What charge port connector?

[slcasner]

An update on the Model S charge connector based on a short conversation with Elon at the end of the first annual shareholders' meeting yesterday morning.

I asked Elon if the Model S would have a J1772 connector. He said it would not because J1772 can't handle high enough power. I agreed that it would not handle the high-power DC charging, but it would handle 70A level 2+, and that I assumed the DC charging would be a separate connector. Elon replied that the Model S would have one connector for both modes. I guess this means yet another proprietary connector. Sigh...

[doug]

Help me Jeebus...

I don't suppose you thought to ask about support for 3 phase. This was imagined to be promised to a certain someone by a certain Tesla CTO during a dream, European Tesla store opening, and/or spirit walk.

Well if not J1772, one can only hope it would be this.

[dpeilow]

Without taking this off down the line of another thread...

J1772's proposed DC Level 3 / AC Level 2 connector surely fits the bill. What words did Elon use exactly, because using this wouldn't contradict the last sentence.

[Eberhard]

An update on the Model S charge connector based on a short conversation with Elon at the end of the first annual shareholders' meeting yesterday morning.

I asked Elon if the Model S would have a J1772 connector. He said it would not because J1772 can't handle high enough power. I agreed that it would not handle the high-power DC charging, but it would handle 70A level 2+, and that I assumed the DC charging would be a separate connector. Elon replied that the Model S would have one connector for both modes. I guess this means yet another proprietary connector. Sigh...

The only connector who can handle both is the Mennekes?

[dsm363]

I don't understand why they can't just say at this point what the connector will be. It has to be finalized by this point. Not having a J1772 charger on there is a mistake I think. Especially in the eyes of the general public.

[emq]

The only connector who can handle both is the Mennekes?

Mennekes can handle both.

The Mennekes Combo plug isnt provided for HighLevel DC Charge, 63A AC, 70A DC. The S is 45 Minutes QuickCharge. If i asume the S has 75kWh Accus, that means 100kW power for 45minutes chargetime. At 3x400V thats 144Amps AC.

70A DC x 375V = 26kW > 3h Charge time.

The only connecter now, can handle 45 min. charge is CHADEMO Standard (supported by about 300 companys worldwide, based on TEPCO Tokyo) on DC 50kW, 100kW, 200kW.

BYD has a propietary solution.

Teslamotors may be has not dicided or communicated there solution.

The good info for quick charge: The primary connection to the grid will be fix installation, can be different according the local grid archtecture, for instance 3ph in EU, 1ph in US, J, Italy ec.
The Output is alwas the same, according the car interface.

emq: Power Quality / EV charging solutions

[Eberhard]

Mennekes can handle 3x63A = 44kW output or 1x70A AC or 2x 70A 500V DC = 70kW output means 80% of 80kW = 64kWH in 55min. Both is fine for me, but i don't need/want DC

[Doug_G]

I guess this means yet another proprietary connector. Sigh...

Aw crap. Apparently Tesla sees plugs as their main profit center.

[richkae]

Possibilities for not announcing:
1) They have not finalized their decision/design.
2) They think they have something better than everyone else and they don't want to be copied.
3) They think they have something better than everyone else but believe it will face criticism until they can demonstrate it and prove that.

Technical possiblities:
1) Much higher power than anyone is currently thinking about. What if they are thinking about 100kW? or 150kW? Maybe they believe they can convince the world that 60-70kW isn't sufficient and the Model S will be ready to handle much more power whenever those are available?
If you buy a fleet of Model S cars, a couple of 100kW-150kW chargers may be a small piece of the pie.

[TEG]

Lets hope you are right that the reason is that they have something better. But keeping it proprietary would be a shame as a shared charging infrastructure can help more broad acceptance of EVs. One thing going for gas stations is you know the nozzle will fit your gas car no matter which station you happen to use. As it is now with EV charging, we have small paddle, Avcon, J1772, Tesla connectors, CHAdeMO, and such spread around. I have already seen some Leaf's pull up to the local Fry's electronics having found a charge spot on their map only to realize there are small paddle and Avcon there and no J1772. I have seen Teslas parked in small paddle spots that are marked "EV only" thus denying a Rav4EV a chance to charge. I really think we need to get standardized on one plug for everyone. If Tesla were to offer charging stations with > 20kW what socket would they use? CHAdeMO? New SAE? IEC 3phase? And to add to the above we have different vendors trying to introduce RFID card controls on their EVSEs, so there doesn't appear to be a standard there either. I will need to have a Chargpoint account and RFID card, as well as a Blink account/card, and who knows what else in future to be able to use the different charging locations.
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110601/OEM01/110609983/1179
...Regarding charging stations, Musk said that Tesla vehicles' extended range means that the company could cover cross-country drives with 13 charging stations. He said eight to 10 stations on each seaboard could cover the U.S. coasts. At an expected investment of about $25,000 per station, "for a couple million dollars you have covered the country," Musk said...
Is that a suggestion that they plan to have company operated charging locations? Would they allow non Tesla cars to charge there too? Hopefully charging infrastructure is viewed as an industry wide effort, not something proprietary to each company.

[emq]

Mennekes can handle 2x 70A 500V DC = 70kW output means 80% of 80kW = 64kWH in 55min. Both is fine for me, but i don't need/want DC

Sorry to correct you: 2x70A DC means 70A x 500V DC = 35kW The S might have max 400V x 70A =28kW 80kWh/28kW ca. 3h

emq

[richkae]

Like I said before in another thread, there will have to be a J1772 adapter on top of any proprietary connector on the car.
If they make that adapter 1) lock to the car, 2) capable of being left attached to the car with the charge door closed so it is just like a native J1772 connector - then I dont care.
The Roadster dangly 3 foot wire thing is a horrible disaster of a solution.

[TEG]

Like I said before in another thread, there will have to be a J1772 adapter on top of any proprietary connector on the car.
... That is fine for Tesla vehicles (e.g. Model S) that want to do opportunistic charging at non-Tesla "public" infrastructure, but what about non-Tesla cars that want to use Tesla EVSEs? Will we have another Tesla proprietary connector on some new charge stations? We have already seen how that can work with public HPCs that are only for Roadsters.

[Eberhard]

Sorry to correct you: 2x70A DC means 70A x 500V DC = 35kW The S might have max 400V x 70A =28kW 80kWh/28kW ca. 3h

emq

no 2x70A X 500V DC = 70kW on mennekes instead AC 3-phase + Neutral (4 lines), DC with 2 lines plus(+) and 2 lines minus(-).

[richkae]

There is no reason why a fast DC charge station cant have multiple cords hanging off it.
It could have a CHAdeMO cord, a J1772+DC cord, a Mennekes cord and some other cord.
You swipe your card and you enter what type of car you have ( or it knows from your card ) or which cord you want - and the machine unlocks the appropriate cord.
If the box is $25000, each additional cord and plug option is probably only $500

[qwk]

Yikes, I guess it's good that the model S will have a front trunk, because it will need it for all of the adapters. This decision definately isn't helping with the negative EV perception by average people. Looks like more ammo for big oil. sigh...

[GSP]

I cannot believe Tesla will not include a J1772 connector on the Model S. They are too smart to make such a huge blunder. I certainly will require a J1772 connector for any future car purchase.

I expect that this report is just a mis-understanding, and the Model S will indeed have a J1772 connector. Tesla is likely keeping the connector secret to enable a last minute decision about CHAdeMO vs. J1772DC for the fast charge connector. Will J1772DC be ready in time? Which one will be the de-facto standard for fast chargers in the US?

Also, how will Tesla support 3-phase? Probably by using the Mennekes connector on European cars, but maybe Tesla has different solution that they don't want to announce yet.

GSP

[vfx]

... I guess this means yet another proprietary connector. Sigh...

Stupid
Stupid.
Stupid!

[Eberhard]

I cannot believe Tesla will not include a J1772 connector on the Model S. They are too smart to make such a huge blunder. I certainly will require a J1772 connector for any future car purchase.

I expect that this report is just a mis-understanding, and the Model S will indeed have a J1772 connector. Tesla is likely keeping the connector secret to enable a last minute decision about CHAdeMO vs. J1772DC for the fast charge connector. Will J1772DC be ready in time? Which one will be the de-facto standard for fast chargers in the US?

Also, how will Tesla support 3-phase? Probably by using the Mennekes connector on European cars, but maybe Tesla has different solution that they don't want to announce yet.

GSP

instead of a single one-phase charger with 90A they can do 3 single phase charger at 32A then it does not matter how it is configured. The efficiency is even higher at lower rates, when only one charger will be used.

[qwk]

instead of a single one-phase charger with 90A they can do 3 single phase charger at 32A then it does not matter how it is configured. The efficiency is even higher at lower rates, when only one charger will be used.

I wouldn't count chickens until they hatch. There may NOT even be 3-phase support.

[Eberhard]

JB Straubel told me, that the europe version will have 3-phase support. They already ship charger for the Daimler A-class e-cell with 3-phase support (mennekes)

[vfx]

JB Straubel told me, that the europe version will have 3-phase support. ...


I had never heard that before!

[dsm363]

Is that a suggestion that they plan to have company operated charging locations? Would they allow non Tesla cars to charge there too? Hopefully charging infrastructure is viewed as an industry wide effort, not something proprietary to each company.
I agree but I could see an advantage of locking the chargers to just Tesla owners for a limited time period of maybe a year or two. If they were placed 100 miles apart, most other cars couldn't really use them anyway (easily). It might help Tesla sales until the broader charger market grows and Tesla could open their network to anyone at that point.

[SByer]

Ok, to play devil's advocate for a second. Let's think about the future. What is the target for charging? Let's assume batteries get cheap enough and gravimetrically dense enough that we could choose any battery size we want. What size would you choose? For, say, a medium-sized SUV-like vehicle that America likes to buy? And drive cross country? And, in terms of infrastructure needed for people to feel comfortable, every chunk of added mile counts, and you want to eliminate just about all range anxiety issues? So, say, 500mi? 600mi? We're talking a 250kWh or 300kWh battery. Now, charge time - an hour is a long time. Hydrogen (if, if, if) will hit at about 20 minutes (but not hit on the range, duh). So, let's go for half hour. Well now, that CHAdeMO connector isn't looking so hot, is it?

Things are in flux now. A little more uncertainty extends the time things are in flux, leaving wiggle room for better standards to be created (now that we finally have people thinking about such things). Current standards cover AC charging sufficiently. Combo standards - which would definitely be better than two connectors - are coming along slowly, but may not cover the desired power wanted. Extending the time of uncertainly while also playing the 'if your standard covered what we want...' game may not be such a bad thing.

And, if you plan for it, there is plenty of room to bring the required wires to a location in the car that they can be hardwired to an 'adapter' for that country's predominant standard, with perhaps a bypass if needed to get maximum capability. After all, we're talking about a big transformer on one side, a few thick wires, a connector, and some more thick wires - and a bit of signaling. As long as there are only a handful of standards worldwide and not dozens, the signaling generator won't be expensive. And, let's face it, the likelihood that politics would allow a global standard are darned near zero. This or that local/regional/continental manufacturer will almost certainly be able to throw enough money at preventing that so they can lock up a piece of the pie.

So, I suspect that Tesla really isn't committed to a (set of) connector(s) yet. They don't have to be until way late in the game (say, 2 months before FCS). And there are games afoot we don't know about.

Elon's not stupid.

[vfx]

Ok, to play devil's advocate for a second. ....

I'm not singing the praises of the J connector. I agree it's only "OK" compared to what it could be but it took 9 years for the new J1772 to go through all the political, regulatory, standards, compliances etc etc,. to get to the point where we were last year to start making them. Even with a 300 mile range, in two years from now when Model S sales need to hit their stride and break out of the early adopter phase, there will be customers who will look at thousands of J plug stations around and hesitate. To not have that option for car buyers sounds like a stupid move from a very smart man. But I also suspect the fat lady is still in her dressing room.

[TEG]

Ok, to play devil's advocate for a second. Let's think about the future. What is the target for charging? Let's assume batteries get cheap enough and gravimetrically dense enough that we could choose any battery size we want...
So in the 'pie in the sky' world of tomorrow where the price of batteries becomes incidental, and they have chemistry that supports very rapid charging, I would think you could have stationary packs on a 'trickle charge' (say 10kW) storing up lots of charge (say up to 300kWh) so that when a vehicle occasionally pulls up for a quick charge you could do a pack to pack dump at very high current levels and get the vehicle back up to charge in a matter of minutes.
But then there is the whole other approach that pack swap catches on and so we don't worry about charge times on high capacity packs because the swap machine switches you over in minutes regardless of capacity. If we were stuck at 20kW charging and pack capacity kept growing from year to year I imagine that pack swap would get more and more attractive. People tend to want to take a pit stop every few hours of driving, so some sort of ultra-rapid "flash charge" or pack swap would probably make more sense then trying to get infinite pack capacity.
Another angle with a world of super cheap, high capacity batteries would be desire to reclaim battery space for passengers and luggage, and/or to reduce weight for better performance. So I guess I am saying there will probably be a turning point someday where we hit max desired onboard pack capacity and people start looking at optimizing the pit stop experience and shrink the onboard pack size for performance and space reasons.

And all of this changes if someone invents the portable fusion reactor or some-such to make a real range-extended, not petroleum powered electric a reality.

[gg_got_a_tesla]

And all of this changes if someone invents the portable fusion reactor or some-such to make a real range-extended, not petroleum powered electric a reality.

Amen to that! I'll take Doc's Fusion-powered flying Delorean any day! ;-)

[markwj]

So in the 'pie in the sky' world of tomorrow where the price of batteries becomes incidental, and they have chemistry that supports very rapid charging, I would think you could have stationary packs on a 'trickle charge' (say 10kW) storing up lots of charge (say up to 300kWh) so that when a vehicle occasionally pulls up for a quick charge you could do a pack to pack dump at very high current levels and get the vehicle back up to charge in a matter of minutes.

An analogy to the world of scuba diving (40+ years experience of 'charging' tanks that we can learn from). Scuba tanks take 10-12 minutes to charge, each. If you've got a boat load of divers, that could be a couple of hours to charge them all, but divers are only willing to wait an hour between dives.

Solution 1: each diver takes 3 tanks on the boat, to give him three dives during the day and a slow charge overnight. Aka battery swap.

Solution 2: an array of large tanks is deployed at the charging station. Overnight, and during dives, these large storage tanks are charged. Then, when a dozen divers turn up, their tanks can be charged in a couple of minutes. Aka stationary packs at charge stations.

Interestingly, with both solutions available, and 40+ years experience, neither solution has 'won'. Both are in widespread use today. In general, the multiple tank approach is used when there is no access to charge stations, and the storage tank approach used at the stations themselves.

[slcasner]

J1772's proposed DC Level 3 / AC Level 2 connector surely fits the bill. What words did Elon use exactly, because using this wouldn't contradict the last sentence.

The exchange with Elon was just after the conclusion of the meeting proper, with a crush of people around trying to ask questions. Consequently, I am not certain of exactly what words were used or intended. I am pretty confident, though, that he was challenging the use of a J1772 connector because it could not handle enough power.

[W.Petefish]

Personally I prefer the connector that Tesla currently has, It has the feel of hooking up a connection, not the pumping gas feel of the J1772. On that note, I would prefer to have multiple charging connectors on the Model S, that being a J1772, the current Tesla connector, and a DC fast charge connector.

In the DC fast charge connector the wires are going to have to be thick to handle the amount of amperage that the LV3 would put out. If smaller wire were to be used you would have a real fire hazard on your hands from the wire heating up. I've had a personal experience with wires heating up when using my UMC at a 40 amp charge rate, mind you 6 gauge wire with a mild temp increase.

It occurs to me that even a distributed load over 3 wires would be 66a per wire at the max rate.

CHAdeMO charging connector:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d3/CHAdeMO_Plug_VacavilleDavisStDC2.jpg

[Doug_G]

For DC charge the full current is carried by both wires. Let's assume 480 VDC at 150 amps. It they use solid wire that would be at least #1 gauge with 90C insulation. Since the wire will be stranded it will be even bigger.

Something tells me they're going to have to go to higher voltages, or some people won't be able to handle the cable!

[vfx]

...Something tells me they're going to have to go to higher voltages, or some people won't be able to handle the cable!
Very true. Studies show the current Tesla connector and cable is right a the limit of what would be to much for consumers to put up with.

[Lloyd]

Fast Charging stations are likely not to be Self Serve both for this reason and the voltages involved.

[doug]

I would prefer to have multiple charging connectors on the Model S, that being a J1772, the current Tesla connector, and a DC fast charge connector.
The current Tesla connector is no more capable than J1772, so there is not much point in keeping it (or having both).

[W.Petefish]

Doug, I'll give you that one. But as I have said I prefer the Tesla connector over the J1772.

[neroden]

Now, charge time - an hour is a long time

Frankly, not really. An hour is exactly the appropriate amount of time to have lunch or dinner, and a reasonable time for an average appointment or meeting. An hour is *exactly* the target charging time. Longer than an hour is too long; but if you get the charging time down to an hour with 400 miles driving in between, don't worry too much about getting the charge time lower. You've covered most of the market, except for the "drive straight through without stopping" lunatics, who aren't safe on the road anyway.

[Doug_G]

Frankly, not really. An hour is exactly the appropriate amount of time to have lunch or dinner.

Agreed. On our recent road trip, my wife was getting impatient with the three hour charge time, especially the second time (return trip). I didn't mind because it was fun to drive electric, but she isn't so much into that. It didn't help that I had to drive like an old lady to get the range. Her comment: "What's the point of this sports car if we have to drive slow?"

Three hours to 50% makes for a trip that takes twice as long. One hour to 80% would have made a huge difference, because our stop would have been shorter and I could also drive faster.

[vfx]

Universal Mobile Connector - Available in North America Only

Please note that the connectors sold through our online store are for the Tesla Roadster. Model S charging options will be released at a later date.

http://shop.teslamotors.com/collections/charging/products/universal-mobile-connector-available-october-2009

S (http://shop.teslamotors.com/collections/charging/products/universal-mobile-connector-available-october-2009)ounds like the Model S will not have the Tesla amp connector.

[TEG]

The current Tesla connector is no more capable than J1772, so there is not much point in keeping it (or having both).

It would be nice to have an inverse of the current J1772 to Tesla adapter (that lets Roadsters use J1772 now) so that J1772 vehicles could use Tesla plugs.
Assuming Tesla goes away from the old "amp" Tesla proprietary on future vehicles, there will still be some number of Tesla EVSEs out in the world (e.g., Harris Ranch, UK extended range network, ...) so an adapter to the old could be handy.

[Tommy]

Sounds like the Model S will not have the Tesla amp connector.

Due to tax credits expiring at the end of this year for installing a home charger, I made a point last month of asking Tesla directly (via e-mail to corporate) if their wall mount charger for the Roadster would work on the Model S. They could not give me a definitive answer even though I explained the loss of the tax credit if I waited to install in 2012. So, I would agree with you on your assessment regarding the Model S charging connector.

[dadaleus]

A Tesla employee who would know told me at the LA rally that the S will have an entirely new connector that 'will blow your mind.' He said it's smaller than the Roadster connector and incorporates both DC quick charge and J1772 standards in one port, using adapters to those charge stations.

Presumably at home you'd have a native cable for this new port, and you'd have to carry adapters for charge stations.

Mixed feelings: I hoped to be done with adapters now that J1772 is standard, but if their port is easier and lighter that's nice too.

[doug]

incorporates both DC quick charge and J1772 standards in one port, using adapters to those charge stations.
I've heard similar things, but as I mentioned in another thread, in Europe the use of adapters is not allowed. I'm still hoping they came up with a modular solution so the port is swapped out for the region appropriate connector.

[dsm363]

I've heard similar things, but as I mentioned in another thread, in Europe the use of adapters is not allowed. I'm still hoping they came up with a modular solution so the port is swapped out for the region appropriate connector.
Exactly. Any adapter that hangs down from the car like the current J1772 adapter will not work with the general public.

[GSP]

An hour is exactly the appropriate amount of time to have lunch or dinner, and a reasonable time for an average appointment or meeting. An hour is *exactly* the target charging time. Longer than an hour is too long; but if you get the charging time down to an hour with 400 miles driving in between, don't worry too much about getting the charge time lower.

My sentiments exactly. EV do not have to be the same as gas cars, just like gas cars did not have to be the same as horses or donkeys. One hour is the appropriate fast charge time. With a 300 mile Model S, you can drive for 250 miles, fast charge, and repeat. An easy 500 mile day. You can even fast charge again and drive a third 250 miles. This 750 mile day is the limit of most human's endurance, so it will match any gas car without charging in less than one hour.

GSP

[Norbert]

A Tesla employee who would know told me at the LA rally that the S will have an entirely new connector that 'will blow your mind.' He said it's smaller than the Roadster connector and incorporates both DC quick charge and J1772 standards in one port, using adapters to those charge stations.

Both in one, and still smaller than the Roadster connector? I certainly like this aspect of it. The smaller, the better.

[doug]

Exactly. Any adapter that hangs down from the car like the current J1772 adapter will not work with the general public.
It's not just that the public might not like it, it's against European regulations.

[Norbert]

It's not just that the public might not like it, it's against European regulations.

IIRC someone said these 'adapters' aren't cables.

[PaulM]

A Tesla employee who would know told me at the LA rally that the S will have an entirely new connector that 'will blow your mind.' He said it's smaller than the Roadster connector and incorporates both DC quick charge and J1772 standards in one port, using adapters to those charge stations.

If this is true, why can't the SAE design something better than the monstrosity that is their solution to a combination L2/L3 charge port. In my opinion, the new L2/L3 J1772 is too big and looks horrible.

[VolkerP]

If this is true, why can't the SAE design something better than the monstrosity (http://images.thecarconnection.com/sml/society-of-automotive-engineers-sae-j-1772-combo-electric-car-charging-plug_100359341_s.jpg) that is their solution to a combination L2/L3 charge port. In my opinion, the new L2/L3 J1772 is too big and looks horrible. (image link added)
I second that. Guessing from the inlet outline, the type 2 combo that ACEA (EU car makers) agreed upon won't look better. Sigh.
A camel is a horse designed by a committee.

[Lloyd]

You realize that the large plug is for DC fast charging only. The smaller J1772 as we are using now works on the upper 1/2 of the recepticle for level II charging AC to 80 amps. I have no problem with this combination!

[VolkerP]

I do realize that. The additional, bulky DC charge pins are unused when charging from AC and vice versa.

What I don't realize is, why a bunch of electric+automotive engineers cannot figure out a way how the vehicle and the EVSE negotiate on both current and form of voltage (AC/DC)! Then charging either uses four pins for three phase AC + neutral or 2 pairs of 2 pins for DC. Given that the Mennekes cable and plug spec goes up to 63A/400V AC (16mm2 wires), it should be possible to provide 500V / 75A x 2 = 75kW DC charging on the same hardware.
Of course, negotiation must be fool proof.

[Norbert]

Given that the Mennekes cable and plug spec goes up to 63A/400V AC (16mm2 wires), it should be possible to provide 500V / 75A x 2 = 75kW DC charging on the same hardware.
Of course, negotiation must be fool proof.

I think it does that up to some maximum DC charging rate. Above that, Mennekes, like SAE, defines a combo plug with two large additional DC pins. I'm not sure how it look in real life compared to the SAE combo plug.

[TEG]

There are a tremendous amount of committees involved with getting this specified and agreed upon.
It is a wonder that they finally approve anything, and not surprising that they end up with something less than elegant.

[TEG]

...Mennekes, like SAE, defines a combo plug with two large additional DC pins. I'm not sure how it look in real life compared to the SAE combo plug.

Sorry, I couldn't find an actual side by side comparison picture, but here are some other points of reference:
AC Mennekes:
http://www.autocar.co.uk/contentImages//Car/ECC/C1/1259943148421356x236.jpg
AC SAE J1772:
http://www.transportation.anl.gov/images/content/smart_grid_plug_300.jpg

SAE seems to have a smaller diameter socket, but the SAE plug handle tends to be longer with the lock/release switch on top.


Mennekes with DC vs SAE with DC pins:
http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x453/tgriner2/mennekes-vs-sae-combo.jpg
I think for the DC plug / socket there isn't a huge amount of physical size difference.


48-v-bordnetz, Teilnetzbetrieb Und Ladeschnittstelle - Deutsche OEMs setzen Standards - all-electronics.de (http://www.all-electronics.de/texte/anzeigen/42481/Deutsche-OEMs-setzen-Standards)
http://www.all-electronics.de/upl/media/131/21296.jpg
http://www.all-electronics.de/upl/media/131/21297.jpg

[vfx]

http://www.cleancities.tv/FeaturedContent/Training/EVSEResidentialChargingInstallation.aspx?VID=110624_Clean Cities_EVSE_Final.flv&Cap=110624_Clean Cities_EVSE_Final.xml

Chart at (http://www.cleancities.tv/FeaturedContent/Training/EVSEResidentialChargingInstallation.aspx?VID=110624_Clean Cities_EVSE_Final.flv&Cap=110624_Clean Cities_EVSE_Final.xml)7:40 help?

[dpeilow]

Yeah, there's a mode on Mennekes where the regular plug supports DC through combining its pins, up to a reasonable power level. The monstrosity form factor is for the big stuff.

I remember seeing a vid on 10 minute Altairnano charging where they proposed a spiral contact design for a small plug and a lot of surface area.

[rabar10]

http://www.cleancities.tv/FeaturedContent/Training/EVSEResidentialChargingInstallation.aspx?VID=110624_Clean Cities_EVSE_Final.flv&Cap=110624_Clean Cities_EVSE_Final.xml

Chart at (http://www.cleancities.tv/FeaturedContent/Training/EVSEResidentialChargingInstallation.aspx?VID=110624_Clean Cities_EVSE_Final.flv&Cap=110624_Clean Cities_EVSE_Final.xml)7:40 help?
Thanks for the link. I didn't even know about the proposed "Level 1 DC", looks like up to 80A if it's using the same power pins as the existing J1772 connector, and 80A at 400V matches the 32kW spoken in the video (but mis-typed in the captioning). That would charge a vehicle with pack voltage similar to the Roadster at ~1.5x the rate of the Level 2 AC connection. BTW there's conflicting info out there on whether Level 1 DC uses the existing J1772 pins or the new big DC pins.

So is the complexity of combining AC and DC connections on the same pins, and requiring an offboard DC charger, worth the gains over L2 AC? Probably not IMO. Hence not hearing about it...

[TEG]

Model S plug (picture from Nigel):
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2819&d=1317523199

Could be similar pinout (but different shape) from J1772.
Hot+Hot+Ground... 2 signaling pins...

[strider]

Yeah, I have to say I am NOT pleased by all this proprietary charge port business. Tesla thinks they're smarter than everyone but not adhering to standards makes everyone's life a PITA. Oh wait, we can have J1772 "adapters". :mad:

And putting in their own charging stations? Stick to one freaking business and excel at it. It's going to cost a bundle to place proprietary charging stations all over the earth and Tesla isn't exactly making money hand over fist. Build great cars, stick to charging standards, and the networks will come.

[dpeilow]

Did anyone get pictures or the size of this 90 kW charging station? I understand there was one there refilling the test drive cars.

[Norbert]

Did anyone get pictures or the size of this 90 kW charging station? I understand there was one there refilling the test drive cars.

Haven't seen one yet. I'll certainly try to get a shot tomorrow.

[AndrewBissell]

Well it is amazingly small for a 90kW connector.

What is the trefoil slot for? Purely guidance and keying, or are there connectors in there? (Is this the expansion space in case they have to add 3-phase in Europe? Some hope!)

[AndrewBissell]

Since Tesla have chosen the proprietary route they are going to have to execute the rollout of their own chargers amazingly well. In the Roadster period this has been piecemeal at best. In the UK without David Peilow, Kevin Sharpe and me it just wouldn't have happened. Hopefully they will hire [someone like] David to drive European fast charge network in a systematic and structured way with full rollout ahead of need. Then (and only then) we could somewhat relax about the likelihood that Model S is frozen out of substantial pieces of the public fast-charge infrastructure.

[cinergi]

The J1772 adapter will be a small inline adapter (no pigtail crap).
The 90kW charger isn't available for pix, and would probably be a useless pic as it's not production-ready.

[doug]

A vid I took of the Model S UMC connected to a test box.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZz8rf16B38
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BZz8rf16B38

[tomsax]

A vid I took of the Model S UMC connected to a test box.

Hi Dave! Thanks for the shout out. Who was the Tesla guy? Was he totally making things up? Tesla requested the proximity pin? In what universe? The Menekes connector uses the same pilot signal as J1772. Tesla handles charging without a pilot by connecting the pilot pin to ground and assuming whatever the local base-level current limit is. You don't need a separate switch for that! If the proximity switch was Tesla's idea, why don't they support it with their adapter?

[tomsax]

Is Tesla going to provide a way for Roadster owners to convert to the Model S connector? Or perhaps another $750 adapter we have to stuff into the trunk hope no one will steal it while we're charging?

[richkae]

2848Posting my pictures of the charge door - I actually saw this before I saw the connector and I thought: "no way you can fit a J1772 in there"

[dsm363]

Is Tesla going to provide a way for Roadster owners to convert to the Model S connector? Or perhaps another $750 adapter we have to stuff into the trunk hope no one will steal it while we're charging?
They had one of the engineers who works on the chargers in the VIP tent. It doesn't sound like they are planning on converting Roadsters to new plug but he didn't know for sure. It's definitely something they should do.

[vfx]

The new plug is simply amazing. Smaller cable, great industrial design, hefty yet lightweight feel. About the size of my electric razor and heft like it was full of batteries (it is not). Great feel for men and women. The J connector feels massive and cheapy plasitc compared to this beauty.

Button on top for sending Rf signal to open the charge port door (pretty sure) and button also releases the connector from the car.

Contacts are silver.

Was told the adapter to J connector is small. Like half a soda can size. It will also latch to car so it can't be removed.

Sounds like they are more open to converting Roadsters to this new connector skipping the Roadster J option. I am for this though it would be nice if the J adaptor could live in the car if I wanted.

[vfx]

A vid I took of the Model S UMC connected to a test box....

Box was just to fake out the connector to make it think it was plugged into a car. Just to make the relay box Cylon light work.

[W.Petefish]

They seem to be thinking about a retrofit kit that would be installed by a ranger or the service center.

[gg_got_a_tesla]

The new plug is simply amazing. Smaller cable, great industrial design, hefty yet lightweight feel. About the size of my electric razor and heft like it was full of batteries (it is not). Great feel for men and women. The J connector feels massive and cheapy plasitc compared to this beauty.

We have a believer! Finally! :)

[vfx]

We have a believer! Finally! :)

HA!

pudding was served :)

[NigelM]

The new plug is simply amazing. Smaller cable, great industrial design, hefty yet lightweight feel. About the size of my electric razor and heft like it was full of batteries (it is not). Great feel for men and women. The J connector feels massive and cheapy plasitc compared to this beauty.

Agree! My wife complains about the heavy cable on the Roadster. Here's a pic that I took last night and a similar one of my hand to give you size reference:

28512852


Button on top for sending Rf signal to open the charge port door (pretty sure) and button also releases the connector from the car.

The button is for lock/release. There is a proximity detector which opens the chargeport door when you approach with the chargeplug, alternatively you can open it from the dash. I asked about charging with an adapter (e.g. at a J1772 charge station) and was told "remember to open the chargeport door before you get out of the car".

I was also told there will most likely be a Models-->Roadster adapter but not the other way around; the Roadster plug is "too big and heavy" to be hanging on the side of the Model S.

[jkirkebo]

I was also told there will most likely be a Models-->Roadster adapter but not the other way around; the Roadster plug is "too big and heavy" to be hanging on the side of the Model S.

Hmm, so where does that leave CHAdeMO ? The Roadster plug is really small compared to that thing...

[vfx]

The button is for lock/release. There is a proximity detector which opens the chargeport door when you approach with the chargeplug,...

I thought I heard him say you had to push the button to release the door. Not a big deal to argue about. Though, it kinda makes sense if you don't want the door to be opening everytime you are winding up the cable near the tailight.

[doug]

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6168/6204663382_8d2c943ae4_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204663382/in/photostream/)
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6135/6204109847_cbc4e4cf7a_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204109847/in/photostream)
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6156/6204124907_90766809ac_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204124907/in/photostream/)
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6152/6204674182_9dde9ed5ae_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204674182/in/photostream/)
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6001/6204686518_1688e7c316_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204686518/in/photostream/)
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6133/6204698608_f4afe1b27e_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204698608/in/photostream)

[tomsax]

The new plug is simply amazing. Smaller cable, great industrial design, hefty yet lightweight feel.

It sounds like a great connector. The question is can they either (a) make it an open, industry standard widely adopted by other automakers or (b) build and maintain their own international charging infrastructure capable of supporting a successful line of mass-market electric vehicles?

It's easy to talk about installing QC stations, but another matter entirely getting them in the ground. Just ask the ECOtality folks about how difficult it is to give stations away. Maybe part of ECOtality's problem is their business model (where site owners have pay a significant network service fee and have little or no control over pricing), but that just makes me wonder what Tesla's business model will be. Will Model S owners have to pay a monthly subscription fee to use the QC stations? How else do you build a credible business model around expensive stations that sell a cheap, universally available commodity and are only rarely needed?

When will they get UL approval for this new connector and their corresponding stations? They didn't get UL approval for the HPC until they had been delivering Roadsters for over two years. I don't think they will get away with that again.

Will there be a reasonably-priced conversion path for Roadster owners? If not, will they also abandon the Model S owners when the next, cheaper, higher production car comes out?

How do they propose to compete against electric vehicles which have convenient, native access to pervasive charging infrastructure built on equipment produced by a large number of vendors forced by competition to offer low-priced, high-quality stations?

What happens to Tesla's proprietary strategy when Nissan comes out with an all-electric Infinity sedan that competes head-to-head with the new car from that wacky little car company in California?

Doing their own thing with a seemingly superior connector is a bold move. I expect Tesla will continue to show the world how to build an awesome electric vehicle, and creating a great connector could be a big win for leadership, but taking on yet another proprietary charging standard adds to the number of barriers to their eventual success in the marketplace.

[doug]

The new plug is simply amazing. Smaller cable, great industrial design, hefty yet lightweight feel. About the size of my electric razor and heft like it was full of batteries (it is not). Great feel for men and women. The J connector feels massive and cheapy plasitc compared to this beauty.
It is designed quite nicely. It's what the Yazaki J-connector shouldhave been. But if they were going to design their own connector, I think they should have made it three-phase capable so that it could be a world connector. Only needs two more pins.

They probably could have (and I think they should have) just made a modified version of the Mennekes type-2 connector (adding body colored paint, the RFID thumb switch, upping the power capability, etc) that would still be compatible with the existing standard.

If you ask me this new Tesla plug looks inspired by Mennekes anyway. Similar basic shape, similar locking mechanism, just missing L3 and neutral.

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2853&d=1317581804http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2854&d=1317581804
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6152/6204674182_9dde9ed5ae.jpg

[doug]

Here are a couple pics of that dummy/test-box so you can see what the inlet looks like:

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6173/6204239573_d33304e718_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204239573/sizes/z/in/photostream/)
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6153/6204241711_d1211d45c5_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204241711/sizes/z/in/photostream/)

Obviously missing L1 and L2 pins here on this box.

[EV_de]

would it big enough to hold a Mennekes inlet ?

[doug]

would it big enough to hold a Mennekes inlet ?
Don't know, but probably. I don't think the Mennekes inlet is bigger than that translucent ring (probably for LEDs) around the new Tesla inlet. I suppose I should have had a pocket ruler on me for scale when I took photos.

[NigelM]

I thought I heard him say you had to push the button to release the door. Not a big deal to argue about. Though, it kinda makes sense if you don't want the door to be opening everytime you are winding up the cable near the tailight.

With so many people it's always possible that someone erred one way or the other. To be honest, I totally forgot to ask about how the door closes!

[dpeilow]

From Doug's photos.

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6178/6204743328_584f8fbe67_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204743328/in/set-72157627678175337/)


That looks very flimsy to me and something that would break off if someone brushed past or snagged their coat on it in a car park.

[NigelM]

That looks very flimsy to me and something that would break off if someone brushed past or snagged their coat on it in a car park.

The hinge seemed as solid as any other fuel/charge door to me. When closed it sits slightly below the level of the bodywork so shouldn't snag.

[cinergi]

Is Tesla going to provide a way for Roadster owners to convert to the Model S connector? Or perhaps another $750 adapter we have to stuff into the trunk hope no one will steal it while we're charging?

They're still debating what the right thing to do is. IIRC they're leaning towards an adapter for old connector to new (which would have to be short cable with connectors on each end due to the weight of the roadster's connector).

Edit: And I see other folks here heard different stories; I'm either not remembering correctly or it's REALLY still under debate :smile:

[cinergi]

Will Model S owners have to pay a monthly subscription fee to use the QC stations?

Still under debate. The engineer then asked us what we'd prefer. There was a mix of answers of course. (monthly, per-use, ...)

[doug]

An adapter for CHAdeMO would need to incorporate some active electronics to translate the signaling.

[William13]

The battery engineer was aware of the need for electronics/ software need for CHAdeMO adapter and wants to make one but was unsure if they could do one that is UL approved but indicated that owners might buy grey market adapters.

[TEG]

Did anyone get pictures or the size of this 90 kW charging station? I understand there was one there refilling the test drive cars.
It was specifically out of public view, and I was told it was a prototype with no case so wasn't meant to be seen by anyone.
They don't have anything ready to show with regards to DC charging yet.

[NigelM]

It was specifically out of public view, and I was told it was a prototype with no case so wasn't meant to be seen by anyone.
They don't have anything ready to show with regards to DC charging yet.

Ditto. But it was confirmed to me that it would be half the size of the Roadster HPC.

[TEG]

People I talked to seemed down on CHAdeMO thinking it will be a short term solution and they questioned if they would "bother" making an adapter to it.
Also, indications of the SAE being too slow so they had to do something on their own.

Perhaps given all the other pictures, this is redundant, but I took this today:
http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x453/tgriner2/socket1.jpg
I measured the size and it is roughly 35mm in diameter... (Slightly oval so a hair wider in one direction and a hair more narrow in the other.)
Many people were remarking that the UMC2.0 cable was very thin for something that could carry 40amps. All I could really get from them is that they said they worked on reducing the insulation to the bare minimum where some other cables are overly fat because they have more insulation than they need.

So that socket can be use all these ways:
#1: With UMC2.0 up to 40amps from all the usual household sockets. (NEMA5-15, 14-50, etc.) (9.6kW)
#2: With a small adapter (not needing UMC) from Tesla to J1772 (up to 70amps/17kW)
#3: From home HPC up to 80A. (20kW)
#4: From a DC fast charger up to 90kW.
Note, DC fast charger is purported to take 3 phase AC input, normally 440/480V, but it might accept other voltages.

I was told that fast charging is not as nice to the batteries, so they would recommend against using it unless you must.

Also, base model will have one 10kW charger included, and a second could be added as an option for 20kW (up to 80A) charging for those that need it.

A good fraction of customers could probably get by with just the 10kW and UMC2 for home charging.

Also, mainly for DPeilow :
The one or two 10kW's are positioned under the rear seat and if you have two then you have used up all the space.
Basically if/when they decide to have a 3phase input, it would likely be a whole different charger, not 3 of the 10kW.
Someone basically said doing 3 10kW would be poor integration and it would make more sense to put one larger 3 phase in place of the 2 10kW units.
And none of this was a confirmation or acknowledgement that they are actually committed to doing that... Just that they have been thinking about it.

[vfx]

There were a hundred key Tesla dept. heads answering questions all night. I guess you should have gone.

[TEG]

Ditto. But it was confirmed to me that it would be half the size of the Roadster HPC.
I think that is in reference to the 17kW home HPC, not the DC quick charger...

[TEG]

There were a hundred key Tesla dept. heads answering questions all night. I guess you should have gone.
Who are you addressing this to? I was there for hours today able to ask questions of all the same people...

By the way, Chris Paine did a Q&A after "Revenge of the Electric Car" last night, and was touring the Tesla factory today.

[TEG]

They're still debating what the right thing to do is. IIRC they're leaning towards an adapter for old connector to new (which would have to be short cable with connectors on each end due to the weight of the roadster's connector).

Edit: And I see other folks here heard different stories; I'm either not remembering correctly or it's REALLY still under debate :smile:
I heard the same as you. Basically that they haven't finalized what exactly to do. Along with everything else, I heard repeatedly "we won't abandon Roadster owners."
& "We know a lot of Model S customers already have Roadsters."

[TEG]

With so many people it's always possible that someone erred one way or the other. To be honest, I totally forgot to ask about how the door closes!
Best I could see was that it is intended to automatically pop open like a gas door would, then you manually push it closed when done.
I was actually thankful it looked simple not some sort of motorized robot arm. I am still thinking the motorized door handles are a bit much and could be subject to reliability concerns.
Someone said there was a menu item on the touch screen to open the charge port door, so you could do it without getting next to it if you needed.

[TEG]

Well it is amazingly small for a 90kW connector.

What is the trefoil slot for? Purely guidance and keying, or are there connectors in there?...
Seems to be purely for guidance / keying with no sign it has any other purpose.

The bottom of the plug has a notch where the car will grab into it whenever you lock the doors.
http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x453/tgriner2/socket4.jpg

Also you may notice two small 'nubs' in the center of the L1/L2 hots.
Those are to keep fingers from getting into the holes. The pins must have a small hole in the center so that only they are able to insert.

[TEG]

Another pictures of the socket (with missing pins):
http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x453/tgriner2/socket3.jpg

And the label on the bottom of the UMC2:
http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x453/tgriner2/umc2a.jpg
By the way someone said that people tend to mistakenly assume that some NEC regulations would apply to the UMC, but they don't...

[vfx]

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6178/6204743328_584f8fbe67_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/26339101@N07/6204743328/in/set-72157627678175337/)


When the latch is released the door slowly and softly opens like a car radio cover. Use your hand )or fingers) to latch it close.

I shot video of this door but it's not too scintillating.

[doug]

Also you may notice two small 'nubs' in the center of the L1/L2 hots.
Those are to keep fingers from getting into the holes. The pins must have a small hole in the center so that only they are able to insert.

Only the tip is dielectric. The rest of that center pin adds conductive surface area.

[vfx]

http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x453/tgriner2/socket4.jpg

Also you may notice two small 'nubs' in the center of the L1/L2 hots.
Those are to keep fingers from getting into the holes. The pins must have a small hole in the center so that only they are able to insert.

Actually those pins are to give a greater contact surface area in the smaller diameter.

[TEG]

I was told specifically that they were for safety.
Perhaps they add surface area and finger safety both...

[doug]

Basically if/when they decide to have a 3phase input, it would likely be a whole different charger, not 3 of the 10kW.
Someone basically said doing 3 10kW would be poor integration and it would make more sense to put one larger 3 phase in place of the 2 10kW units.
Sure it makes more sense to have dedicated 3 phase charger, but of course the connector they've shown won't support it.

[Doug_G]

Still under debate. The engineer then asked us what we'd prefer. There was a mix of answers of course. (monthly, per-use, ...)

Well I hope if it's subscription that they also have one-off pricing. I don't do a road trip every month...

[cinergi]

Ditto. But it was confirmed to me that it would be half the size of the Roadster HPC.

I think you're talking about the new HPC, not the DC QC station ... ?

[cinergi]

#3: From home HPC up to 70A. (17kW)


The new HPC delivers up to 80A.

[Citizen-T]

Lets hope you are right that the reason is that they have something better. But keeping it proprietary would be a shame as a shared charging infrastructure can help more broad acceptance of EVs. One thing going for gas stations is you know the nozzle will fit your gas car no matter which station you happen to use. As it is now with EV charging, we have small paddle, Avcon, J1772, Tesla connectors, CHAdeMO, and such spread around. I have already seen some Leaf's pull up to the local Fry's electronics having found a charge spot on their map only to realize there are small paddle and Avcon there and no J1772. I have seen Teslas parked in small paddle spots that are marked "EV only" thus denying a Rav4EV a chance to charge. I really think we need to get standardized on one plug for everyone. If Tesla were to offer charging stations with > 20kW what socket would they use? CHAdeMO? New SAE? IEC 3phase? And to add to the above we have different vendors trying to introduce RFID card controls on their EVSEs, so there doesn't appear to be a standard there either. I will need to have a Chargpoint account and RFID card, as well as a Blink account/card, and who knows what else in future to be able to use the different charging locations.
http://www.autonews.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20110601/OEM01/110609983/1179
Is that a suggestion that they plan to have company operated charging locations? Would they allow non Tesla cars to charge there too? Hopefully charging infrastructure is viewed as an industry wide effort, not something proprietary to each company.

The market will sort it out. We'll have a standard. The winner sets the standard.

[hcsharp]

It sounds like a great connector. The question is can they either (a) make it an open, industry standard widely adopted by other automakers or (b) build and maintain their own international charging infrastructure capable of supporting a successful line of mass-market electric vehicles?
Why would they have to do either one? Doesn't a simple adapter answer this question? Am I missing something?


Will there be a reasonably-priced conversion path for Roadster owners? If not, will they also abandon the Model S owners when the next, cheaper, higher production car comes out?
Have they EVER had a reasonably priced accessory or adapter for Roadster owners?


How do they propose to compete against electric vehicles which have convenient, native access to pervasive charging infrastructure built on equipment produced by a large number of vendors forced by competition to offer low-priced, high-quality stations?
They're going to compete by using the aforementioned adapter. But frankly, J-1772 is a bad design! That's why Tesla opted not to use it. And that's how they will compete - by providing a better solution. It's downwardly compatible with J-1772 with a simple adapter.


What happens to Tesla's proprietary strategy when Nissan comes out with an all-electric Infinity sedan that competes head-to-head with the new car from that wacky little car company in California?
If I were a Tesla salesperson, I would love this question. "How long will you have to wait for that Infinity old-technology car to charge when it's limited to 75A? "If you buy a Model S, you can use Tesla's network of Fast Chargers and be back on the road in a third as much time. "Oh, and by the way, you can always use the old-fashioned J-1772 network that Infinity uses if you don't mind waiting around while you charge..."


Doing their own thing with a seemingly superior connector is a bold move. I expect Tesla will continue to show the world how to build an awesome electric vehicle, and creating a great connector could be a big win for leadership, but taking on yet another proprietary charging standard adds to the number of barriers to their eventual success in the marketplace.
Well said. Bold is the right word.

[hcsharp]

Sure it makes more sense to have dedicated 3 phase charger, but of course the connector they've shown won't support it.
Presumably they will have a different connector for the European spec models. I doubt it will be Mennekes. Although that is a better design than J-1772 IMHO, no one has approved it for more than 63A at this point.

It shouldn't be long before they have the 3-ph charger because it shouldn't be very hard to design and build such an animal. Maybe there's something I'm not aware of.

[W.Petefish]

The answer to 3 phase is a blunt no. BUT, if it is converted to DC off of the car you could do 3 phase.

[dpeilow]

Yeah I'm skeptical that the 90 kW DC charger could be made half the size of the Roadster HPC when Nissan's are the size of a gas pump. There's a lot of rectifier electronics to stuff in there. The contactor in the Roadster HPC takes up half that unit.

Regarding CHAdeMO being a stop-gap solution: Have they not seen the press release from Nissan about rolling out 20,000 across Europe in the next 3 years? I'd rather have access to a nearby handy 50 kW charger than go without, thanks.

[vfx]

I was told specifically that they were for safety.
Perhaps they add surface area and finger safety both...

Beer commercial?

[gg_got_a_tesla]

One tidbit I got from one of the battery engineers (while within earshot of TEG who was busy messing with the charger!) was that Tesla is designing their own home charging station and is going to seek a partner for installations nationwide within the US! The partner may not be SolarCity who don't have as wide a presence as Tesla would like.

The station would be compact/sleek/cool (or some similar adjectives that he used that I can't recall now) but, if one has an older installation already (J1772), then, they'd have to go the adapter route.

[Kipernicus]

Wait why would we need a charging station? I thought the new plug handled all that. In fact, I asked someone in the tent who was demonstrating the new cable if I just needed an extra 240v outlet or if I would need to install some sort of box and she said no, just this cable and an extra outlet. I'm pretty confused (and a newb).

[gg_got_a_tesla]

Wait why would we need a charging station? I thought the new plug handled all that. In fact, I asked someone in the tent who was demonstrating the new cable if I just needed an extra 240v outlet or if I would need to install some sort of box and she said no, just this cable and an extra outlet. I'm pretty confused (and a newb).

Hmm... pardon my ignorance then. I'm a newb to the battery and charging situation too. But, that's what he said or I heard :(

[cinergi]

It's the same options as the roadster, just sleeker; There's a UMC -- which is what you saw, and there's a new HPC that's permanently installed and provides twice the power of the UMC. Either may be used. Most people probably don't need the HPC.

[Kevin Sharpe]

Regarding CHAdeMO being a stop-gap solution: Have they not seen the press release from Nissan about rolling out 20,000 across Europe in the next 3 years? I'd rather have access to a nearby handy 50 kW charger than go without, thanks.I think Tesla profoundly miss-understand the reality on the ground in Europe. In the next few years we will have blanket coverage of "mennekes" Charging Stations (many 44kW) and large numbers of CHAdeMO Chargers that are in daily use by ALL of their competitors.

It will be extremely difficult to construct a workable business model for Tesla's proprietary solution and I seriously doubt that they can finance a usable QC network here.

[NigelM]

Yeah I'm skeptical that the 90 kW DC charger could be made half the size of the Roadster HPC when Nissan's are the size of a gas pump. There's a lot of rectifier electronics to stuff in there.

You know lots more about the technical aspects than me, but just wanted to confirm that I heard the "half the size of the existing HPC" comment from several people including one of the hardware engineers. (Sorry I didn't ask him more technical questions).

[TEG]

But are you sure they were talking about the 90kW high speed DC charger, not the 20kW "HPC 2.0" (my term) ?

In case it isn't clear, they will basically have 3 types of equipment for charging:
#1: The hand held UMC2.0 we have seen so many pictures of recently (~10kW AC).
#2: The wall mount HPC2.0 (my term) that looks like a bigger version of the UMC, hangs on a wall, and offers ~20kW AC capability.
#3: The higher voltage, high speed 90kW DC charger primarily intended for public locations (not home use) which is the item whose size is being debated.

[NigelM]

Aah, you're probably right. HPC 2.0 is a good way to describe it. I was talking to Tesla folk purely about what will go in my garage.

[gg_got_a_tesla]

Aah, you're probably right. HPC 2.0 is a good way to describe it. I was talking to Tesla folk purely about what will go in my garage.

Ah, yes, that makes it clear for me too. The battery engineer was talking about a sleek, gadgety "HPC 2.0" for a garage installation. Thanks, TEG, for being on top of things as always!

[TEG]

Something they could do, but probably shouldn't:
---
Given that the tail lights are symmetrical, and it looks like the right side also has a triangle shape that could be another flap, they could put a socket on both sides. Also they plan to offer the car with 2 separate chargers inside. So they could run each socket separately to its' own charger, and charge from two different cables at the same time.

Why this would be a good idea?:
#1: Most of the public AC infrastructure is J1772 at up to 30amps. That doesn't even take full advantage of one Tesla 40amp charger module.
So, if you plugged in two J cables at once, and had two chargers, you could get 60amp charging (2x speed) compared to what you would get with only one socket (even if you had 2 chargers.)
#2: The model S is wide enough that you may have trouble fitting in a narrow parking space / charge spot. It would be tempting to overlap two spaces anyways.

Why shouldn't they do this?
#1: Using 2 charging stations at once might be considered anti-social. (Although if you have a note saying someone can unplug one if they need it...)
#2: Using 2 parking spaces at once would be considered anti-social.

http://images.cheezburger.com/completestore/2009/8/22/128954400042863406.jpg

By the way, the Model S is said to lock the Tesla plug to the socket when the doors are locked. But for J1772 charging I think it would just lock the adapter module to the socket, and someone could still (theoretically) unplug the J-plug from the adapter if they needed to charge a different vehicle.

[vfx]

...and there's a new HPC that's permanently installed and provides twice the power of the UMC....

Anyone get a shot of it? Battery guy said it is half the size of the current HPC. They were charging the drive cars with them.

[vfx]

...
By the way, the Model S is said to lock the Tesla plug to the socket when the doors are locked. But for J1772 charging I think it would just lock the adapter module to the socket, and someone could still (theoretically) unplug the J-plug from the adapter if they needed to charge a different vehicle.

Yes, I was just pointing out that your easily pocketable Tesla 2.0 plug to J adapter would be safe from grabbing.

[TEG]

Anyone get a shot of it? Battery guy said it is half the size of the current HPC. They were charging the drive cars with them.
I was told that it was not being displayed, but that a prototype could be seen in the background of the video that played behind the "8 people get out of one S" event. Unfortunately my view of the screen was obstructed, so I didn't catch it. When people watch various views of that video perhaps they can look to see if they spot it.

I don't think they were using the HPC2.0 to charge the ride event cars. I was told twice that they were using a prototype 90kW high speed DC charger which makes sense given how many rides they were offering and only with 2 or 3 cars at a time. I heard them send away one of the cars once to drive around back of the facility (somewhere) to get recharged.

[Doug_G]

It's the same options as the roadster, just sleeker; There's a UMC -- which is what you saw, and there's a new HPC that's permanently installed and provides twice the power of the UMC. Either may be used. Most people probably don't need the HPC.

The HPC will be an expensive option because it will also require the second in-car charger. That second charger will only be useful for HPC and for high-power J1772, since the fast DC charging won't need it.

[dsm363]

The HPC will be an expensive option because it will also require the second in-car charger. That second charger will only be useful for HPC and for high-power J1772, since the fast DC charging won't need it.
Won't the car have the second in-car charger even if you don't get the HPC?

[Doug_G]

Won't the car have the second in-car charger even if you don't get the HPC?

No, it is optional.

[dsm363]

The Signature is supposed to be 'fully loaded' so hopefully it's included. Would be nice to take advantage of a 75A J1772 charger that's being installed in Austin.

[Doug_G]

The Signature is supposed to be 'fully loaded' so hopefully it's included. Would be nice to take advantage of a 75A J1772 charger that's being installed in Austin.

Good point...

[Norbert]

(Another) close-up of the connector:

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2911

SAE's stated goal was to create a connector that requires only one plug for both AC and DC charging. For very similar reasons, a smaller and simpler plug should be more practical and preferrable.

[Lloyd]

Here's a question I could not get answered while on the tour: At the completion end of the production line there were a series of EVSE's with regular Roadster connectors. These were the regular Tesla HP-70's wth the roadster connection attached. With the new Model S connector introduced "Why were Roadster connectors installed in the Model S factory ?"

[TEG]

The Alpha prototypes they had been running around the test track outside definitely had Roadster type sockets for recharging.

Also, I think that new connector may be very new, and might not even be in the betas yet.
I asked a couple people if they could open the charge door on the betas and was denied.
Did anyone actually see a new style socket with pins in it? The only socket I was was in the test box, and it was missing power pins.
Perhaps the betas still have a Roadster socket, or a direct DC for QC in them right now.
For that matter, did anyone actually see any of the 10kW charger boxes? They were absent from all the components I saw around the building. It seems like they opened up and exposed just about everything else in the car except the charging circuits.

[TEG]

(Another) close-up of the connector:

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2911

http://www.hecklerspray.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/walle_20080626112252-300x2951.jpg

[TEG]

...SAE's stated goal was to create a connector that requires only one plug for both AC and DC charging. For very similar reasons, a smaller and simpler plug should be more practical and preferrable.

Let's say for instance that Tesla offered the SAE their new system as an open standard...(unlikely)
Would SAE accept it, embrace it and promote it?...(unlikely I think)

Even if it were just about "what is the best technology", I think different entities want to "own" it for licensing and competitive reasons.
The SAE proposal, as ugly, big, and not-yet available as it is does have a benefit that the socket can accept a J-1772 plug for AC charging without any adapter. For that reason alone some may prefer it.

No question the Tesla solution is more comfortable, stylish, & portable, but beyond that you could start to argue merits in different directions.

[Norbert]

Let's say for instance that Tesla offered the SAE their new system as an open standard...(unlikely)
Would SAE accept it, embrace it and promote it?...(unlikely I think)

Make a photo of it next to the J1772+DC combo plug, which one would people prefer as customers/users?
Tesla's? Likely.
Does it matter? Yes. ;)

[tomsax]

The HPC will be an expensive option because it will also require the second in-car charger. That second charger will only be useful for HPC and for high-power J1772, since the fast DC charging won't need it.

I think 10 kW charging at home is plenty, buying an HPC for home is just silly for most people. We've had one for over two years and 23,000 miles and I've never used it to charge our Roadster above 40A (except for measuring charging efficiency). Away from home is completely different. I've charged at 70A plenty of times on the road, and we've let other Roadster owners passing through town use our garage as a charging station.

If I were buying a Model S, I'd skip the HPC but would get the dual chargers for road trips.

[tomsax]

It sounds like a great connector. The question is can they either (a) make it an open, industry standard widely adopted by other automakers or (b) build and maintain their own international charging infrastructure capable of supporting a successful line of mass-market electric vehicles?
Why would they have to do either one? Doesn't a simple adapter answer this question? Am I missing something?

Tesla has a pretty good story on J1772 compatibility, but not for quick charging. I don't see how they can outbuild CHAdeMO (or the SAE standard if that takes off).


Have they EVER had a reasonably priced accessory or adapter for Roadster owners?

Good point.




What happens to Tesla's proprietary strategy when Nissan comes out with an all-electric Infinity sedan that competes head-to-head with the new car from that wacky little car company in California?
If I were a Tesla salesperson, I would love this question. "How long will you have to wait for that Infinity old-technology car to charge when it's limited to 75A? "If you buy a Model S, you can use Tesla's network of Fast Chargers and be back on the road in a third as much time. "Oh, and by the way, you can always use the old-fashioned J-1772 network that Infinity uses if you don't mind waiting around while you charge..."

An Infinity sedan would presumably support CHAdeMO. It's not clear to me that DC Quick Charging will ever happen, but I'll bet it happens first with whatever standard the early market leaders use. There are already 6,500 LEAFs in the US, most with CHAdeMO ports. The only thing that's going to derail CHAdeMO is other automakers gaining larger market share with a different standard. Nissan is set up to start producing 140,000 LEAFs annually, starting next year, all with CHAdeMO ports. I don't think Nissan will be standing still while Tesla gets Model S production started.

[Doug_G]

If I were buying a Model S, I'd skip the HPC but would get the dual chargers for road trips.

Hopefully it will be standard on the Sig, as it would be handy for high power J1772, but it's not clear at this point how often I'd get to use it. We don't have the HPCs rolled out here like you do. It's very early days here for J1772, and I'm not aware of any that are high power. I expect on the road I'll be mostly using Tesla DC fast chargers and NEMA 14-50.

[vfx]

An Infinity sedan would presumably support CHAdeMO.....

The images we saw had an outline with a similar shape to the Leaf on the front.

[TEG]

...An Infinity sedan would presumably support CHAdeMO. It's not clear to me that DC Quick Charging will ever happen, but I'll bet it happens first with whatever standard the early market leaders use. There are already 6,500 LEAFs in the US, most with CHAdeMO ports. The only thing that's going to derail CHAdeMO is other automakers gaining larger market share with a different standard. Nissan is set up to start producing 140,000 LEAFs annually, starting next year, all with CHAdeMO ports. I don't think Nissan will be standing still while Tesla gets Model S production started.

Paraphrasing Ghosn in "Revenge of the Electric Car": "I KNOW that we are in the lead."
Basically I gathered that they are not afraid to blaze their own trail here. Not needing to wait and see what others are thinking of doing.
I don't think they view Tesla as a major concern for their volume strategy. They have deeper pockets than Tesla if they want to make an infrastructure roll-out happen.
Also, I think they have some others Japanese car companies who would be willing to collaborate, such as Mitsubishi.

What may be more interesting is to see what Toyota does. Would they dare put a CHAdeMO+J1772 on the production RAV4EV? Or would it be assumed to be a Tesla connector?

[stopcrazypp]

What may be more interesting is to see what Toyota does. Would they dare put a CHAdeMO+J1772 on the production RAV4EV? Or would it be assumed to be a Tesla connector?
Toyota joined CHAdeMO last year. So you can expect them to support it along with the other members (Nissan, Mitsubishi, Subaru, TEPCO).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHAdeMO

[cinergi]

Anyone get a shot of it? Battery guy said it is half the size of the current HPC. They were charging the drive cars with them.

I saw it in person. It's small. WAY smaller than the old HPC (as in 1/3 the size, not 1/2 ... 1/3) And way better looking. They did a nice job with it.

[Kevin Sharpe]

Tesla has a pretty good story on J1772 compatibility, but not for quick charging. I don't see how they can outbuild CHAdeMO (or the SAE standard if that takes off).I fully agree... indeed, I suspect that Tesla may have exposed it's achilles heel with it's proprietary quick charging strategy. In Europe we are going to have large numbers of cars using national trunk networks of CHAdeMO while the Tesla is restricted to charging at 32A (and in some cases 63A) single phase "mennekes" or the 70A HPC network.

IMO this quick charge strategy has removed a large number of people who were lined up to buy the car here.

[Norbert]

That sounds like quite a change of mind about CHAdeMO. Just a few months ago the question seemed to be whether there would be any worth talking about.

[VolkerP]

Make a photo of it next to the J1772+DC combo plug, which one would people prefer as customers/users?

It's like the beauty and the beast. Or Apple vs PC. Or MagSafe vs HDMI.

http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6152/6204674182_9dde9ed5ae_z.jpghttp://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x453/tgriner2/mennekes-vs-sae-combo.jpg

I'm sure if you enter a bank with a SAE plug in your hand, security personnel would open fire in defense, or at least "taser" you to smithereens - before you could even say "somebody vandalized your charge point".

[jcstp]

I saw it in person. It's small. WAY smaller than the old HPC (as in 1/3 the size, not 1/2 ... 1/3) And way better looking. They did a nice job with it.
http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2919http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/6456-Photos-from-Sunday-October-2-2011-%28Model-S-event%29?p=85189

[VolkerP]

Suggestion to Tesla:

1) refit the Roadster PEM with that charge port
2) roll out HPC 2.0 and UMC 2.0
3) offer the PEM as a free upgrade for all Roadster owners
4) swap cables, UMC 1.x and HPC 1.0 of existing owners.
5) get the first 100 of the 90kW DC chargers out of the door ASAP, be it prototype or sleek & sexy looking.
6) set up a program to upgrade existing HPC installations along highways to DC chargers

Benefits
+ you just added ~900 cars in U.S to use that new infrastructure. This helps solving the chicken-egg-problem a good deal
+ bold move to show support of the existing customer base
+ make the Roadster's charging devices not look like yesterday's tech
+ give back credibility to Tesla as there was nearly no public support J1772 for the Roadster

the drawbacks are obvious
- need cash
- need additional engineering time for the revised PEM

[TEG]

As I started reading your suggestion, I started thinking "not gonna happen..."
But after I got to the end I started to think it made some sense.
Model S customers would probably appreciate seeing some public infrastructure in place before the cars rather than after.
If they could start that off with Roadsters it might be a good way to show that adoption of the new plug/socket is starting.
Better to see people actually using it instead of some empty parking spaces until the new cars show up.

Upgrading everyone for free? Umm., I think it might work better for them if they charged for the upgrade.
They don't need everyone to change to show off that it is possible.

Oh, by the way, it is starting to make more sense why Tesla seemed reluctant to endorse a J1772 socket as a Roadster upgrade.
Now we know they have a different option, which would likely be preferable to them instead of the SAE J...

[dpeilow]

Still amazed that Tesla logos and signatures showed up on SAE and Mennekes presentations though.

I can understand not endorsing that horrid SAE DC connector mess but the Mennekes design is virtually there already (just needs to be Teslarized and have some spangly red plastic added).

[widodh]

Still amazed that Tesla logos and signatures showed up on SAE and Mennekes presentations though.

I can understand not endorsing that horrid SAE DC connector mess but the Mennekes design is virtually there already (just needs to be Teslarized and have some spangly red plastic added).I still think the Mennekes connector is superior. I don't think a lot of people had their hands on one, but it is really a small sized really well designed connector.

It is not that bigger than Tesla's new connector.

To EV_de, just adding a third pin might give you true three phase, but IF they choose to support three phase, it will probably be three seperate chargers each drawing from a phase instead of one charger doing true three phase.

You could than also connect these chargers to one phase and draw a big load on one phase. Still dont get why they didnt do that... There is already space for 2x 10kW, why not make room for a third... Well, we are starting to repeat again here..

[Eberhard]

The Mennekes has one big problem. it's not rated for more then 200A. That's what you will need to charge with at least 90kW.

[VolkerP]

The Mennekes has one big problem. it's not rated for more then 200A. That's what you will need to charge with at least 90kW.

Ah, yes. It's becoming clear to me why Tesla designed their own connector for the 90kW DC fast charge. They committed to charge to 80% SoC in 45 minutes. As standards didn't evolve quickly enough, and as cheap & powerful EVSEs weren't available/rolled out, apparently there was a point in time when the decision had to be made to do it with a proprietary connector and Tesla-built DC fast charger.

There really should be an additional connector pin and a 3phase on board charging unit for the EU Model S. Otherwise, Tesla has effectively denied standard Model S from AC high power charging at outlets of drehstromkiste (DE), zero carbon network (UK), TEXX Energy (CH), N-Laad (NL), RWE (DE) and others across the continent. Even the first country wide HPC network in UK is only half potential for base equipped Model S. AC home charging at 240V 80amps must be derated to 32A, 7.7kW.

What a bummer.

[Eberhard]

I think, that it is possible to upgrade the Mennekes to higher current without changing the size of the plug. Using longer pins etc. I saw the 10kW charger and the plugs. Its really well integrated into a nice overall concept.

[Lloyd]

Eberhard,

Do you think it is possible to merge Tesla's concept for charging location, size, etc. for the model S with a workable 3 phase Mennekes plug that everyone will be happy with?

[dpeilow]

Three chargers connected in delta configuration would work with EV_de's proposal I think(?)

[TEG]

They still have the option of using the other flap on the other side of the car. Perhaps an EU option could be a separate 3-phase input so you keep the new single phase UMC2 compatible socket on one side, and switch to using a Mennekes adapter through a 3 phase socket on the other side of the car when needed?

[Eberhard]

that's what i tried to convince JB Straubel and George Blankenship for. They are very focused what the best fit for tesla but deny the need for 3-phase because of cost and weight. They think, even one onboard charger with 10kW may enough, if fast charging is available. They offer the second onboard charger only because the HPC and J1772 are already out and to make use of it.

[TEG]

I saw the 10kW charger...
Where did you see that? Was it on display somewhere at the factory, and I missed it?

[donauker]

Are the 10kW chargers air cooled?

[TEG]

that's what i tried to convince JB Straubel and George Blankenship for. They are very focused what the best fit for tesla but deny the need for 3-phase because of cost and weight. They think, even one onboard charger with 10kW may enough, if fast charging is available. They offer the second onboard charger only because the HPC and J1772 are already out and to make use of it.

I got that message from a few different people there:
"People think they need more power than they actually do."
I think this is based on the disconnect they see from people saying they want a 70amp+ HPC, then find their data says most people are charging slowly at night for most of their charging. Also, most people probably overestimate how much daily driving they actually do.
You guys who do the routine cross country road-trips are probably the (vocal) exception that doesn't fit their "typical customer" model they get from their data.

I probably fit their stereotypical customer better - I do almost 100% charging at night at home slowly, and rarely take a long trip. I am fine with low(ish) power home charging, but want the fastest charging when trying to do a long trip in one day. So, yeah, DC fast charge at freeway rest stops, and 10kW is plenty fine for home / night. They may think 3-phase isn't so important since it is requested for home/night charging where one phase is probably enough, but they aren't addressing the long trip opportunistic charging that has 3 phase sockets available, and no Tesla DC QC stations nearby. They could ignore the 3-phase and think they will put Tesla DC QCs around important places, but that puts a big burden on them to deploy enough of their external chargers so that people can go where they want and stop feeling like they needed the 3-phase. Plus, we are back to the concept that they want to avoid putting much weight in the car.

[cinergi]

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2919http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/6456-Photos-from-Sunday-October-2-2011-%28Model-S-event%29?p=85189

I wasn't talking about the connector. I'm talking about the box on the wall for the *HPC* (nothing to do with the UMC, the cable, or the connector).
AFAIK, no pictures of that have been released.

[dpeilow]

If they are basing these assumptions on the data connected from Roadsters I think they are kidding themselves.

Sure, some people (here) use them as every day cars, but I bet a lot of them are weekend play-things.

[TEG]

I saw it in person. It's small. WAY smaller than the old HPC (as in 1/3 the size, not 1/2 ... 1/3) And way better looking. They did a nice job with it.
Where did you see it? Was there a 'back room' at the factory where selected people got to see a bit more of the really new stuff?

AFAIK, no pictures of that have been released.
Someone told me there was a brief glimpse of it in the video presentation on the screen behind the S stage. I didn't notice it, but my view was very obstructed.

[TEG]

If they are basing these assumptions on the data connected from Roadsters I think they are kidding themselves.
Sure, some people (here) use them as every day cars, but I bet a lot of them are weekend play-things.
I think the attitude of "people say stuff, but the data doesn't lie" was pervasive.
Designing based on an average, or lowest common denominator could be risky, as could assuming that S will be used just like Roadster.
But, I assume they are smarter than that, and have really thought this stuff through.

[NigelM]

If they are basing these assumptions on the data connected from Roadsters I think they are kidding themselves.

Sure, some people (here) use them as every day cars, but I bet a lot of them are weekend play-things.

IMO, David is right. I do use my Roadster as an everyday car (it's also a weekend toy!) but we also have an ICE family car and that's the one used for family trips, airport runs, cross-state trips etc. We will use the Model S (our ICE replacement) in a very different way to the Roadster and I'm sure that will result in very different charging habits.

[Kevin Sharpe]

That sounds like quite a change of mind about CHAdeMO. Just a few months ago the question seemed to be whether there would be any worth talking about.While I dislike CHAdeMO the reality today is that Nissan have committed to deploy large numbers in the UK and we even have groups of Leaf owners planning to purchase quick charge stations to help build a network.

The problem with Tesla's proprietary approach is that they must build a network from the ground up and it will only be useful to Model S owners. It's going to be tough convincing sites to deploy Tesla chargers because they will only have the occasional visitor whereas a CHAdeMO/mennekes site could see thousands of visitors.

[cinergi]

Where did you see it? Was there a 'back room' at the factory where selected people got to see a bit more of the really new stuff?

At the Deer Creek facility.

[dpeilow]

While I dislike CHAdeMO the reality today is that Nissan have committed to deploy large numbers in the UK

Not just the UK but 20000 across Europe. They are encouraging and facilitating this rather than committing their own cash.

While I can just about arm-twist hotels into installing a wall mounted connector that takes 17kW from their supply, getting them to install dedicated Tesla charging hardware alongside the CHAdeMO or Chargemaster post when it probably requires an entirely new incoming supply and large civil works is a whole different ball game.

I dislike CHAdeMO as a solution as well, but I think in the last month the balance has shifted towards it. It looks like by stealing a march on everyone else, Nissan may well get it established as the de facto level 3 standard.

[Kevin Sharpe]

If they are basing these assumptions on the data connected from Roadsters I think they are kidding themselves.I agree.... for the model S to be successful in the UK it must replace the family ICE car. Without a national fast charge network the model S will be limited to ~200 motorway miles when loaded with a family, and IMO no family is going to wait for hours on end while the car charges on 1-Phase AC.

If the Model S supported CHAdeMO and 3-Phase when released it would be able to undertake long distance travel in the UK and support driving in Mainland Europe. Both of these are requirements for a ICE replacement in the UK.

[dpeilow]

Also driving 200+ miles for a 2 hour meeting is not that uncommon. If Tesla are going to capture this market then such drivers need to be able to call into any location for lunch and replace those miles. 7kW charging isn't going to cut it in that scenario, but if Nissan's scheme works then there will be CHAdeMOs in every town.

[dsm363]

Could the Model S possibly use the CHAdeMO with an adapter?

[Kevin Sharpe]

Could the Model S possibly use the CHAdeMO with an adapter?yes, but you'd only get 32A or 63A 1-Phase **ignore this statement, I read CHAdeMO as mennekes :redface:

I think a CHAdeMO adapter will violate European 'standards'

[donauker]

Could the Model S possibly use the CHAdeMO with an adapter?

Should certainly be possible, and it sounds like an item of significant value.

[donauker]

yes, but you'd only get 32A or 63A 1-Phase

How does this relate to DC charging?

[Kevin Sharpe]

How does this relate to DC charging?see above....

[TEG]

Could the Model S possibly use the CHAdeMO with an adapter?

When I asked, TM staff seemed non-committal, almost dismissive about that.
Also mentioning that the signaling is very different. It would likely involve a lot more than just a physical adapter to get from CHAdeMO socket to Tesla plug. Probably need a full computer in-between to translate (for lack of a better explanation) CHAdeMO language to Tesla language of charging control.

[EV_de]

CHAdeMOs are not the way it will work ... CHAdeMOs will build only along Motorways / Autobahn.

Usually I do not stop there to fill up my ICE, cause it is too expensive, the same will happen with the CHAdeMOs ...

BUT a 3p 16A or even a 3p 32A Socket i can find almost everywhere ... cause they already there ...

[donauker]

When I asked, TM staff seemed non-committal, almost dismissive about that.
Also mentioning that the signaling is very different. It would likely involve a lot more than just a physical adapter to get from CHAdeMO socket to Tesla plug. Probably need a full computer in-between to translate (for lack of a better explanation) CHAdeMO language to Tesla language of charging control.

Probably all true but the computer is really just a few tiny chips nestled in the corner of the connector box. Not unlike the RFMC I use all the time.

[dpeilow]

For computer read PIC controller costing pennies.

What might be more of a problem is the insertion force of the CHAdeMO into and exertion out of a small box or adapter. And live 50kW plugs on the ground.

[Kevin Sharpe]

BUT a 3p 16A or even a 3p 32A Socket i can find almost everywhere ... cause they already there ...you'd be waiting for hours to charge a Model S using this power level.... I just don't see a family doing this after traveling just ~200 miles

[donauker]

For computer read PIC controller costing pennies.

What might be more of a problem is the insertion force of the CHAdeMO into and exertion out of a small box or adapter. And live 50kW plugs on the ground.

I am visualizing a box with a padded back and an appropriately shaped coated hook to slip into those spokes of the back wheel...

[Doug_G]

I think the attitude of "people say stuff, but the data doesn't lie" was pervasive.

That is very wise, in my experience. Most people can't imagine how they would use a new product, and give bogus answers based on past experience that isn't applicable.


Designing based on an average, or lowest common denominator could be risky, as could assuming that S will be used just like Roadster.

Well one would hope they would not blindly follow the data, either. You can't assume the data will remain the same if you change some of the input variables!

My Model S will be used much like my Roadster, only I would take more road trips with it. That's a bias. I would take more road trips with it because it has more trunk capacity, more comfort, more passenger capacity, more range. Also charging infrastructure is currently nonexistent here, and I expect it will get better (fast DC chargers on the 401!).

The data from my Roadster shows that I charge at 40A most of the time. What it won't show is why. It won't show how much I wish I had 70A available (or better) when on road trips. It kinda becomes a self-fulfilling prophesy when the lack of high power charging infrastructure on the road limits the number of high-power charges I do.

As valuable as the Roadster data is, you have to take it with a grain of salt, too. You need to understand why those patterns currently exist, and understand how they will change with a different product.


But, I assume they are smarter than that, and have really thought this stuff through.

They're also extremely busy, and most of them aren't driving an EV daily. It certainly doesn't hurt to express your views.

[TEG]

For computer read PIC controller costing pennies.
Yes, but customized code to speak CHAdeMO costs how much R&D $ ?

[donauker]

Yes, but customized code to speak CHAdeMO costs how much R&D $ ? I suspect this could be handled by some of the owner community. The problem I see is, will the high power Tesla connector be available without buying a $40,000 HPDC charger or will it be possible to upgrade the connector of the UMC to handle 50 kW?

[doug]

Well one would hope they would not blindly follow the data, either. You can't assume the data will remain the same if you change some of the input variables!
Good points.
Two years ago I saw JB give this talk (http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009symposium/presentations/straubel.pdf) during which he showed this slide:

2931

Concluding that most the time spent charging was using the MC120 (now called the spare connector) and thus 120V, 12A was good enough for most folks. Can anyone remember why this data might be biased?

[TEG]

I suspect this could be handled by some of the owner community. The problem I see is, will the high power Tesla connector be available without buying a $40,000 HPDC charger or will it be possible to upgrade the connector of the UMC to handle 50 kW?

Whereas a company might be OK to let various EVSEs plug into their vehicle (for instance "who knows what" could be on the other side of a J1772 adapter), I am thinking they might not be so flexible about external DC chargers going to their pack. With AC, their own charger will handle turning AC into appropriate DC and charging the batteries "safely". If someone manages to "Macguiver" some random off-board DC charger to their charge port, they might be at risk of battery damage if the external charger doesn't behave their same as their own "factory authorized" charger.

[TEG]

Can anyone remember why this data might be biased?
Was there a conclusion before that we are supposed to remember?
Right now I can think of some reasons it might be biased:
#1: Stuck charging off of 120V because the customer was waiting for a MC240 to become available...
#2: Stuck charging off of 120V because the customer was waiting for permits to get an HPC installed...
#3: Stuck charging off of 120V because there were no public HPCs nor J1772s with adapters until very recently.
(I bet the 240V@24A has gone up these days from people using the J1772 cable at public J1772 stations.)

[doug]

Basically #1. Also the HPC which was previously supposed to come with the car got turned into an expensive option.

Would like to see an updated histogram.

[Doug_G]

I suspect a new histogram would be somewhat different. It was almost a year before I even took the cable tie off the spare connnector.

[SByer]

My thoughts:

- CHAdeMO is insufficient for real long term targets (600Mi range, 340Wh/mi for an SUV, target a 30min 80% charge).
- The current connector standards aren't optimal - J1772 really kind of sucks, or at least the plastic-y crap we see now does (and the combo looks just plain stupid), and connecting an adapter cable is nearly no extra work.
- Getting a standard protocol robust enough and cross-tested enough to use the same pins for AC and DC across mfrs. has a snowball's chance in hell.
- Things are still very fluid.

I look at that and say "gee, it'd be nice to have one standard, but it wouldn't let my battery/connector/recharge time stand out".

If you believed that you could always get an adapter down to 1/2 brick sized, and support it and the connector off the side of the car, why wouldn't you go with a new connector as long as things were this fluid?

And, don't forget, the WAF of the Roadster connector is pretty close to zero. CHAdeMO is pretty close to that, J1772 not far behind that. Mennenkes is quite a bit better, but still not really in the same ballpark as that sleek, light Model S connector.

And what if you think that, in 3 years, you could get the cost of an external DC charger down to that of the high-powered on-board AC converters. And the size down to a shoebox. But you can't quite bet on that completely, yet.

I think that Tesla has made a valid, not easily dismissible bet. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

[Norbert]

Yes, given the amazing Tesla connector as an alternative, the reason to use CHAdeMO would be the future network built with Nissan's support, which seem to become a 50 kW network. And while I'm happy for Leaf owners about that, it won't really be the network which Model S and Bluestar owners will want, and I'll just assume that Bluestar will also have a 90 kW ability. That's a major selling point. 50 kW and 90 kW is a significant difference. Since Tesla has already recognized the need to start building the network (at least initially), we at least won't have to wait for others to discover the business model. And with Tesla's larger range, it won't need as many stations, and not necessarily in the same locations.

While CHAdeMO is theoretically capable of more than 50 kW, it seems that would happen only far in the future if at all. (And even if there were select stations with more than 50 kW, they might be frequently occupied by Leafs using them at 50 kW). So the alternative would be SAE DC combo (or Mennekes DC combo), but that's probably still more than a year away from being even agreed upon, and there still aren't any plans announced to actually implement either that or anything else at 90 kW, by the "big three" in Detroit (or any european manufacturer). Of those, Ford is apparently closest to building a pure EV, but we wouldn't know the DC rate it might support, if any, and whether Ford would be willing to support a DC network (one which would be useful to Tesla owners). And after seeing the Tesla connector, I just wouldn't be happy having to use those big combo connectors. One could even argue that if Tesla wants 90 kW (as in: more than 50 kW), which is certainly what I want as a future customer, using some other connector might be helping the future competition more than anyone else, and make things only more difficult (and more expensive) for Tesla, still being a small company.

[Eberhard]

Yes, given the amazing Tesla connector as an alternative, the reason to use CHAdeMO would be the future network built with Nissan's support, which seem to become a 50 kW network. And while I'm happy for Leaf owners about that, it won't really be the network which Model S and Bluestar owners will want, and I'll just assume that Bluestar will also have a 90 kW ability. That's a major selling point. 50 kW and 90 kW is a significant difference. Since Tesla has already recognized the need to start building the network (at least initially), we at least won't have to wait for others to discover the business model. And with Tesla's larger range, it won't need as many stations, and not necessarily in the same locations.

While CHAdeMO is theoretically capable of more than 50 kW, it seems that would happen only far in the future if at all. (And even if there were select stations with more than 50 kW, they might be frequently occupied by Leafs using them at 50 kW). So the alternative would be SAE DC combo (or Mennekes DC combo), but that's probably still more than a year away from being even agreed upon, and there still aren't any plans announced to actually implement either that or anything else at 90 kW, by the "big three" in Detroit (or any european manufacturer). Of those, Ford is apparently closest to building a pure EV, but we wouldn't know the DC rate it might support, if any, and whether Ford would be willing to support a DC network (one which would be useful to Tesla owners). And after seeing the Tesla connector, I just wouldn't be happy having to use those big combo connectors. One could even argue that if Tesla wants 90 kW (as in: more than 50 kW), which is certainly what I want as a future customer, using some other connector might be helping the future competition more than anyone else, and make things only more difficult (and more expensive) for Tesla, still being a small company.
If tesla would offer an external 3-phase 30kW charger for the triple price of the 10kW extra onboard charger option, i will do that.

[jkirkebo]

Yes, given the amazing Tesla connector as an alternative, the reason to use CHAdeMO would be the future network built with Nissan's support, which seem to become a 50 kW network. And while I'm happy for Leaf owners about that, it won't really be the network which Model S and Bluestar owners will want, and I'll just assume that Bluestar will also have a 90 kW ability.

So why not offer CHADeMO as an additional option ? It would not need to be externally accessible, a connector inside the frunk would be fine with me. I'd happily pay $2k for such an option.

Without it I can't see getting a Model S. I seriously doubt Tesla will install a hundred DC chargers in Norway, and without them I'd be limited to 16A charging. No way we go on a road trip and wait 24 hours for a recharge. So it seems the Leaf will eventually be replaced with a Leaf "2.0" and not a Model S :(

[Kevin Sharpe]

So why not offer CHADeMO as an additional option ?I think this is where Tesla have dropped the ball.... the reality in Europe is that a CHAdeMO network is being built and we will have thousands of Tesla competitor cars driving around and using it. I'd much rather work with my Leaf friends on building a mutually beneficial network than try to build a proprietary one for Tesla.


Without it I can't see getting a Model S.I think Tesla have excluded a very large number of potential customers in Europe by removing access to the CHAdeMO fast charge network. For me the Model S would be an ICE replacement and I cannot use it if I can only drive 200 miles with the family and then wait for hours to recharge.

[Norbert]

So why not offer CHADeMO as an additional option ? It would not need to be externally accessible, a connector inside the frunk would be fine with me. I'd happily pay $2k for such an option.

Why do you think there won't be such an option? I was referring to the primary connector. I'd expect that DC doesn't require a conversion, only a translation of signaling, which would require not much more than a small micro-controller, if it can't be done in software, although I wouldn't know what it takes to make CHAdeMO's extra pins happy. It seems to me that the door on the port would allow an additional mechanical connection which would hold a box just large enough for a CHAdeMO plug, and that could be locked to the car.


Without it I can't see getting a Model S. I seriously doubt Tesla will install a hundred DC chargers in Norway, and without them I'd be limited to 16A charging. No way we go on a road trip and wait 24 hours for a recharge. So it seems the Leaf will eventually be replaced with a Leaf "2.0" and not a Model S :(

100 chargers would be $2.5 million at $25,000 each. Not exactly an astronomical sum, however if using $500 per car, it would require selling 5000 Model S or Bluestars, so I wouldn't expect it to happen very quickly. However, on the major highways, it might give you a number of 90 kW chargers sooner than anything else.

[Kevin Sharpe]

And while I'm happy for Leaf owners about that, it won't really be the network which Model S and Bluestar owners will want, and I'll just assume that Bluestar will also have a 90 kW ability. That's a major selling point. 50 kW and 90 kW is a significant difference. Since Tesla has already recognized the need to start building the network (at least initially), we at least won't have to wait for others to discover the business model. And with Tesla's larger range, it won't need as many stations, and not necessarily in the same locations.I agree that CHAdeMO is not the Network that Tesla customers want BUT it will be the network that is actually on the ground in Europe and Tesla should use that to accelerate sales.

I do not believe that Tesla will be able to finance a practicable fast charge network in Europe (probably true of the US as well). I also doubt that many third party sites will spend thousands installing a proprietary solution when for the same (less?) money they will be able to install CHAdeMO that supports thousands (millions?) of cars.

[Norbert]

I also doubt that many third party sites will spend thousands installing a proprietary solution when for the same (less?) money they will be able to install CHAdeMO that supports thousands (millions?) of cars.

A 90 kW charger has the advantage that it can serve more cars in the same time. 50 kW is just a bit slow for long trips, though not impossible. I do agree it would be nice to have a CHAdeMO adapter box, as I wrote above. But with the range of the Model S, and 90 kW chargers on main routes, not many will have to use it very often.

[jkirkebo]

A 90 kW charger has the advantage that it can serve more cars in the same time. 50 kW is just a bit slow for long trips, though not impossible. I do agree it would be nice to have a CHAdeMO adapter box, as I wrote above. But with the range of the Model S, and 90 kW chargers on main routes, not many will have to use it very often.

50kW is ~200mph charge speed. For us that would mean 2 hour drive and 30 min recharge or 4 hour drive and 1 hour recharge. Fine by me, we take such breaks anyway.

[vfx]

There really should be an additional connector pin ...

Any chance at all that Tesla has devised a way of doing this with less pins? Something really clever?

[doug]

They may drag their feet on it, but I'm sure Tesla will make some sort of CHAdeMO adapter. I don't think it will be that hard to translate the signaling, and the PLD or whatever they use can probably fit inside a compact adapter. Though, they'd better reinforce the inlet on the car side to make it robust enough to hold that huge connector (as they should for J1772 and the Roadster connector as well).

Anyone find out how Tesla is doing the signaling for DC charging? Are they reusing the proximity or control pilot pins?

[TEG]

Anyone find out how Tesla is doing the signaling for DC charging? Are they reusing the proximity or control pilot pins?

I asked... They wouldn't say...

[doug]

Tesla's 2012 Model S Charging Equipment. Redesign For Redesign's Sake? (http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1066861_teslas-2012-model-s-charging-equipment-redesign-for-redesigns-sake)

[widodh]

Tesla's 2012 Model S Charging Equipment. Redesign For Redesign's Sake? (http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1066861_teslas-2012-model-s-charging-equipment-redesign-for-redesigns-sake)I like that article!

It's about the same as everybody here has been saying, they might have based it on this topic? ;)

[VolkerP]

Tesla's 2012 Model S Charging Equipment. Redesign For Redesign's Sake? (http://www.greencarreports.com/news/1066861_teslas-2012-model-s-charging-equipment-redesign-for-redesigns-sake)

For those who do need to make use of public charging stations, Tesla has said its system is ‘backwards compatible’, using the same communication protocol between car and charging station as both Chademo and J1772 systems.


Article states that the Model S DC charging protocol is compatible with CHAdeMO. Anybody heard this, too? From which source?

[Norbert]

50kW is ~200mph charge speed. For us that would mean 2 hour drive and 30 min recharge or 4 hour drive and 1 hour recharge. Fine by me, we take such breaks anyway.

Going at 50 mph? At highway speeds, 50 kW is more like 150 mph charging speed, which would be about 1 hour 10 min drive at 30 min recharge, or 2 hour 20 min at 1 hour recharge. Which can be done once in a while, but isn't how the mainstream would want to travel.

[Fuzzylogic]

Anyone find out how Tesla is doing the signaling for DC charging? Are they reusing the proximity or control pilot pins?

I think they use the control pilot signal, as the J1722 spec already has a duty cycle of 5% reserved for digital communication:

2952

from the spec:

A duty cycle of 5% indicates that digital communication is required and must be established between the EVSE and
vehicle before charging. This is required for DC charging. Digital communication is optional at any valid control pilot duty
cycle for AC Level 1 & 2 charging.

[Kevin Sharpe]

Which can be done once in a while, but isn't how the mainstream would want to travel.you have to factor in the fact that you'll be driving past all of the 50kW DC and 44kW AC Charging Stations to find the mythical Tesla 90kW charger.... we should deal with the reality on the ground and use the existing infrastructure while we wait for Tesla (or more likely the drivers) to supply the chargers.

When the Model S is delivered in the UK there will be a lot of fast DC and AC installed... none of which the Model S will be able to use if Tesla stick to their current plans. So effectively you'll have a 200 mile range car (fully loaded at highway speeds) and then face a charge of many hours at 10kW... that is not how the mainstream want to travel.

[dpeilow]

Article states that the Model S DC charging protocol is compatible with CHAdeMO. Anybody heard this, too? From which source?

I seriously do doubt it's the same. CHAdeMO has 2 CAN pins, 4 analogue pins and ground, in addition to the power pins. They could drop the redundant analogue part but it's not clear if the charger would still operate.

http://chademo.com/images/01/interface.jpg


But perhaps they've kept the CAN and spoof the rest in the adapter.


From CHAdeMO Technology (http://chademo.com/05_interface.html)



It is technically possible to design a charger to transmit all information passes through by CAN, but combination of analog communication to digital transmission improves safety:

- It prevents an erroneous start of charging driven by malfunction of digital control system.

- It can be confirmed that both control systems in the vehicle and the charger operate correctly in each step of operation.

- When analog signal is lost, charging operation is shut down immediately. As the result, shutdown can be achieved faster than by transmission of digital signal. Important feature of this design is fail-safe function.



Incidentally, CHAdeMO allows for 200 A connectors which would be 100 kW on the usual 500 V charger voltage, so many of these rapid chargers being deployed are underpowered.

[Kevin Sharpe]

Article states that the Model S DC charging protocol is compatible with CHAdeMO. Anybody heard this, too? From which source?I asked Nikki on twitter and she replied "At the press briefing and event at Tesla, thought engineers said Mechanically incompatible, but electrically okay"

[doug]

I asked Nikki on twitter and she replied "At the press briefing and event at Tesla, thought engineers said Mechanically incompatible, but electrically okay"

Well, Nikki's not an engineer, so maybe she misunderstood. Certainly something can be adapted electrically as well as mechanically. The charging engineer I spoke with (and I kinda gave him a hard time) was quite clear that the signaling was not CAN based like CHAdeMO, though he wouldn't specify what scheme they were using. A CHAdeMO adapter would be possible but you'd need to translate the signaling. It, however, does have the same signaling as J1772 for Level 1,2 charging, just like the Roadster.

[doug]

I think they use the control pilot signal, as the J1722 spec already has a duty cycle of 5% reserved for digital communication:

2952

from the spec:

A duty cycle of 5% indicates that digital communication is required and must be established between the EVSE and
vehicle before charging. This is required for DC charging. Digital communication is optional at any valid control pilot duty
cycle for AC Level 1 & 2 charging.
A control pilot duty cycle of 5% indicates that digital communication is required, but does it then use that same pin for digital?

[widodh]

Well, Nikki's not an engineer, so maybe she misunderstood. Certainly something can be adapted electrically as well as mechanically. The charging engineer I spoke with (and I kinda gave him a hard time) was quite clear that the signaling was not CAN based like CHAdeMO, though he wouldn't specify what scheme they were using. A CHAdeMO adapter would be possible but you'd need to translate the signaling. It, however, does have the same signaling as J1772 for Level 1,2 charging, just like the Roadster.Not even EVSE for AC charging!?

That is really disappointing on top of everything we've seen! That would mean you can't charge at a J1772 or "Mennekes" charging station without some kind of hardware doing translation of the signal.

[doug]

Not even EVSE for AC charging!?

That is really disappointing on top of everything we've seen! That would mean you can't charge at a J1772 or "Mennekes" charging station without some kind of hardware doing translation of the signal.
No no.. reread what I said (and you quoted). "It, however, does have the same signaling as J1772 for Level 1,2 charging, just like the Roadster." Single phase Mennekes should be fine (though lets hope they have a 3-phase solution by the time that becomes an issue).

[vfx]

The battery guy (with JB standing there) said they have looked at the Roadster charging data (+10,000,000 miles worth) and saw the 40Amps was where by-far most people are charging. So that makes sense from the perspective of what most EV owners need but as we all know, there is a lot of public that don't drive EVs that think they need charge boxes everywhere and the faster the better. They have picked a battle that requires educating the public. Not an easy task.

[jkirkebo]

Going at 50 mph? At highway speeds, 50 kW is more like 150 mph charging speed, which would be about 1 hour 10 min drive at 30 min recharge, or 2 hour 20 min at 1 hour recharge. Which can be done once in a while, but isn't how the mainstream would want to travel.

Our average speed on road trips turns out to be around 45mph, according to the trip computer in our VW Touran. Many roads over here have 43mph speed limits, most of the rest have 50mph. A few have 56mph or 62mph.

[jkirkebo]

Incidentally, CHAdeMO allows for 200 A connectors which would be 100 kW on the usual 500 V charger voltage, so many of these rapid chargers being deployed are underpowered.

No car exists yet than can use more than 125A so no wonder they don't yet deploy faster chargers. 125A on the Leaf is about 45kW (battery voltage 360V).

[rsquared99]

VFX - I don't understand. You mean all of those 5 to 6 hour charging sessions I spent at RV sites charging at 40 amps is interpreted as all I "need?" It's all that's available. Now, if they're just talking about what people are doing at home where they are deciding how quickly to complete a charge, then I guess that makes sense.

[widodh]

No no.. reread what I said (and you quoted). "It, however, does have the same signaling as J1772 for Level 1,2 charging, just like the Roadster." Single phase Mennekes should be fine (though lets hope they have a 3-phase solution by the time that becomes an issue).Sometimes I need to read better...


The battery guy (with JB standing there) said they have looked at the Roadster charging data (+10,000,000 miles worth) and saw the 40Amps was where by-far most people are charging. So that makes sense from the perspective of what most EV owners need but as we all know, there is a lot of public that don't drive EVs that think they need charge boxes everywhere and the faster the better. They have picked a battle that requires educating the public. Not an easy task.It really depends, since I guess that 40A is the max available, not the max people want.

If you look to Europe, you'll find that 16A or 32A is the most common, since we are simply not able to use more :)

[doug]

Anyone find out how Tesla is doing the signaling for DC charging? Are they reusing the proximity or control pilot pins?
I asked... They wouldn't say...
It's possible they haven't worked out the details yet.

Looks like maybe the Betas are still doing DC charging through the trunk using a separate connector.

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/10/tesla-2011-10-03-800-18.jpg
http://www.blogcdn.com/www.engadget.com/media/2011/10/tesla-2011-10-03-800-17.jpg
(Note the cables in that rear left pocket. Pics from Tesla Model S test ride - Engadget Galleries (http://www.engadget.com/photos/tesla-model-s-test-ride/#4507007).)

Alpha:
http://i1182.photobucket.com/albums/x453/tgriner2/socket2.jpg
(TEG's photo)

[vfx]

It's just the middle of the bell curve. Of course there are exceptions. I too have done the crazy cross country non stop 18 hour drives in an ICE and charged my EV in crazy places i wish would fill my batteries faster. Those stories are the minority. No one car can fill up everyone's needs.

[Eberhard]

Sometimes I need to read better...

It really depends, since I guess that 40A is the max available, not the max people want.

If you look to Europe, you'll find that 16A or 32A is the most common, since we are simply not able to use more :)

JB Straubel told me, that the 10kW charger (40A) fills even the biggest pack through the night and consider this as being enough. For quicker charge, there is a second 10kW charger as option, but you need a wallbox.
For long distance rides, tesla will setup a charging network using 9x 10kW charger in a external DC setting, charging within 45min to 80% SOC

[strider]

I guess that's a question I have, if you opt for the second charger, will there be a second charge port on the other side and you'll use 2 L2 EVSE's or will they simply push more current through the main connector? If there will be two plugs then that could be an option for those who want the charge port on the right side.

[Eberhard]

The powertrain architekt told me, that both charger are tied together charging from one port. i would prefer to charge from different phases (3-ph) without a wallbox.

[Norbert]

if Tesla stick to their current plans.

I haven't heard of a plan *not* to have adapters. On the contrary, I've heard there *will* be adapters. They just don't have anything to announce yet, and it seems they are still working on things.

[Norbert]

I guess that's a question I have, if you opt for the second charger, will there be a second charge port on the other side and you'll use 2 L2 EVSE's or will they simply push more current through the main connector? If there will be two plugs then that could be an option for those who want the charge port on the right side.

The best would be if there is a port on both sides (perhaps optional), but you only need one even for 2*10 KW AC...

[vfx]

The best would be if there is a port on both sides (perhaps optional), but you only need one even for 2*10 KW AC...

Aaagh.

As it is I can never remember which side my ICE car's gas hole is.

[widodh]

JB Straubel told me, that the 10kW charger (40A) fills even the biggest pack through the night and consider this as being enough. For quicker charge, there is a second 10kW charger as option, but you need a wallbox.
For long distance rides, tesla will setup a charging network using 9x 10kW charger in a external DC setting, charging within 45min to 80% SOC Yeah, the DC story is clear.

But you know, 10 kW AC in europe is not possible without 3 phase support :) Again, I'm not persuing 44 kW charging with AC. 10 kW is indeed enough for a overnight charge.

[Kevin Sharpe]

I haven't heard of a plan *not* to have adapters. On the contrary, I've heard there *will* be adaptersso, you were told that they will have an adapter for CHAdeMO?

[Eberhard]

Yeah, the DC story is clear.

But you know, 10 kW AC in europe is not possible without 3 phase support :) Again, I'm not persuing 44 kW charging with AC. 10 kW is indeed enough for a overnight charge.

with 2x10kW = 2x7,2kW with 32A = 14,4kW

[Norbert]

so, you were told that they will have an adapter for CHAdeMO?

As far as I know, there was only the general statement, no specific ones, not even a definite one for J1772 AC, it was only pointed out that there is electrical compatibility.

[widodh]

with 2x10kW = 2x7,2kW with 32A = 14,4kWOnly true in Europe if both chargers are connected to a different phase :) Otherwise it's 3.6kW or 7.2kW, nothing more.

[TEG]

I guess that's a question I have, if you opt for the second charger, will there be a second charge port on the other side and you'll use 2 L2 EVSE's or will they simply push more current through the main connector? If there will be two plugs then that could be an option for those who want the charge port on the right side. Yeah, I was also told that one port would feeds both charger boxes. Yes, having two ports so you could run two cables (one to each charger) would offer some charging options not available with only one. Remember the old Jaguars with the gas filler holes on both sides? http://www.pro-site.com/xj6/now/DSCN0240.JPG

[Kevin Sharpe]

As far as I know, there was only the general statement, no specific ones, not even a definite one for J1772 AC, it was only pointed out that there is electrical compatibility.OK, thats what I understood.... and I think that rules out the Model S for many in the UK until we get support for CHAdeMO or an extensive fast charge Tesla network.

[Norbert]

OK, thats what I understood.... and I think that rules out the Model S for many in the UK until we get support for CHAdeMO or an extensive fast charge Tesla network.

Because specific adapters haven't been announced yet? It will take some time until Model S will be sold in the UK, and while in the US there aren't any fast chargers yet (except maybe a handful), a CHAdeMO adapter will likely be asked for in the US as well. (It will also still take a while until Nissan brings the less expensive $10k charger to Europe and the US, since they want to start in Japan.)

[dpeilow]

They are bringing the less expensive one here in January.

[Norbert]

They are bringing the less expensive one here in January.

Good for the Leaf. I don't think that is a competitive problem for Tesla.

[VolkerP]

with 2x10kW = 2x7,2kW with 32A = 14,4kW

This assumes you have two charge ports and you can feed the on board chargers with different phases. I don't think they can work independent of each other, so you are limited to one phase.

Latest residential electric installations in Germany are 3phase 240V with 3x50Amps fuse ("Hausanschlusssicherung"). The cabling is rated for 63 amps and you can upgrade to 63amp fuses but they charge you for that. All legacy installations (back to WW2) have 3x63 amps without extra charge (so, utilities found a new way to generate money for nothing).
Basic thing is, you will blow one of that fuses if your house is using one of them and at the same time you max it out charging your EV. To get on the safe side, I would draw 34 amps at most from the 50 amp installation, and 47 amps at most from the 63 amp installation. This gives 8.2kW/11.3kW for the AC charger and a remaining max power of 3.6kW (tea water boiler) for that phase. AND it is in violation of electric code that limits single phase load to 32A/7.7kW.
So you may come close to that 10kW of the on board charger or even use a little bit of the optional second one, but it is illegal and you are prone to black out your house.
Call that a customer friendly solution based on charging data? For a car that will cost >55k Euro ($74k) and is promoted to be the best sedan in its class, beating every ICE?

Viable solutions I see:
- a connector capable of 3 phase, 32A and an on board 22kW charger, or
- a wall box with 3phase 240Vx326A input and 22kW DC output (with Tesla plug & DC charger protocol) for home charging, or
- a similar mobile device, perhaps limited to 11kW for reasonable weight and size, or
- a really quick roll out (mid-2013) of the Tesla fast DC charger network.

sorry long post.

[GSP]

The charging engineer I spoke with (and I kinda gave him a hard time) was quite clear that the signaling was not CAN based like CHAdeMO, though he wouldn't specify what scheme they were using. A CHAdeMO adapter would be possible but you'd need to translate the signaling. It, however, does have the same signaling as J1772 for Level 1,2 charging, just like the Roadster.

I bet they are using the new SAE DC charging protocol. It doesn't require extra pins like ChadeMo.

GSP

Edit: Info on SAE DC charging protocol:

http://ev.sae.org/article/10128

"SAE J1772 goes further still by uniquely defining communications between an EV/PHEV, off-board charger, and the smart grid. Power Line Communications (PLC) is defined in SAE J1772 as the technology for enabling these vehicle-to-grid communications, without requiring changes such as the addition of another pin to the coupler architecture.

That's where IEEE comes in. PLC implementations from both the HD-PLC Alliance and HomePlug Powerline Alliance are based on IEEE 1901-2010, the world's most mature, robust, and advanced Broadband over Powerline standard. And the IEEE 1901 Inter-System Protocol prevents interference when the different PLC implementations are operated within close proximity of one another."

[doug]

I bet they are using the new SAE DC charging protocol. It doesn't require extra pins like ChadeMo.

GSP

You know, I think you're right. In a slightly different context that same charging engineer mentioned PLC. So maybe they're waiting for the details of the SAE protocol to be worked out. That would explain a lot. When I asked to see the 90kW charger the guys I spoke to implied it was held together with bailing wire and duct tape. So for the Beta event they had nine 10kW chargers rigged together and likely plugged it in through the trunk with the cabling seen here.

[Kevin Sharpe]

It may be so in EuropeI'm primarily interested in the UK, with secondary interest in mainland Europe. The US has very different requirements which I understand and respect. The real question is whether Tesla are interested in European customers for the Model S... if they are then they need to solve the 3-Phase and CHAdeMO problems before they launch the car.

[jcstp]

so, you were told that they will have an adapter for CHAdeMO?

i guess when they want to sell in Japan it would be advised!
Japan has a chademo nearly at every corner of a street ;-)

[dpeilow]

Because specific adapters haven't been announced yet? It will take some time until Model S will be sold in the UK, and while in the US there aren't any fast chargers yet (except maybe a handful), a CHAdeMO adapter will likely be asked for in the US as well. (It will also still take a while until Nissan brings the less expensive $10k charger to Europe and the US, since they want to start in Japan.)


They are bringing the less expensive one here in January.


Good for the Leaf. I don't think that is a competitive problem for Tesla.


That's not my point. There will be lots of these cheap chargers on the ground by the time the S arrives. Don't forget that Nissan are working with Siemens to do this, so they will likely not even be Nissan branded and certainly will not be at Nissan locations.

Also as CHAdeMO can support 200A at >500V it would make sense if Tesla pushed the consortium to make the chargers take full advantage of the specification.

[doug]

I think Tesla is still working out the details of their DC charging, but will likely have an adapter for CHAdeMO. You know the Europeans are also working on a combo version of the Mennekes connector which will probably have the same signaling as the SAE J1772 combo. So if the EU goes that way they'll also need a CHAdeMO adapter, unless the CHAdeMOs get changed over.

I'd be more concerned on the AC side, since the otherwise awesome connector Tesla has shown is incapable of delivering 3-phase.

[Norbert]

That's not my point.

I know, I have already said that I'm in favor of a CHAdeMo adapter, and like Doug I consider it likely.


Also as CHAdeMO can support 200A at >500V it would make sense if Tesla pushed the consortium to make the chargers take full advantage of the specification.

Or ask Nissan to use the Tesla connector. ;) Actually, seriously. I also think that SAE should consider using Tesla's connector, they don't have a backwards compatibility problem. I'm sure the optional CHAdeMO ports on the Leaf could also be retrofitted, or at least replaced, with Tesla plugs. Not sure if that has a better chance than a snowball in hell, but the Tesla connector appears much better, so I think that's the direction to take.

Fast chargers and their connectors don't have to look like gas-pump wannabes.

[widodh]

I know, I have already said that I'm in favor of a CHAdeMo adapter, and like Doug I consider it likely. I hope so




Or ask Nissan to use the Tesla connector. ;) Actually, seriously. I also think that SAE should consider using Tesla's connector, they don't have a backwards compatibility problem. I'm sure the optional CHAdeMO ports on the Leaf could also be retrofitted, or at least replaced, with Tesla plugs. Not sure if that has a better chance than a snowball in hell, but the Tesla connector appears much better, so I think that's the direction to take.

Fast chargers and their connectors don't have to look like gas-pump wannabes. Why another new connector? If we want the adoption of EV's to speed up we do not need even more standards! I already feel stupid when I have to tell people a 100 k Roadster cant do fast charging like the Leaf...

Again, the Mennekes connector does everything we want. AC with 70 A single phase and also 63 A 3 phase, but also DC for fast charging.

Standards, OPEN standards, thát is what we need!

[tomsax]

Good points.
Two years ago I saw JB give this talk (http://www.arb.ca.gov/msprog/zevprog/2009symposium/presentations/straubel.pdf) during which he showed this slide:

http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=2931&d=1317772965

Concluding that most the time spent charging was using the MC120 (not called the spare connector) and thus 120V, 12A was good enough for most folks. Can anyone remember why this data might be biased?

Depending on when the data was collected, it may have only included the first 200 owners, which I'm sure would skew the data because all of those Roadsters included an HPC, and I'll bet that group has different demographics than the larger owner community. I'm a little surprised there isn't a bigger spike at 40A for all the Roadster owners who saved half the cost of an HPC by getting an MC240 or UMC for charging in their garage and on the road. That does make it look like the data is exclusively or mostly from the very early Roadster owners.

Regardless, the data has very limited utility. Data doesn't lie, but people can easily draw wrong conclusions from it.

The chart tells us nothing about how any individual owner charges their car. It also only shows how people charge given what the Roadster allows, the cost of the various charging units, the state of public charging infrastructure, and how those together limit what's practical and convenient.

From the chart, it's easy to conclude that about half of Roadster charging is done with a 70A HPC with the car set to take all 70A. Does that mean people need 70A charging in their garage? Definitely not, that's just what happens if you buy an HPC, throw it on the wall and plug the car in without thinking about any possible benefits of charging at a lower current setting. However, some of the 70A charging is happening on longer road trips where 70A is critical. That chart doesn't give us any idea how often owners would benefit from even faster charging. It also doesn't tell us how often the Roadster gets left in the garage because of a lack of available public charging at sufficient rates to not be a huge pain.

The chart shows a big chunk of charging at 120V/12A. How many owners were satisfied with 120V charging? What portion of that is because people were pissed that Tesla changed the HPC from included in the base price to a $3,000 add-on? How many owners were waiting for the MC240 or UMC be become available? What portion is due to owners not having access to 240V where they park their car? What portion of that is people going on road trips and getting by just fine on 120V charging (http://www.saxton.org/tom_saxton/2011/09/last-gas.html)?

We got our LEAF two weeks ago and just got our J1772 charging station installed and inspected today. We've been charging on 120V and it's been totally adequate. It would be even easier with the Roadster where I could do my normal 20-to-40 mile daily driving and get charged overnight. If I do a long 150-mile drive, I can still add 40 to 50 miles of charge overnight and have plenty for typical drives until I build back up to a full charge over the next several days. Does that mean 120V would work for every Roadster owner? Definitely not.

To be clear, I'm really disappointed that the LEAF has an anemic 3.3 kW on-board charger. I think it's stupid they didn't max it out at the full 19.2 kW that the J1772 standard supports. With that, you could charge a LEAF faster than a Roadster from just a simple, cheap Level 2 station.

I think it's much more interesting to look at the charging behavior of a single owner, so how about me? To create the following chart, I used the new data aggregation feature added by my log parser that RichKae is using to collect data for his battery longevity study (http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/6491-new-thread-about-battery-capacity-over-time).

http://www.idleloop.com/tesla/photos/charge_amps_histogram.png

The above chart shows the number of hours spent charging at different current levels, with 120V showing at half the amperage, including time spent with the current tapering off near the top of a charge, over a period of 2 years and 19,000 miles. If you want to play along, look at the chart and see what you can tell about how we charge our Roadster. Below, I'll tell you what the chart means and what it doesn't say.

We used to charge at 40A at home because that was more than fast enough for overnight charging while staying away from low current levels that are less efficient, and it reduced the load on our panel. We've owned a RAV4-EV since 2008, and we generally set timers so we don't charge both at the same time, but lowering the Roadster's current level to 40A means we're using less than 70A even if the Roadster and RAV are charging at the same time.

After I did my analysis of charge rates and efficiency (http://www.saxton.org/tom_saxton/2010/07/tesla-roadster-charging-rates.html), I concluded that charging at 32A had nearly the same efficiency as higher current levels, was still plenty fast, and further reduced the load on our panel, and was maybe a tiny bit nicer to the battery pack.

In all this time, I've only charged our Roadster at home at 70A once, for the charging efficiency study. (We have used it to charge the Roadsters of friends passing through town on long trips, our quiet contribution to charging infrastructure, but that's not reflected on the chart.) So basically, the 70A charging is all on road trips.

But the spike at 70A only tells part of the road trip story.

Some of the 40A charging is on the road, some of which was fine at 40A getting us charged while we did something fun, some of it was painful, killing time at an RV park.

The 70A spike doesn't tell you that driving from Seattle to Portland used to be painful, requiring staying in the right lane to do 55-60 mph while dodging the big trucks. That drive got so much more pleasant when we got an HPC installed at the midpoint of the drive at the Burgerville in Centralia. Now we can blast down the road at whatever speed is appropriate, pop into Burgerville for a quick bite and 20 minutes of charging, then cruise the rest of the way to Portland with no SOC stress. With a bit longer stay, we could even do the drive comfortably with a standard mode charge.

The charts says nothing about how adding a 70A HPC in Ellensburg made the 310-mile drive from Seattle to Coeur d'Alene, Idaho, very doable with just a long lunch break partway through the drive. It would be even better with another charging opportunity between Ellensburg and Spokane.

The charts also says nothing about all of the road trips we just don't even consider in the Roadster because of charging stations we don't have. If we want to do a drive like that, we need to rent gas-burner. Tesla seems to think the range on the Roadster is so large that no one needs to charge away from home. That's true for most people's daily driving, but it's just not true if you want an electric car to completely replace a gas car.

The Roadster is not a great car for long drives. The ride is rough and noisy. The passenger doesn't benefit from the fun driving factor, making the car less suitable for long drives with someone else. I assume the Model S will be much better as a car, especially for the passengers, so road trips will be even more constrained by charging infrastructure. Tesla has to get this right, and they won't get it if they just look at aggregate Roadster data and ignore what Roadster owners tell them we want.

I think the 10 kW on-board charger option is dumb. Although most everyone will be totally happy with 10 kW at home, especially with the big battery pack that can handle occasional long drives and still be fine for the next drive even if not fully charged the first night back home. The Model S seems like it will be a great road trip car, even with base 160-mile battery. You only get the advantage of the big battery once per day, after that it's all about charge rate. Tesla will not be able to cover the whole country with quick chargers along the route to every small isolated community where people have friends and relatives they want to visit. For those trips, owners will want the maximum charge rate possible and it will always be easier to fund maxed out Level 2 chargers than DC fast chargers at strategic spots. It'll just make owners mad if they get the 10 kW on-board charger and then want to drive somewhere not covered by Tesla's promised fast charge network.

[richkae]

I totally agree with Tom.
One concept I believe is important is something I call "plug-hours" ( or plug-minutes ). Any given plug has 24 plug hours in a day. An individual user may have 4 hours to spend charging and need 24 kW and is happy to charge at 6kW for those 4 hours, it makes no difference to him if he charges at 12kW for 2 hours instead. However they have used 4 plug hours, when they could have used 2. Someone else has been frozen out of that spot for all of those 4 hours and it wasn't necessary.
Slow level 2 chargers suck, slow charging cars in a fast level 2 charger suck even more.

Even if a network of level 3 chargers blankets the country every 100 miles or so on the interstate, there will always be a place for fast level 2 charging.
A 70-80 amp level 2 charger is really only a couple hundred dollars worth of wire, circuit breaker and connector, they will always be at least an order of magnitude cheaper than a level 3 charger.
For small fleets, private networks/businesses, they are the cheap way to extend the network.
If I am on a long trip and I can choose between a 1.5 hour level 2 charge in the parking lot of a restaurant where I want to eat, and a 30 minute level 3 charge in a rest stop where there is nothing to do - I will choose the level 2 charge. The goal is that you charge when you need to stop, not stop when you need to charge.

If by the time my Model S is ready there are level 3 chargers every 100 miles where I think I want to go - I may still want 20 kW of level 2 charging available in my car.