-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Teslamate projected range down about 2% within just a month of purchase - M3LR
- Thread starter neeraj86
- Start date
-
- Tags
- battery degradation
It's possible to do much better than that if you follow AAKEE's directions. And probably even with typical 80% charge limit it should be better than that as well.
I keep my charge max to 50-52% almost every day (all but ~10 days per year when I go on trips, no supercharging). I have 3.6% degradation after 17500 miles and 18 months. Most degradation happens in warm weather as expected. As it scales with sqrt(time) I suspect little calendar degradation from here.
Candleflame
Active Member
Originally 358. Extrapolated from 50% its 344-347. Just this minute, checking the app, 181 @ 52% -> 348. That would be 2.79% degradation, but I usually take 344-345 as my range.
The point here is that following the science really works over the long term. Peer reviewed independent science, not Tesla, not a blogger, not bro science. Being ~half of a typical 5-6% 1st year is as expected, I'd imagine. Calendar aging rate is half below 55% SOC scientific (52.5% displayed) for NCA.
How many people follow the 50% charge limit from new, and what is their degradation? This all started with AAKEE keeping his 3P at a low SOC near permanently and he had exceptionally low degradation compared to the fleet. The thread down here is probably 2 years old at least now. I was reading on TMC between my order date and pickup date and fortunate to find out about the discussion and decided to take it seriously.
Candleflame
Active Member
oh i dont know about the more modern cars. there is technically a hidden buffer. maybe read it out with teslafi.
My car sits most of the time at 50% or less but my old battery was just crap.
there is pretty good evidence battery lottery is more important than anything else.
My M3P had 492km range at the last full charge (the day I drove to change car) out of 507km after 2.5 years and 66K km.
NFP was 78.4kWh, so about 4.5% counted from 82.1 (full pack when new) but we now the NFP selldom goes above 81 for most cars. (Battery test at the company that bought my car said 5% from 82.1 kWh)
Other cars for sale with the same battery at same company had 9 to 13%, all cars with less miles and no car was older than mine as my was a very early ’21 refresh.
Cold climate is good but the other swedish was close to the teslafi average. 460-465km when i had 490-ish on teslafi.
The 358mi equals 79-79.1kWh.
Each mile is worth 221 Wh.
345 x 221 = 76.25 kWh.
348 x 221 = 76.9. kWh.
On this battery we can discuss what the actuall start value is (or was). Tesla got between 80.6kWh and 82.0.7kWh out of the battery.
(I always used 82.1 as the starting value for calculations on my M3P).
This battery seems more sensitive than the earlier Panasonic 77.8kWh. Less cobalt = less stability? Your ~76.5 is a good value.
Candleflame
Active Member
the vast majority on the NCA 78.8kwh battery drop to 70kwh very quickly and 67-68kwh is completely normal after 30k miles.
We've kept ours at 50% limit since new and only charge above that - usually to 100%, once or at most twice a month. We rarely use more than 20-30% range in a day (20% lowest SoC). On trips we've partially supercharged maybe four times, otherwise level 2.
Today, 6,741 miles and exactly four months since delivery, Teslamate (and the car) just after finishing one of those 100% charges, estimates 269 of 272 mi, or 1.1% degradation. For some reason I charged it to 100% last weekend too and it estimated 271 mi. This is good.
I can also tell when the BMS error starts to grow, as the estimated range abruptly drops to the low 260s (keeping at no more than 50% SoC) and stays there until the next 100% charge when it pops up again.
For daily driving this strategy works well for us and seems to also be minimizing degradation in the first year.
Today, 6,741 miles and exactly four months since delivery, Teslamate (and the car) just after finishing one of those 100% charges, estimates 269 of 272 mi, or 1.1% degradation. For some reason I charged it to 100% last weekend too and it estimated 271 mi. This is good.
I can also tell when the BMS error starts to grow, as the estimated range abruptly drops to the low 260s (keeping at no more than 50% SoC) and stays there until the next 100% charge when it pops up again.
For daily driving this strategy works well for us and seems to also be minimizing degradation in the first year.
Small correction: the smaller older NCA is 77.8kWh (I guess you know, but just not to confuse with the 78.8kWh LG M-50).
As it seems, the 82.1 kWh is more sensitive, dropping ~ 10-13% in less than two years even with few miles on the ODO.
~460 km equals ~73kWh, out of 82. 11% quite early.
The low SOC strategy @DrChaos use will reduce the calendar aging with about 50%.
It also reduce cycliccsging as that is low at the same SOC values (but cyclic aging is very small anyway).
Maybe more silicon in the anode which more directly increases capacity. Calendar aging above 50% is mostly graphite anode, right?
and the vast majority don't keep state of charge at 50% or less most of the time.
As I mostly concentrate on [What happens] and not [Why], the question is close to the border of my knowledge, or slightly beyond
Calendar aging at low SOC is mostly Anodic side reactions. At high SOC (80% and more?) Cathodic dide reactions comes into play. I think its often described as coupled side reactions at high SOC (Anode + Cathode).
I know Cobalt is very good to stabilize the cells for cyclic life. I do not know but guess cobalt also could act stabilizing in the cathode for calendar aging?
In the anode, the strive for higher energy density probably is in opposite relationship to stability? I guess, to make space for example more lithium you need to reduce something else?
I think its clear that the 2170L cell is more sensitive than the old Panna 2170.
I thought it was the other way around. That at high SOC most of the lithium is in the graphite anode and the degradation happens there?As I mostly concentrate on [What happens] and not [Why], the question is close to the border of my knowledge, or slightly beyond
Calendar aging at low SOC is mostly Anodic side reactions. At high SOC (80% and more?) Cathodic dide reactions comes into play. I think its often described as coupled side reactions at high SOC (Anode + Cathode)
Probably yes.
With silicon you can insert even more lithium ions but that makes for a less stable structure---more swelling---which degrades the structure with time. The basic problem with silicon anodes has always been rapid degradation.
I think Panasonic overall has superior tech to LG.
This report on NCA (often cited by me has it like this:
I do not think so.
NCA was used earlier as the sole mean to really high capacity.
LG's NMC (or NMCA, 4% aluminium) is not far back and the degradation rate is slow, very slow. Just give it one year or one-end a halv maximum with the SOC people mostly charge to and they are even. After that, the LG M50 will have better quality in ost cases.
Panasonics NCA charge faster, and deliver power better so that LG just barely manage to give the power M3P and MYP needs, and in a narrow band of SOC and cell temp. These NMC cells are not for Plaid cars.
But other than that, the LG will be superrior long term.
That's also what I thought too, but this means the problem is at the anode (graphite) with lithium being deposited on the graphite permanently and removed from circulation. Since more permanent capacity loss happens at high SoC, this means that the degradation is happening at the graphite when it is more strongly charged.]
The website and his car are 2 different cars. The old one like his has the panasonic battery, with a larger capacity than the new one with the LG battery, therefore it has a 25 mile difference.
The different chemistry in the LG battery will have less degradation in exchange for a loss of performance, supposedly.
Similar threads
