-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Appears to open the door to permit you to optionally pay to get charging priority. That's actually efficient from an economic standpoint - if you don't care how long it takes, you won't pay. If you're in a hurry, you'll pay.
I could also see other priority schemes being created, e.g. priority for cars on a road trip (far from home) as opposed to local vehicles that visit regularly.
I could also see other priority schemes being created, e.g. priority for cars on a road trip (far from home) as opposed to local vehicles that visit regularly.
If they can keep it free but prioritize people traveling then that is great. Maybe they could throttle people down who abuse the system much like mobile carriers do. You still have unlimited charging/data in this analogy but you might have to wait longer. There needs to be some financial or time disincentive to keep Supercharging for its intended use (people traveling).
Oski
Member
Possibly even giving priority to people who plan ahead and indicate which SC's they will be using and when. Scheduling is all about information; and the more information that you have, the better job you can do scheduling.
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
I like the "essence of entrepreneurship is find the pain and offer a solution".
It should read, the reality of patent trolls is to patent the obvious before someone else shuts you out of your own game.
I normally try to take the glass half full view but there are certain activities that have come of age with the proliferation of technology companies that just drive me nuts.
It should read, the reality of patent trolls is to patent the obvious before someone else shuts you out of your own game.
I normally try to take the glass half full view but there are certain activities that have come of age with the proliferation of technology companies that just drive me nuts.
Does this patent include all charging or just L3 charging? One of the problems I have seen is the dedicated wiring for each individual L2 charger (EVSE). If I was a business owner and I wanted customers/employee's to have a chance to charge, I would prefer to just string up say 8 chargers in line and only wire 100A service (as an example) that could then be spread in any combination to any and all chargers. Say 1 spot is Iced, and another 2 spots have volts that are fully charged, It would be nice to take that entire 100 A of service to the remaining 5 chargers.
I noticed this in another thread. Seemed related to this discussion:
Details on Teslas First $35,000 Mobile Supercharging Station
Details on Teslas First $35,000 Mobile Supercharging Station
Doesn't sound like it they are intending it for Superchargers: "For example, in a large parking lot or structure, at best there may be one or two parking stalls that provide access to a charging system for recharging an electric vehicle's batteries."
More useful for L2 destination charging IMO.
More useful for L2 destination charging IMO.
I believe that when they filed the patent the concept was new. Apparently the USPTO thinks so too, or they wouldn't have issued the patent.
constraint said:
True, but traditionally every wire going to every charger has been sized for the capability of just that charger, and nothing has been making any sensible decisions about how much actual current to deliver across that wire. In your example, you'd have to wire every spot out of the 8 to be able to take the full 100A, even though most of the time you'd be delivering only 20A or less. And anyway, you're saying that now; I don't think it was that obvious a few years ago.
Lets upsize my example for a minute and say we have a 12 charger array with 200A of service. You are not going to wire each charger to be capable of the entire 200 A load. Hell Tesla's duel charger can only take 80A. You could size them for a max of say 40 A (10 kw). If you are a 3.3 kw leaf, well you get your max, if you are a duel charger tesla, sorry you only get 40 A on this array.
Oski
Member
Expanding this out based on the text of the patent, say that you have a charger that is capable of delivery 160 total amps, 80 amps max to each car. You could potentially have six cars coupled to the charger, and it could be delivering two cars 80 amps each and four cars 0 amps, or four cars at 40 amps and two cars at 0 amps, or one car at 80 amps four at 20 amps and one at 0 amps, or any other combination...
lolachampcar
Well-Known Member
INATM,
I'd tend to give Tesla the benefit of the doubt here and think they are simply inoculating themselves from a Troll attack on this issue. Of course, I could very well be wrong.
I'd tend to give Tesla the benefit of the doubt here and think they are simply inoculating themselves from a Troll attack on this issue. Of course, I could very well be wrong.
This idea also allows for a larger number of Level II charging stations to be installed with less overhead cost for each. This would be ideal for destination charging such as hotels, etc...
As already noted, current stations each require a full-current-capacity electrical home run back to a feed panel. In many cases I'd bet that represents the most significant cost factor by far, when you consider that in many cases it involves trenching, conduit runs, panel installation/upgrades, etc...
So in this case, a single 100amp service might be able to supply 4 charging stations rather than 2 with less installation cost. That increases the likelihood that hotels will install more stations.
Yes, it leans less instantaneous current might be available at any given time, but with it likely that cars are parked for 8-10+ hours as destinations, ramping the current between 20-80A as load among the four spaces changes will probably be more than sufficient the majority of the time.
This is especially useful at destination charging where long-term parking is assumed, and hence charging locations being tied up will be a factor as EV adoption increases.
I's much better have twice the chance of finding charging spot at a hotel and getting a variable charging rate, than perhaps not getting a spot at all with a charger that has constant current.
As already noted, current stations each require a full-current-capacity electrical home run back to a feed panel. In many cases I'd bet that represents the most significant cost factor by far, when you consider that in many cases it involves trenching, conduit runs, panel installation/upgrades, etc...
So in this case, a single 100amp service might be able to supply 4 charging stations rather than 2 with less installation cost. That increases the likelihood that hotels will install more stations.
Yes, it leans less instantaneous current might be available at any given time, but with it likely that cars are parked for 8-10+ hours as destinations, ramping the current between 20-80A as load among the four spaces changes will probably be more than sufficient the majority of the time.
This is especially useful at destination charging where long-term parking is assumed, and hence charging locations being tied up will be a factor as EV adoption increases.
I's much better have twice the chance of finding charging spot at a hotel and getting a variable charging rate, than perhaps not getting a spot at all with a charger that has constant current.
Last edited:
They're protecting themselves from other patents. There are at least two patents out there related to adjusting charge current based on load.
Oski
Member
There are more than two, and that is certainly part of the strategy, but they are also going after adjusting charge current based on more criteria than just load. The patent discloses prioritizing charge based on arrival time, fees paid, vehicle priority information, customer priority information, existing battery pack state-of-charge, existing battery pack temperature, and intended departure time. Furthermore, it discusses prioritization based on a reservation system, and it discloses multiple methods for obtaining this information.
deonb
Active Member
Why not? Seeing that during the Supercharging announcement last year Elon came out and said that they plan to allow 4 cars per supercharger. This patent seems to cover exactly that.
Ugh. No research whatsoever on the article. The current Supercharger stations allow two vehicles per charger, not one.
Similar threads
