturer that's actually serious about getting heavy electric vehicles on the road, I'm not sure I see much incentive for European, mainly German, companies to do much of anything anytime soon.

 

[petecrayton]

Yes, the question is how long are those "further discussions" going to go on? 6 months, 6 years? Since Tesla seems to be the only manufacturer that's actually serious about getting heavy electric vehicles on the road, I'm not sure I see much incentive for European, mainly German, companies to do much of anything anytime soon.

If I were Musk, my position would be "Lead, Follow, or Get Out of the Way."

 

[Jeff Hudson]

Tesla has the hip high, drivers side specification covered. Whenever the various authorizing entities get their act together and specify a connector genuinely designed for the future is when Tesla should respond and no sooner. I did not read if there was any provision for allowing a connector adapter but at these proposed power levels I do not think there will be any room for user error.

Anyway, can you imagine the size of the utility company transformer that will need to be installed to accommodate a multi station DC Fast Charging location. Are any made big enough to accommodate 8 - 20 charging stalls? I suppose multiple utility transformers could be used instead.

 

[kaffine]

A quick search shows the Siemens makes transformers up to 400MVA so that could power 130 chargers running at full capacity. The transformers weigh 96.9 tons per 100 MVA so Tesla is going to need a bigger truck to move them. That is from their industrial line they make larger transformers for the power industry. Their site shows they have made them up to 1100MVA for a power plant.

My guess would be they would use several smaller ones and possibly even have them disconnect from the grid when not in use. Transformers that size are going to have some large standby losses and I would expect a lot of downtime for the chargers at first.

Of course this is Tesla they could do a lot with Power Packs. Smaller grid connection can constantly charge the power pack and then pull from that to charge the trucks.

 

[Jeff Hudson]

Of course this is Tesla they could do a lot with Power Packs. Smaller grid connection can constantly charge the power pack and then pull from that to charge the trucks.

That's a really insightful comment. I think you may have something there. I'm not an EE but this seems like a great and practical leveraging of Tesla's Powerpack product.

 

[mongo]

Of course this is Tesla they could do a lot with Power Packs. Smaller grid connection can constantly charge the power pack and then pull from that to charge the trucks.

That works, but limits the installation to some duty cycle. As it sees more use, the supply requirements approach the charge rate.

 

[Watts_Up]

This was the original Tesla proposal....

 

[Jeff Hudson]

That works, but limits the installation to some duty cycle. As it sees more use, the supply requirements approach the charge rate.

I agree but as long as the duty cycle works for the majority of the time this solution is probably the most cost effective. We should remember there is normally a significant part of any complete day/night interval when little to no charging is taking place.

 

[RDoc]

That works, but limits the installation to some duty cycle. As it sees more use, the supply requirements approach the charge rate.

Definitely, but even a 50% duty cycle makes a big difference in continuous power draw. Casually looking at truck stops, I'm doubtful that the diesel pumps are in use 50% of the time, even during daylight hours.

 

[mongo]

Definitely, but even a 50% duty cycle makes a big difference in continuous power draw. Casually looking at truck stops, I'm doubtful that the diesel pumps are in use 50% of the time, even during daylight hours.

Yah, but mega chargers are going to be fewer in number so get more usage (offset by smaller fleet). Semis carry 100-400 gallons, so also fuel less often than a 500 mile range Tesla.

I was mostly concerned with future proofing, but it may make more sense to have twice as many locations than are only rated at 50% duty. The in dash app would tell you which to use. Local solar would also reduce the grid transformer size.

With autononous fleets, night would be advantageous due to less traffic. Charging at night should get tine of use rates too.

 

[kaffine]

It will be easier to deploy them as they will know the usage of the trucks before hand. Unlike with the cars most of the trucks will be going to fleet operations. They will have routes determined and truck will either be returning to the same terminal or going to another company owned terminal at least for the first few years. They will know how many trucks will be charging at each station as it will just be for that fleet.

I will make another guess that it will be local use trucks that get the initial ones that way they only have 1 MC site to build initially.

They will need to build out a MC infrastructure at some point for fleets that don't have facilities close enough together and for when Owner Operators are able to start running them.

 

[ZoomsansVroom]

Local delivery trucks do make a heck of a lot more sense.

 

[Ulmo]

Source: https://assets.ctfassets.net/ucu418...HPCVCS_Task_Force_update_6.10.2019_Rustam.pdf
EPRI Public Site (see 04 - Bus and Truck Working Council June 2019 - CharIN HPCVCS Task Force update 6.10.2019 Rustam)

Tesla also is a member of the committee, so even if they don't use the Tesla proposal there's a good chance the Tesla semi will use whatever standard comes out.

“Located on the driver side of the vehicle.”

That has got to be one of the most retarded things I’ve ever seen. How are you going to plug in the cord for curb-side parking? You have to crawl under the truck, reach under the truck and throw the cable in the dirt underneath the truck, go back around, reach under, grab the cable, pull on it, then angle it in a 180º turn into the charge port, then go back around again! And if it's too short, you have to pull it back under, then go around the block and park the truck the wrong way.

Why not just put it on the right side where it’s easy and safe to reach?

If I were a truck manufacturer, I'd install it on the right side, and screw the committee. If it was standards-based, how would they know the electrons are flowing on the right side? All the manufacturer has to do is put a port on the other side and have them certify the manufacturer with that one, then fix it.

 

[Ulmo]

Yes, the question is how long are those "further discussions" going to go on? 6 months, 6 years? Since Tesla seems to be the only manufacturer that's actually serious about getting heavy electric vehicles on the road, I'm not sure I see much incentive for European, mainly German, companies to do much of anything anytime soon.

??!? Tesla doesn't have any electric truck products on the road, but dozens of other companies do.

 

[Ulmo]

Tesla has the hip high, drivers side specification covered. Whenever the various authorizing entities get their act together and specify a connector genuinely designed for the future is when Tesla should respond and no sooner. I did not read if there was any provision for allowing a connector adapter but at these proposed power levels I do not think there will be any room for user error.

Anyway, can you imagine the size of the utility company transformer that will need to be installed to accommodate a multi station DC Fast Charging location. Are any made big enough to accommodate 8 - 20 charging stalls? I suppose multiple utility transformers could be used instead.

Why bother with a transformer? The thing has a damn inverter on it. Just pull the electrons direct at high voltage. 500KV. 1MV. Whatever.

(In case you don't understand the logic, think of it like this: you put enough capacitors in series to pull in that bit of sine waveform at that instant for the expected charge time for those capacitors, then switch to the next bank of capacitors when those are full, etc. You put in enough overlapping switching banks that hiccups don't noise up the supply. Every time the capacitors are disconnected from the source and get out of the series and have enough proper charge that they ought to be discharged, they are recombined into a new series and parallel series groups to be discharged into the requisite voltage level asked for by the truck. In fact, each capacitor wouldn't necessarily need to have a designated next step until its condition is known and the next certain plan phase for that capacitor is known. They can switch in and out of groups as needed. You could even peal them off as they come down the sine waves and put them on as they go up the sine waves. That's probably an oversimplification, but tell me inverters don't work like that today already. We don't need any more transformers any more. Screw the transformers.)

 

[mongo]

Why bother with a transformer? The thing has a damn inverter on it. Just pull the electrons direct at high voltage. 500KV. 1MV. Whatever.

(In case you don't understand the logic, think of it like this: you put enough capacitors in series to pull in that bit of sine waveform at that instant for the expected charge time for those capacitors, then switch to the next bank of capacitors when those are full, etc. You put in enough overlapping switching banks that hiccups don't noise up the supply. Every time the capacitors are disconnected from the source and get out of the series and have enough proper charge that they ought to be discharged, they are recombined into a new series and parallel series groups to be discharged into the requisite voltage level asked for by the truck. In fact, each capacitor wouldn't necessarily need to have a designated next step until its condition is known and the next certain plan phase for that capacitor is known. They can switch in and out of groups as needed. You could even peal them off as they come down the sine waves and put them on as they go up the sine waves. That's probably an oversimplification, but tell me inverters don't work like that today already. We don't need any more transformers any more. Screw the transformers.)

That is not how inverters work today.

First off, terminology. An inverter converts DC to AC. An AC-DC power supply does the opposite.

A simple power supply is a transformer to step down the voltage, a rectifier (diode) to generate DC, a capacitor to filter, and then a linear or DC-DC regulator.
A better version (used in higher power) uses a rectifier first, followed by a boost stage for power factor correction, a high voltage capacitor, then a setep down (buck) DC-DC converter.
Then you have other types of isolated supplies that use a transformer or mutual inductors for voltage regulation.

Yes, you could switch caps around, indeed AC voltage doublers (and triplers and so on) used diodes and caps to increase voltage. There are also low power switched cap power supplies for DC-DC conversion, but it is not practical for high power. Direct switching capacitors generate huge inrush currents requiring the use of inductors which then puts you back in a typical buskyl/boost topology.

 

[Watts_Up]

I tried to find some technical information regarding the World’s largest all-electric ferry.

From the following video: World's most powerful all-electric ferry there is an animation showing
the articulated connector used to recharge the 4.2 MWh Li-ion battery pack developed by Leclanché.

It would certainly like to find more details of this high capacity shore power plugs:

 

[doghousePVD]

“Located on the driver side of the vehicle.”

That has got to be one of the most retarded things I’ve ever seen. How are you going to plug in the cord for curb-side parking? You have to crawl under the truck, reach under the truck and throw the cable in the dirt underneath the truck, go back around, reach under, grab the cable, pull on it, then angle it in a 180º turn into the charge port, then go back around again! And if it's too short, you have to pull it back under, then go around the block and park the truck the wrong way.

Why not just put it on the right side where it’s easy and safe to reach?

If I were a truck manufacturer, I'd install it on the right side, and screw the committee. If it was standards-based, how would they know the electrons are flowing on the right side? All the manufacturer has to do is put a port on the other side and have them certify the manufacturer with that one, then fix it.

1) There is no driver side on a Tesla semi - the driver is in the center.

2) Putting the connector on the left side is less walking for the driver.

3) Trucks are not going to charge on the street.