-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Buddyroe
Active Member
Why does your charge rate get divided by 10? If you can deliver the electricity that fast to a 1000 kwh battery, why not a 100? I'm not saying the current cars could support it, and maybe it isn't possible or feasible to install needed wiring and cooling for this high rate into a sedan, but surely there is an area in between what is currently on the S and what is on the semi. So no, maybe it isn't possible to reach the 3 or 6 minute number, but possibly 10 minutes is realistic.
The innovation here is in the power delivery, not the charge rate--charging a (presumed) 1 MWh battery 80% in 30 minutes is conceptually exactly the same as charging a 100 kWh battery 80% in 30 minutes. It's delivering that much juice in a safe and effective way that's the new bits.
Max charge rate was, is, and always will be dependent on the battery's capacity. Think of it as a 5 gallon water bucket and an 8 oz cup. Just because you have a faucet that can fill that bucket in 30 seconds doesn't mean you can fill the 8 oz cup in 0.375 seconds without spilling a whole bunch of water or destroying the cup. In fact, it intrinsically says absolutely nothing about what you can do with the cup.
Max charge rate was, is, and always will be dependent on the battery's capacity. Think of it as a 5 gallon water bucket and an 8 oz cup. Just because you have a faucet that can fill that bucket in 30 seconds doesn't mean you can fill the 8 oz cup in 0.375 seconds without spilling a whole bunch of water or destroying the cup. In fact, it intrinsically says absolutely nothing about what you can do with the cup.
Because you are reducing the number of batteries by a factor of 10. (You figure they are charging the cells as fast as they safely can on the Semi, so you can't just start charging the cells at 10x that rate without them overheating and catching fire.)
The big story is that in that 30 minutes that are keeping a very high charge rate, it isn't tapering off like currently happens with the S/X. (Either that or they are starting off at way more than 1600kW, which is unlikely.)
This is talking about on road breakdowns, not service/ part lifespan requirements. If there are 4 independent motor/pack units, dual redundant screens, a dual output pedal and dual control units, it takes a hard mechanical failure to stop the truck.
If the megachargers are on site at the shipper, there can be an upfront equipment cost they pay, along with a pre-purchase of electricity. If the chargers are on routes, then the shippers can be charged a monthly/ yearly access fee that covers the first chunk of electricity. Or roll it into the tractor lease (X thousand miles a year = Y kWh).
With an 800kWh pack, 6 hrs of sun, 20% efficient panels, 90% round trip storage (not net grid), = 740 square meters of panel per truck or 8,000 square feet. An average warehouse is 40k square feet, so could support 5 trucks a day. Walmart has an average store size of 104k square feet, so each could charge 25 trucks a day. Walmart distribution centers average 1 million sq ft, so 250 trucks worth a day.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
The smaller battery cannot accept that much power. Just because you have a firehose available doesn't mean you can drink from it at full flow without blowing your face off.
Reciprocity
Active Member
Dude, if you put 1000KW into a 100KWh battery pack it will explode. It cannot handle the temp that would result, it can't handle the temps created by 170KW today and just slow down as the great rises and cooling can't keep up. Not to mention the cables and connectors that would melt. Max charge rates will probably top out at 2c or 2x the size of the pack so 200KW, not 800+. Even at 2c there will be tapering and the packs and cells must be improved beyond where they are at today.
Tesla’s Model 3 Is Cool, but No Parking Money in the Stock
Here are his takeaways from his meetings with management:
(1) Management expressed confidence in achieving its revised Model 3 production timetable, with the initial allotment consisting of higher ASP models; (2) Management expressed confidence in achieving its 25% gross margin target for the Model 3
note his PT is 185
Here are his takeaways from his meetings with management:
(1) Management expressed confidence in achieving its revised Model 3 production timetable, with the initial allotment consisting of higher ASP models; (2) Management expressed confidence in achieving its 25% gross margin target for the Model 3
note his PT is 185
sub
Active Member
I have a deposit down on a model X and I need a referral code. I would like to use one from a regular contributor to this thread. Please pm your code to me and I'll choose the one from my favorite member. Need it today. Thanks!
Everyone seriously wants in at a lower price point to maximize gains. The greed is astounding. The company's aim is to help save the planet.
Gerardf
Active Member
The problem / limiting factor is the CURRENT that flows through the cell during charging. It heats the cell's (as they have some resistance) . P = I*I*R where P is the power lost as heat in the cells.
And the chemistry also needs time to do its magic, which also limits the max current.
So the limiting factor is not the Super / Mega chargers. These are relatively easy to scale up.
Look at it this way :
A larger 1 MWh pack is ' simply' 10 x 100 kWh packs in parallel, so the total current is distributed equally over the parallel packs.. (or 5x parallel and that two times in series to get to an 800V pack).
Actually the 100 kWh pack themselves are around 5.000 individual cells with aprox. 100 each 4V cells in series to get to 400 Volt, and that 50 times in parallel (simplified, and not exactly correct figures, but close enough as example).
Last edited:
Buddyroe
Active Member
I think you better go back and re-read. Others provided genuinely legitimate replies - but what you've posted isn't even close to responding to what I said. Not sure what you read.
Waiting4M3
Active Member
Another chance after Tesla withdrew the 3 this year: Tesla Model 3: 2018 Motor Trend Car of the Year Finalist - Motor Trend
Goes twice as fast if charged with 220V electricity, right??
MT lists the M3 RWD LR as 4.8sec 0-60?
Tesla did a fantastic job with the Semi, the design, the specs, the way they priced it, the guaranteed solar Megacharger $0.07 rate, the one million mile no breakdown guarantee... everything is perfect. There are certain important things that were not mentioned during the unveil. I am so happy they didn't talk about those things. You don't want to show all your chips at once. The two huge chips they didn't mention.
Currently each diesel Semi runs about 1 million miles in 5 years. The all in cost is about 1.5 million dollars. I guess it can bring in 2~3 million dollars sales (freight service). Nobody will do it for 5 years and only brings back 1.5 million sales, just equal to the cost. There are 1 million Semi trucks in the US.
Take a step back, understand the all in cost for Tesla per truck (insurance and everything else included), now do you see how much money Tesla is going to earn on each truck?
Tesla is setting up for something huge. Everything Tesla touches has a huge market and Tesla is going to dominate that market even if they don't intend to. The growth in the next 5~8 years will be explosive. Shorts only focus on the quarterly spreadsheet. Talking about short sighted.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
"Top gear revs at 60mph 16,250 rpm? I'm guessing that's actually the motor peak rpm at full speed.
Pulls better in the skid pad than the Model S. Having driven both, not surprising, it’s resisting a lot less weight tossing side to side.
Going to be very interesting to see what an AWD performance Model 3 will be able to do.
How can one understand the all-in cost for Tesla, when we don't know the price, and Tesla can't possibly know what their 1 million mile warranty is going to cost them, nor do we know what the electricity is going to cost them?
- Status
Similar threads
- Sticky
