Why Tesla doesn't make a CCS adapter like Chademo?

[TonyWilliams]

CHAdeMO was not a open standard a few years ago (this was also partially why other manufacturers did not want to adopt it). The only way to get access to it back then was to become a member. Of course now that it is a JIS/IEC standard it is not necessary to be a member.

See discussion below (and back then there was lots of talk about having to reverse engineer the protocol):
Open CHAdeMO

If you're talking about 2012 (now five years ago), then yes, CHAdeMO was closed / membership based. CCS didn't exist beyond PR and smack talk.

People were trying to "hack" CHAdeMO long after it was public. The data was and is readily available.

 

[TonyWilliams]

Yep, as I read it, no ban on VW putting CCS-only. With that language, it's unlikely for them to allow VW to have all chargers with CCS-only, but I don't see how a similar strategy to the corridor program (a mix) would not be allowed.

And looking into the next year, the combined sales of the Bolt, i3, eGolf, Ioniq would likely hammer the Leaf and the Soul EV, so VW can legitimately say the market is going toward CCS.

I gotta say, you are consistent in your promotion of CCS.

 

[TonyWilliams]

In an effort to head off revisionist history, I started these notes when I did my first drive from Mexico to Canada in June 2012. Some of these have been removed or retired since then.

California DC chargers:

Hopefully in order:

1. May 2010, Vacaville, Eaton brand - PGE (public utility) open to public March 2011 only, free then

2. Fall 2010, Sacramento, AeroVironment brand - Nissan (auto manufacturer), private

3. Spring 2011, Cypress, Eaton brand - Mitsubishi (auto manufacturer) open to public, free, still there I think

4. March 2012, San Bernadino, Eaton brand - 7-11 store (retail public, private capital funds), public, free

5. April 2012, San Diego, JFE brand - SDG&E (public utility) private

6. April 2012, Palo Alto, Efacec brand - 350green (retail public, public/private funds) public, fee

7. May 2012, Belmont, Blink brand - Volkswagon Tech Center (private / public funding) free

8. May 2012, San Ramon, Blink brand - (public / private funding) free

9. June 2012, Los Angeles, Blink brand, locked in parking lot, closed midday

10. June 2012, Oregon and Washington, I-5 freeway completed with AeroVironment chargers ever 25-50 miles along the West Coast Electeic Highway

10. November 2012 - Fuji brand, San Juan Capistrano - first ChargePoint network DC charger (I was part owner)

11. Spring 2013 - first USA CCS installation, San Diego (I was present for the grand opening, concurrent with Plug-In 2013)

 

[stopcrazypp]

If you're talking about 2012 (now five years ago), then yes, CHAdeMO was closed / membership based. CCS didn't exist beyond PR and smack talk.

People were trying to "hack" CHAdeMO long after it was public. The data was and is readily available.

Yes, I'm talking about 2012-2013, which was the time frame Tesla was working on the CHAdeMO adapter (it was put on the store in October 2013, but Elon mentioned they were already working on it at an event in Europe on March 2013).

As for the hacking before then, I'm pretty sure Tesla would not want to rely on reverse engineering to make a commercial product. When you don't have a open standard this also steps on intellectual property issues for non-members using the standard. CHAdeMO did not become an IEC standard until March 2014 and that was the point when non-members outside Japan would be "safe" from such legal challenges.

Long story short, I see Tesla's membership in CHAdeMO driven by necessity of developing the adapter, while their core membership in CharIn being of a different nature.

I gotta say, you are consistent in your promotion of CCS.

I just hope we end the current situation of having two standards (or three if you count Tesla's) and to move on to single standard as soon as possible. My prediction is a move to CCS 2.0 (which likely with have backwards compatibility with CCS) and Tesla adopting that also.

I do not look forward to another standards battle between CHAdeMO 2.0 and CCS 2.0, and if I were to pick one to die first, I would pick the one that is DC-only and still requires another AC port.

 

[TonyWilliams]

I do not look forward to another standards battle between CHAdeMO 2.0 and CCS 2.0, and if I were to pick one to die first, I would pick the one that is DC-only and still requires another AC port.

No professional is hacking something that is readily available, and that includes Tesla. Nobody has ever suggested that Tesla joined the CHAdeMO Association for any reason except to make adaptors for the world markets where CHAdeMO used.

I think we will move to a common DC charging standard as soon as:

1) There is one type of liquid fuel

2) There is one kind of electricity (not 50hz, 60hz, every voltage, single and three phase, etc). Actually, the squabble for 50hz reminds me of CCS. Heck, Japan uses 50hz in one half of the country, and 60hz in the other half.

3) There is one electrical wall outlet

4) There is one bolt size (just use more of them in place of one bigger one)

5) There is one kind of laundry soap

6) The toilet swirls the same way in the northern and southern hemisphere

7) All computers have the same OS

8) All video games are the same format

9) The only restaurant is one that serves exactly what I like to eat

 

[artsci]

The real question is why was Chademo designed to look like the worst Rube Goldberg device the world has ever seen. The Tesla charger, compared to all the others out there, is like a work of industrial art. Chademo looks like it was designed by a comittee of dumbfounded engineers.

 

[DarkMatter]

The even weirder part about CHAdeMO is just how many redundant signals it has on the connector. It makes J1772 look like a piece of design art in comparison. They have a CAN bus and then still insist on using analog signal lines for a number of the pin functions. One of the pins is unused. The low voltage pins are huge and have high spacing for no real reason. The entire thing could have been the size of the DC portion of the Combo connector, which could have then really been a Combo instead of yet another charging standard.

I know, I know, ten years of hindsight is just that. At one point there was a debate between conductive and inductive charging, too. And the Avcon 'Claw' made sense at one point. But my goodness the Tesla connector is really quite good given what tech we have available now.

 

[Jonas_man]

It will require a smart adapter similar to the CHAdeMO one, that uses powerline modulation on the CCS side. It would likely be similar in cost and complexity...which to me says there won't be one. I maintain the only reason Tesla made the CHAdeMO adapter was because not having it in the Japanese market was a non-starter. There is no market where CCS is has the same presence.

Im still confused a bit.

So in Europe ppl connect to their bmw/VW a CCS or a type 2 connector. Are they using different signalling?

What if i connect one end of my type 2 cable into the CCS cable and the other end to the car, what would happen?

 

[miimura]

Im still confused a bit.

So in Europe ppl connect to their bmw/VW a CCS or a type 2 connector. Are they using different signalling?

What if i connect one end of my type 2 cable into the CCS cable and the other end to the car, what would happen?

First, the male/female gender of the cables don't allow you to make the connection you described.

Second, when using a Type-2 cable for AC charging, there is one kind of signaling. When you connect to a CCS station for DC charging, it activates a completely different method of signaling.

 

[AmpedRealtor]

It's too bad Tesla doesn't make a CCS/Combo adapter. I could have used it last week when going to the mall. There were two front row charge spots available, one was occupied by a Leaf and one was available. Unfortunately, the Leaf was using the CHAdeMO and the only other connector that was available was the CCS/Combo which I could not use.

I pity those who have to grab a charge wherever they can. The standards chaos means that you may not be able to plug-in even if the spot is available.

 

[Rocky_H]

It's too bad Tesla doesn't make a CCS/Combo adapter. I could have used it last week when going to the mall. There were two front row charge spots available, one was occupied by a Leaf and one was available. Unfortunately, the Leaf was using the CHAdeMO and the only other connector that was available was the CCS/Combo which I could not use.

I pity those who have to grab a charge wherever they can. The standards chaos means that you may not be able to plug-in even if the spot is available.

Those stations that have CHAdeMO and CCS cords are still sharging one set of charging hardware inside, though, so it can only have one of those two cables active in a session, so you wouldn't have been able to use the other one anyway.

 

[Jonas_man]

First, the male/female gender of the cables don't allow you to make the connection you described.

Second, when using a Type-2 cable for AC charging, there is one kind of signaling. When you connect to a CCS station for DC charging, it activates a completely different method of signaling.

that doesn't make sense. It means that the car needs to detect the cable connected "type2" or "CCS" in order to communicate?
For me it makes sense that the protocol is the same.

Type 2 cable fits in the both ends.

 

[Saghost]

that doesn't make sense. It means that the car needs to detect the cable connected "type2" or "CCS" in order to communicate?
For me it makes sense that the protocol is the same.

Type 2 cable fits in the both ends.

They are different but interrelated. The Type 2 (and US J1772 which is basically type 2 without two of the phase wires,) has a pilot line with a square wave 1 kHz (I think?) signal. The duty cycle of that signal tells the car how much current it is allowed to draw, with both ends reserved for failure modes. The highest duty cycle block (95%?) means "I am a DCFC, initiate digital communication."

Superchargers work this way, too, by the way - but the digital communications are completely different from CCS.

 

[Jonas_man]

They are different but interrelated. The Type 2 (and US J1772 which is basically type 2 without two of the phase wires,) has a pilot line with a square wave 1 kHz (I think?) signal. The duty cycle of that signal tells the car how much current it is allowed to draw, with both ends reserved for failure modes. The highest duty cycle block (95%?) means "I am a DCFC, initiate digital communication."

Superchargers work this way, too, by the way - but the digital communications are completely different from CCS.

OK now i get.

So comms phase 1 is one protocol
comms phase 2 is yet another protocol.

Who invents this stuff? lol

 

[Saghost]

OK now i get.

So comms phase 1 is one protocol
comms phase 2 is yet another protocol.

Who invents this stuff? lol

Committees, of course.

 

[davewill]

OK now i get.

So comms phase 1 is one protocol
comms phase 2 is yet another protocol.

Who invents this stuff? lol

It is really the only way to go unless you want to add a separate connector or more pins. The J1772 protocol isn't really a communications protocol at all, just some simple signaling, so something else had to be added to communicate with the charger. Tesla and CCS just didn't choose the same solution. CHAdeMO went with a separate connector.

 

[Jonas_man]

just read about type 2 specs and in europe we could really all be doing what tesla did (using the DC mode of type2 with high power)
this CCS is a silly move.

Tesla is probably using the 3rd option but with double the amps with larger connectors.
400 * 300A = 120kW

 

[miimura]

Yes, Tesla is using a variation of the DC-Mid scheme on vehicles sold outside North America, Japan, and Taiwan. However, they are pushing 360+ amps through it.

You will notice that the slide above is from 2010. Even earlier, Daimler was proposing this scheme as the global standard for all EV charging ports. SAE decided instead to go with J1772.

 

[stopcrazypp]

Kind of off topic, but it'll be interesting to see if anything changes for the Model 3 launch (like will Tesla change the charge port or offer more adapters).

 

[stopcrazypp]

No professional is hacking something that is readily available, and that includes Tesla. Nobody has ever suggested that Tesla joined the CHAdeMO Association for any reason except to make adaptors for the world markets where CHAdeMO used.

I think we will move to a common DC charging standard as soon as:

1) There is one type of liquid fuel

2) There is one kind of electricity (not 50hz, 60hz, every voltage, single and three phase, etc). Actually, the squabble for 50hz reminds me of CCS. Heck, Japan uses 50hz in one half of the country, and 60hz in the other half.

3) There is one electrical wall outlet

4) There is one bolt size (just use more of them in place of one bigger one)

5) There is one kind of laundry soap

6) The toilet swirls the same way in the northern and southern hemisphere

7) All computers have the same OS

8) All video games are the same format

9) The only restaurant is one that serves exactly what I like to eat

I missed this response, but I don't see the analogies quite the same. All the different types of liquid fuels use the same nozzle and fill hole. The difference in types of fuel would be more like AC/DC. And CCS would be similar to the liquid fuel situation (where a single socket can handle both, although the connectors are different). Tesla is most similar given both the socket and connector stay the same for AC/DC. When 800V DC is introduced, that would be similar to another "grade" of fuel.

It makes sense to have different types of DC standards if they actually provide some kind of different functionality, but CHAdeMO and CCS is pretty much the same (with CCS handling a superset). Keeping both around indefinitely doesn't make sense in this case.