Will current X and S become Supercharger obsolete?

[stopcrazypp]

I can't see it. All Tesla's original objections to J1772 plugs apply - larger, unwieldy plug with less self centering/rotation, smaller contacts for the big loads - and you add in the complexity of fiddly little covers over the DC contacts for when you're charging on J1772 AC.

From a business standpoint, I think Tesla has more to lose than to gain from switching midstream to a connector that their competition will also have - they incur a whole lot of cost to convert the largest EV fleet and charger network out there, and for what?

So that their competition can charge at their stations? (or at least clog them up while attempting to charge, which already happens in Europe since the Superchargers there look like Type 2 connection that most EVs have, but won't charge those cars.)

So that the folks who buy their cars can have the option to pay twice as much to use someone else's smaller charging network without an adapter?

There's something to be said for one standard - but if we're going to one worldwide standard, Tesla's European standard is the way to go. It gives up some of the size and centering advantages of the US version in exchange for being able to charge off of three phases (more important in other parts of the world.)

If it doesn't have to be a single worldwide standard, Tesla is already using the best ones out there for the regions I think, and if they do a good job with the 3 launch they'll be dominating the industry in sales as well. Maybe the industry can come to them instead.

In Europe, there is no negative to switching to the CCS socket, since it'll still support Tesla's connector. It can also potentially provide 2x the current carrying capacity (another 350A for a total of 700A) if they parallel the conductors.

For the US, if they use the conductor paralleling idea from Tesla's European connector, SAE CCS gives 80A more current (20% more than currently) for 430A total. Not as big an advantage, but it's still there.

Also, in the long run, it makes sense that everyone uses the same socket as that completely eliminates the need for adapters. Keep in mind an adapter is currently needed not only for CCS, but also for regular J1772 AC.

Access control to superchargers can be done in software and the difference in protocol (as it currently is done in Europe). Yes, you would still have some clueless people that try to charge anyways, but from what I can tell, it is extremely rare.

In the short term, an adapter may make more sense, but in the long run adopting a common standard makes more sense.

 

[Saghost]

With the current technology of li-ion batteries, there is an upper limit to how fast you can charge them, even with aggressive cooling. And adding some kind of cooling system to superchargers would significantly increase the cost. Probably 3X per stall over the current design. It is possible to make charging a little faster than it is now, but don't expect 5-10 minute charge times for some time. It just won't be possible until li-ion is replaced with something else.
Solid state rechargeable lithium batteries will have higher energy density and look like they might charge quicker. There are several different labs all working on the same technology and it looks promising, so that may be the tech of the future, but we probably won't be seeing it in cars until 2025 or later. It's going to take a lot of work to get that tech out of the lab and into large scale production. The turn time for battery tech from lab to production is about 10 years, sometimes longer.

I'm not a battery expert, so naturally I have lots of brilliant ideas for how it can be done faster.

Recognizing that, though, I know that there is a lot of variation in maximum recommended rates for different chemistries - the exotic Lithium Titanate based cells BYD uses for busses seem to be perfectly happy at 25C or more - but the cells are more expensive and contain less energy or the mass/volume.

I know that the taper portion of the charge is so that you don't risk overcharging individual cells into the highly damaging ranges, but I've never been clear on what sets the maximum before you get there - I actually thought it was mostly externalities like the amperage limit of the connectors. I'd be interested to hear any specific information we have on Tesla limits.

If the charging limit at lower SoC is driven by pack cooling, maybe Tesla can create an initial surge - chill the pack to the lowest safe temperature (remember we always have limited charge rates in winter, so there's clearly a minimum,) as the car approaches the SpC site, then turn on max cooling as the connection ramps up and let the pack temperature climb until it gets towards the upper end of the acceptable range, then throttle back the charge rate to what we're used to now - pack the maximum amount into the initial few minutes.

If the car can read the actual states of cells/blocks accurately when not charging and the models are precise enough, I could see the taper replaced/supplemented by "burping" the battery pack - surging a calculated safe higher voltage short term flow in, pausing to assess all of the cell states, then pushing another surge in. You wouldn't want to take this to 100% capacity of course, but how often do you go much above 90% in a SpC situation now, and how much bigger will future packs be?

 

[wdolson]

I'm not a battery expert, so naturally I have lots of brilliant ideas for how it can be done faster.

Recognizing that, though, I know that there is a lot of variation in maximum recommended rates for different chemistries - the exotic Lithium Titanate based cells BYD uses for busses seem to be perfectly happy at 25C or more - but the cells are more expensive and contain less energy or the mass/volume.

I know that the taper portion of the charge is so that you don't risk overcharging individual cells into the highly damaging ranges, but I've never been clear on what sets the maximum before you get there - I actually thought it was mostly externalities like the amperage limit of the connectors. I'd be interested to hear any specific information we have on Tesla limits.

If the charging limit at lower SoC is driven by pack cooling, maybe Tesla can create an initial surge - chill the pack to the lowest safe temperature (remember we always have limited charge rates in winter, so there's clearly a minimum,) as the car approaches the SpC site, then turn on max cooling as the connection ramps up and let the pack temperature climb until it gets towards the upper end of the acceptable range, then throttle back the charge rate to what we're used to now - pack the maximum amount into the initial few minutes.

If the car can read the actual states of cells/blocks accurately when not charging and the models are precise enough, I could see the taper replaced/supplemented by "burping" the battery pack - surging a calculated safe higher voltage short term flow in, pausing to assess all of the cell states, then pushing another surge in. You wouldn't want to take this to 100% capacity of course, but how often do you go much above 90% in a SpC situation now, and how much bigger will future packs be?

Tesla already does quite a bit with supercharging to push as much in as the cells can handle. That's why the charge rate can vary quite a bit over a supercharging session. I'm sure they continue to look at how to do it more efficiently and faster. People found the 90 KWh packs charged at a different rate and a different pattern than the old 85 packs. They probably made some hardware tweaks to charge at a slightly better way.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

Unfortunately if you examine the details it's not going to work (at least in the way the patent lays out). The coolant, high voltage, and data connectors are all facing upwards.
View attachment 224431
Pics/Info: Inside the battery pack

This makes sense for automated swapping, given you have to take the battery out anyways (and the connectors are naturally protected from the elements). But for the scheme in the patent, the connectors should be facing down so that the robotic arm can connect to it from the bottom.

With the existing design, the closest thing would be to have the pack taken out, rapidly charged and then put back into the car, but the complexity of the equipment obviously is a lot higher (would be similar to battery swapping).

True, but none of that precludes an additional coolant port at the bottom of the pack. If we could remove that plate perhaps we'll see a coolant loop? If so, then the addition of a quick disconnect port would be easy-peasy, and would show tremendous foresight by Tesla's team.

 

[xyeahtony]

Tesla has spent so much money on the current supercharging infrastructure. Do we really think they're going to modify every single charger in the near future in a manner that would make charging all their current cars impossible? Lets be realistic.

im going to bet that they're going to keep the legacy tesla connector for the long foreseeable future. Yes they will improve supercharging speeds for sure to charge faster, but i highly doubt that it would prevent older vehicles/cars from being supercharged. If anything, a system will be in place to detect an older model vehicle and downgrade the supercharging to match (if our cars currently are not even capable of faster supercharging, and i'm pretty sure it is.)

 

[Ulmo]

Tesla patent shows new way to automated high-speed charging with external cooling

Cool

 

[Ulmo]

With new batteries/supercapacitors that can be charged quickly, there comes a problem of delivering that power to the cars. Right now Tesla superchargers have their own transformers and take up a pretty big circuit on the neighborhood mains. If they were able to deliver power much faster than they do today, that would require much more power delivered to the supercharger station. They would have to locate superchargers next to area sub-stations because that's the only place where they are going to get enough power to run the supercharger.

Yes. I've been saying that's where Tesla Network cars go to charge for a while now. Real estate next to substations is going to get valuable. If I were a rich investor, I'd buy all the properties around substations and start building really nice parking lot infrastructure with huge main utility hookups, and set up lease deals with charging networks. I'd also put the appropriate security and snack shops in place, but mostly it would be an area for self driving cars to feed while they aren't holding passengers.

 

[stopcrazypp]

True, but none of that precludes an additional coolant port at the bottom of the pack. If we could remove that plate perhaps we'll see a coolant loop? If so, then the addition of a quick disconnect port would be easy-peasy, and would show tremendous foresight by Tesla's team.

Well, we are talking about existing packs. But, if you are willing to modify it, of course anything is possible, it just depends on the cost. So far, from the packs taken apart (up to the newest 100kWh pack) there is no evidence of a bottom facing port. The ports are the same except for a new ring around the high voltage connector.

Pics and Info: Inside the Tesla 100kWh Battery Pack | wk057's SkieNET